Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Suggestions on a desktop...
Freejack
Jake the Not-so-Wise
in Zocalo v2.0
My wife is beginning to bother me about getting a new computer, our old Pentium II 300 and Celeron 300 computers just aren't cutting it anymore so I'm looking around for a good deal...she sees the Gateway ads for $500 of a P4 2.8 Ghz setup, but I can't help but think there is a better set-up out there for the money.
I friend of mine picked-up a Cyberpower unit and has been happy with it, was curious if anyone else has been exposed to one of their boxes.
Any other suggestions as to place to look fore a value-price computer? I know one of the answers will be build your own. As much as i'd like to, I don't have time, nor do I think my wife would trust me to...
Jake
I friend of mine picked-up a Cyberpower unit and has been happy with it, was curious if anyone else has been exposed to one of their boxes.
Any other suggestions as to place to look fore a value-price computer? I know one of the answers will be build your own. As much as i'd like to, I don't have time, nor do I think my wife would trust me to...
Jake
Comments
If you get them in peices then you don't get the fun of pulling them appart! :)
best parts retailer in the USA. Build a kick arse PC for less!
Good prices and excellent service. Almost everything on my present computer came from them.
Almost all of the people I know online that build PCs use Newegg if they live in the US.
P.S. - Don't by LCD monitors there - you can get much better bad pixel policies almost everwhere else.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Freejack [/i]
[B]I know one of the answers will be build your own. As much as i'd like to, I don't have time, nor do I think my wife would trust me to...[/B][/QUOTE]:D
I have no use for it at all. I only got it because of a recent PC/LCD combo deal Dell offered (saved almost $300.00 on the LCD by getting the combo). I'm about to Ebay it or I can sell it to you.
Pentium IV 2.8 ghz
256 mb DDR Ram
80 gig HD
Windows XP Home
So, if you want it...it's yours for around $400.00 (approx the going rate for this Dell config on Ebay). Let me know. If not I'm going to Ebay it as I want the final cost of the LCD to be about $200.00 once everything is paid for. :-)
At first, I had brand loyalty towards Intel, thinking it's competitors like Cyrex (or whatever) and AMD were just pissant little upstarts that had nothing good to offer. But then AMD started making really good stuff, and my brand loyalty shifted to them. But then I read something that seemed to suggest that Intel chips can work with better RAM, and now I am confused.
When I build a new PC, should it be with an Intel inside, or an AMD? I'm leaning towards AMD, but only because I like them more for some reason.
AMD and Intel are both good brands. Intel tends to be a bit more expensive. The AMD Athlon processor is better then the Intel Pentium at most standard desktop applications, but the Pentium is faster then the Athlon at things like MPG and MPEG encoding.
Now enter the chip I know little about: The AMD Athlon 64. I can't tell you it's stregths and weaknesses as I have never looked into it.
My suggestion: Look arround at reviews of t he 3 main processor lines: AMD Athlon, AMD Athlon 64, and Intel Pentium with Hyper Threading. Find some that compare the processors. Weigh price and function.
Don't forget to also weigh motherboard features available with the correct sockets. For instance, almost all Pentium boards handle 4 GBs of ram, but almos all Athlon boards only handle 3 GBs.
Also don't forget about the speed of your Front Side Bus (FSB) - this should be the highest available (if you can afford it) for that chip. Basically, unless you go with the Athlon (400MHz), the other 2 processors usually run at 800MHz now. Make sure any memory you get is the same bus speed as your FSB (max speed the board can handle for memory is almost always it) - otherwise you are lacking efficiency. Note that the CPU FSB speed should also be the same. If the CPU has a lower FSB, then take note that the mobo will run at the lower CPU FSB, so the memory should be a lower speed too. This is especially important to note with the AMD Athlon 3000+ and lower which run at a 333MHz FSB rather then the 400MHz FSB that the Athlon 3000+ and 3200+ run at (3000+ comes with both FSBs).
There are some nice features out there right now on mobos. I can tell you that the nForce Soundstorm audio processer sucks. Actually, it isn't nVidia's fault here but rather the codex manufacturer's (Realtek AC97 codex) that has a bug that causes sound spitting on some things, including some DVDs. It is still good though if you don't want to fork out the money for a top of the line audio card (like me) yet want 5.1 sound.
--RC
"Running at 2.2GHz, this CPU is very similar to the Athlon 64 FX-51, except that the 3400+ slides into a 754-pin socket and talks to only one channel of DDR400 memory."
And this:
"We're interested to learn several things about the 3400+. Its performance rating, for instance, suggests it's faster than a theoretical Pentium 4 3.4GHz CPU. Can its performance back up that (implicit) claim? Also, how much difference is there between one memory channel and two?"
So, what is the difference between one memory channel and two?
And what would you give to an Athlon 64 3400 (RAM, motherboard, etc)?
AMD Athlon 64 3400+, 1MB L2 Cache, 64-bit Processor
Model: AMD Athlon 64 3400+
Core: ClawHammer
Operating Frequency: 2.2GHz
FSB: Integrated into chip
Cache: L1/64K+64K; L2/1MB
Voltage: 1.5V
Process: 0.13Micron
Socket: Socket 754
$305.00
Always assembled myself, except for the laptop, which is a dell :)
[B]Well, I happen to have a brand new Dell P4 2.8 ghz for sale if you're interested (Pre-built PCs are not always that bad as Biggles makes it out to be).[/B][/QUOTE]
I might just take you up on that, do you know off the top of your head, which model it was? I just want to check out some of the other specs, specificly video (dell and gateway seem to love those on-board setups).
