TechSpot

Buying a new PC, advice needed on processors

By McYaballow
Aug 30, 2009
  1. 04ihegba

    04ihegba TS Rookie Posts: 57

    Thank you Rage for the insight. To be honest I have never really inspected the soldering on my boards, and don't care for the heatsinks as long as they do their job, so you may well be right there in saying that Gigabyte do that better.

    Still, as the point has been made. If you want to perhaps spend a bit more on a CPU and grab a quad core OP, at the expense of not having as big a heatsink (the one you will have will still be more than adequate), then AsRock would be the way to go.

    While were on the subject, anyone have any opinions on Foxconn. I'm thinking of getting one of their boards for my next clients gaming rig and am wondering whether they are ranked among the top two or considered lower tier on this forum.
     
  2. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 7,290   +25

    Foxconn are okay, depending on the model; they are a so-so brand IMO.
     
  3. red1776

    red1776 Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe Posts: 5,910   +91

    04ihgba,
    I had two simple points that I disagreed with you on.
    1) Gigabyte's quality is superior to Asrock
    2) DDR3 is not new ,untested, nor unreliable
    that's it, i did not debate cost, or the intention of the person asking for help, the rest of it is other things you have added since., but since you have broadened the debate.
    .....
    [
    This is just faulty logic..the motherboard market share looks like this, Asus 41%-Gigabtye-20%-MSI-9%-DFI-4%,Asrock isn't even on the list (and not included in the Asus numbers) of course you don't see many googles' for "broken AsRock" ...very few are using them. Its like pointing out that MicroSoft needs a bigger help desk than Linux!
    *source: CPU-Z

    Win7 was purely an analogy of a new product on the market, and you seem to have failed to make the connection, nevermind.

    An analogy should be relevant to the issue at hand. again, comparing a piece of software that has not even been launched yet, with hardware technology that was released over two years ago, is not a relevant analogy.

    really? im glad you said that, because you make an awfully lot of assumptions about what this person wants...and uses. like this:
    Nowhere prior to recommending that this person purchase 8Gb of DDR2, did you bother to ask what operating system he/she is using
    . . this is bad advice for more than one reason

    1) if they are using a 32 bit system, the second 4gb is useless

    2)the very vast majority of user's will not use anything approaching 8gb of ram,and there is no performance increase in doing so. ( a little reference material for you): http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-module-upgrade,2264.html

    3) by the time 8Gb of memory is useable for anyone but server users and those with ultra resource intense software. DDR2 will be antiquated legacy hardware with no upgrade potential.

    4) you chastised Ritwik for his motherboard recommendation citing that the OP could use the additional wasted $50 on something else like the processor. aside from the fact that Ritwik proposed a quality choice of motherboard, why then do you not take your own advice and not waste an additional $50 on useless ram for an upgrade on the rest of the system?

    nothing personal 04ihgba, its your ideas im debating not you :)
     
  4. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,988   +957

    I think what you're referring to here is "backward obsolence".

    Just to add another manufacturer into the mix, Intel's boards are quite stable, wherein "stable" is a euphemism for "boring", and also I think, "Foxconn".
     
  5. 04ihegba

    04ihegba TS Rookie Posts: 57

    Indeed, and I accepted those as your views and decided to broaden the subject in order to state why I had said these things. In my experience, AsRocks reliablility has come a long way in a short period. You actually make my point in what your mention next about market share as to why most people are automatically judgemental about the boards they make. With such a little market share many rely on hearsay to judge them and they made some pretty abysmal boards in the SDRAM era.

    Also DDR3 is not new, and I never debated that, I just said it wasn't as seasoned as DDR2, and due to the technology being around for much longer, DDR2 is inevitably more reliable. This is akin to saying that the new Semprons AMD make are probably more reliable than the original ones that they made. DDR2 has now been around long enough to go through countless redesigns and it still boasts a lower latency at similar speeds. Rather than debating it with you though, I'm interested to know what speed DDR3 you would recommend to him.

    The market share of a company does not always suggest its the best ,and I already said It was a poor analogy, despite that, AsRocks have many reviews and awards and usually are the first to do new stuff in the market. They also have a 34 page awards list here and are literally the innovation division of ASUS.

    5GB you mean. :)

    I haven't made an awful lot of assumptions, I have read everything the OP said in his post. He will NOT be gaming, he wants his PC for general use, and he wants it to be a competent multitasker. So I said go large DDR2 RAM, as heavy multitasking needs more RAM rather than fast RAM. I have no idea what he wants, I am only acting on what he has told me.