Jake
[B]So, what is the difference between one memory channel and two?
[/B][/QUOTE]
2 channel memory effectively doubles the data transfer rate. Thus if you have 200MHz DDR memory (DDR 3200 - 2x200MHz since its DDR) it effectively runs at 400MHz on a single channel and 800MHz on a double channel. However, a 2 channel memory system needs 2 ram boards - one in each channel. Each DDR board only runs at 400MHz, but they both run on independent addressing effectively doubling their speed.
[QUOTE][B]
And what would you give to an Athlon 64 3400 (RAM, motherboard, etc)?
[/B][/QUOTE]
Well, any 754 pin socket board. A numbre of different brands make them.
I find the quote you gave about:
"Running at 2.2GHz, this CPU is very similar to the Athlon 64 FX-51, except that the 3400+ slides into a 754-pin socket and talks to only one channel of DDR400 memory."
This seems to indicate that the Athlon 64 FX is actually a better processor then the Athlon. As I recall the FX is more expensive. It also requires a different socket (900-some pin). Only a few manufacturers make mobos for the FX - I know ASUS is one of them with a $200 mobo that can handle both the 64 FX and the standard 64.
As for memory, go with DDR. I have 1 GB of memory on my system (2 512MB boards, 1 in each of the 2 channels). 2 channel memory really improves system performance.
------------
Note that my core system I built before the Athlon 64 came out. As a result it's specs are:
AMD Athlon 3000+ (400MHz FSB)
ASUS A7N8X Deluxe mobo (this mobo has been replaced by the E-Deluxe version in stores)
1 GB Ram (Corsair - not their XMS series though)
When I did the upgrade at that time I didn't upgrade any other parts of my system, so everything else is either newer or old then that upgrade date. The other parts are:
Drives:
NEC DVD (3 years old)
DVD+/-RW DUAL OPTORITE DD0201
HD 160GB|MAXTOR 6Y160M0 7200RPM SATA
HD 80GB|MAXTOR 6Y080L0 7200RPM ATA133
HD 60GB unknown 5400 RPM
FD 1.44MB|SAMSUNG
Case:
Cheiftec BX-03B-B-SL ATX CASE
Enermax 460 Watt Power Supply EG465P-VE(FMA)
Cards:
ATI VE TV Tuner Card (this product sucks for drivers)
nVidia GeForce 4 TI 4200 (Abit)
Some sucky modem that dies on FTP uploads half the time.
Other:
Lots of fans
Logitech premium desktop keyboard/mouse (the cheapest without the F-Key stupidity that most companies are doing). Optical cordless mouse, reciever is in keyboard. Rechargable batteries (NiMH 1600mAh) in mouse, with spare set always charged :) - batteries last about 3 weeks before needing to be recharged.
Monitor: NEC LCD 1700V (no longer sold)
Fan control panel: Enermax UC-A5FATR2B
Round IDE and Floppy cables
Some old speakers that need to be upgraded.
--RC
[B]256mb ram isn't really much....hell, I have 1GB in my digital camera :) [/B][/QUOTE]
That's because I didn't intend on using the PC myself. It was the base config that I got because I wanted the kickass LCD. :)
[B]256mb ram isn't really much....[/B][/QUOTE]
Yeah, and it's brand PC so it design propably has some very weird things in it.
At least for Intel processors you should go for double channel mobos, otherwise memory's transfer speed is only about half what processor bus can transfer.
And about choise that you migt hit. If there's choise between PC with 256MB RAM and other one with 512MB of RAM but one "step" slower CPU speed I would recommend the latter... unless you're ready to buy more memory immediately.
Hell, if you really want I could build it for you. Part of it would go to the upkeep of FO. :)
[B]2 channel memory effectively doubles the data transfer rate. Thus if you have 200MHz DDR memory (DDR 3200 - 2x200MHz since its DDR) it effectively runs at 400MHz on a single channel and 800MHz on a double channel. However, a 2 channel memory system needs 2 ram boards - one in each channel. Each DDR board only runs at 400MHz, but they both run on independent addressing effectively doubling their speed.[/B][/QUOTE]
Ok, so is there any reason why Intel chips don't signficantly outperform AMD Athlons? Accoding to this [url]http://tech-report.com/reviews/2004q1/athlon64-3400/index.x?pg=2[/url] the 3400+ did better than the Pentiums in a lot of their benchmarks, and the few times Pentiums beat the 3400+, it wasn't by too much.
Is this double data transfer rate going to be much more useful within the next two or three years or something, and now software just doesn't take advantage of it?
[B]To expand on what Biggles said, AMD chips do four times the work per cycle (Hertz) compared to Intel's once per cycle. (though seeing that AMD and Intel share technology, this may have already or will change in the future.....) [/B][/QUOTE]
Well, Pentium-M is even with AMD in work per cycle.
So I would really like to see Intel putting two Pentium-M processors in same package and make desktop processor from that. Power consuming would be much smaller than any current top processor. (about 50W)