    You promote DDR3 as futureproof, yet you don't want to recommend 64 bit to him. You do realise that they now make server OS's in 64bit only flavours, an had it not been for Intel having a 32bit laptop chip they probrably would have done the same for Win7. In fact, I can see you telling the OP to grab 3x1GB sticks for his OS but then where is all this "futureproof-ness" going to come from when he can't upgrade his RAM without a format and buying a new OS.

    Indeed, I read that yesterday incidentally, and I disagree. The sweet spot may be there for ultrafast 1600mhz performance RAM, but the slower the RAM, the more benefit you gain from having more of it, because quite simply, less clock time is spent scrubbing. Also, especially with Vista, pre-cacheing speeds up a lot of applications startup times vastly, and the more RAM the OS sees, the more it pre-caches and the speed difference is very noticeable, especially for the price. Of course the OP may not use all the RAM himself, but the OS will use a much bigger about if there is much more there.

    By the time we reach 2012, you will be saying the same about DDR3 in the face of DDR4. The difference? By then the boards will be a lot cheaper.

    I apologise to Ritwik if I came across harshly, but recommending a SLi motherboard to someone who explicitly said he was not intending to play any games at all seems to me like a careless decision.

    Hey, I'm not taking it personally, actually I'm quite enjoying this little debate. You bring some very good points to the table. :)
     
  6. Ritwik7

    Ritwik7 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,288   +7

    Don't worry about it 04ihegba. Just a discussion. :)

    The point is that DDR3 mobos (at least Gigabyte and ASUS) are I think all SLI.

    BTW, the OP seems to have been lost in all this and not responded at all!
     
  7. Ritwik7

    Ritwik7 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,288   +7

    That would be another way of putting it, yes. LOL! :D
     
  8. hellokitty[hk]

    hellokitty[hk] Hello, nice to meet you! Posts: 4,377   +127

    Me too I skipped over it.

    But I did read 8GB of DDR2 and the fastest Phenom II, and I disagree. Instead, consider 4GB of DDR3, an Asus or Gigabyte AM3 Motherboard, and a Phenom II X3 740!
     
  9. mv670

    mv670 TS Rookie Posts: 75

    I would like to build my own PC instead of buying one that already comes with all the parts.
    i bought my current pc back in 2005 and compared to the pc's today it is groteskly behind in performance and overall capacity.

    I'm looking for the right parts that will give me great pc performance overall but with the ability to run a few games here and there. I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I'll enjoy a few games
     
  10. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 7,290   +25

    A budget would help us give specific recommendations. Are you willing to buy online?
     
  11. mv670

    mv670 TS Rookie Posts: 75

    Yes I would be willing to buy online, my budget would be 500 USD
     
     
  12. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 7,290   +25

    Okay. What parts will you be reusing, if any, from your current system? Will you need a monitor and\or an OS?
     
  13. mv670

    mv670 TS Rookie Posts: 75

    well I cant use DDR2 with my current system,max ram is 4gb. Monitor is ok and I'm running Vista but I will most likely get windows 7 so you can say i'm building this new machine to use win7 to its full capacity( I guess it would be to early to see since Seven is not out yet).

    I have a 500w power supply so i'll keep that one.
    9400 GT will stay, 512mb of dedicated memory is decent.
     
  14. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 7,290   +25

    I would recommend the GA-MA770-UD3 mobo and the AMD X2 550 or X3 720 to go with it. You can get a cheap G.SKILL or OCZ 4GB DDR2 1066MHz kit to go with them.

    However, whether or not you need a new PSU and graphics card depends on what brand and model of PSU it is, and what games you plan to play and at what resolution. The 9400GT is not even a low-end gaming card.
     
  15. mv670

    mv670 TS Rookie Posts: 75

    interesting... I guess I would need to get a new bigger case unless those new parts fit in my current presario...
    PSU: Apevia 500w, thats all i got from the box.
    So my GPU is worse than a low-end gaming card?? or is it a mid-level respectable card?
     
  16. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 7,290   +25

    The 9400GT is not good for games at all. And ditch the Apevia too, unless you game at 1280x1024, in which case, keep it and get an HD 4670. It will be a massive improvement over your 9400GT and you will not need a new PSU either.

    You can get a decent case for $40-50 too. The Cooler Master Elite series fits the bill nicely.
     
  17. mv670

    mv670 TS Rookie Posts: 75

    like i said before I'll game once in a while so i'm looking for better pc performance overall
     
  18. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 7,290   +25

    In that case, upgrade the CPU and mobo to the new stuff, and get a cheap new case. That should be good enough for you IMO.
     
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...


Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.