Re-Building My Computer, Need To Make Some Decisions

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TL93

Posts: 52   +0
Well i've finallized my opinion and i will rebuild my computer ALMOST from scratch.

I'm keeping the case even though people say just get a new case, don't worry, i'll make sure everything is a okay with air flow and fans.

I'm also keeping my 200GB SATA II 7200 RPM Hard Drive since its still in perfect condition according to S.M.A.R.T.[95% overall for a 2 year old hard drive]

Now i need to make decisions about CPUs and other things.

Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2200 [Only for maybe a year or two and will replace with a good Core 2 Duo or Quad]

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ G2 Revision

Which processor should i go with

For motherboards,

If Intel,

ASUS P5K-VM G33 Chipset mATX

ASUS P5E-VM G35 Chipset mATX

If AMD,

Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H 780G mATX

ASUS M2A-VM HDMI 690G mATX

For Ram, i'll choose whatever is on sale and recommended by the manufacturer of the motherboard

For the Operating System, my cousin will supply Windows Vista Business Genuine for free [GENUINE, from his work place]

For Power Supply, probably a OCZ 500W PSU since its around $45 after MIR for one.

Video card will wait for a bit, at most mid to end of summer.

Also i think i'll be spending around $300 [at most $350] in total [I've calculated] since i don't need to buy an OS

Thanks in advance
Tim
 
BUMP

Anyone?

I'm going to purchase and rebuild it on the weekend [Saturday] most likely

So please help me choose parts!

Thanks.
Tim
 
The CPU looks okay. I'd go with the G33-based motherboard since it provides support for DDR2 1066MHz RAM, which'd be useful when you upgrade to a faster CPU later. To go with it, I'd recommend this RAM. It's guaranteed to work since it's made by Micron, and to my experience, Micron RAM always works well with ASUS motherboards.

Lastly, I'd recommend this PSU as an excellent high-quality choice for your build.

Good luck and let us know how it goes. :)
 
Imo i would go with my system just because it has alot of features for pretty cheap, I spent $602 but when you take out the case and 8800gt thats a good $250 less. I didnt buy a hdd or cd/dvd drive. The cpu runs like a champ at 2.5ghz and if your into overclocking it will go to 3ghz pretty easy although if you are an extreme overclocker the amd black edition would be better to go with. But out of the parts you want to choose from i would say the amd 5200 with the asus mobo.
 
Well i'll still be looking for AMD processors as i might regret the price of it right now in total xD

$305 for all the AMD parts i calculated from my parts list doc.

the 4800+ is a good buy? well most 4600+ to 5200+ processors are on sale at NCIX.

I'll probably head down the AMD route.
 
This PSU is a great deal IMO, much better than the Antec Basiq.

The 4800+ is not bad as such, but an AMD PC limits your upgrade options to AMD Phenoms, which aren't the greatest performers around. IMO, buying this CPU and this motherboard, you'd have a better PC than an AMD one for about the same price I think. In the end, it's upto you.

Good luck and let us know how it goes. :)
 
Is there a particular reason you want an AMD system? You might have a good reason to keep to AMD....

Although these days, you'd need a really good reason to go to AMD....
 
Haven't i mentioned that Intel CPU?

And also, if i choose to go with Intel, i'd get the G35 or G33 Chipset Motherboard by ASUS :)

Yeah its true we would need a good reason to go to AMD.

But its the value of that AMD Motherboard i get for a mATX Motherboard [mATX fits in my HP Case], the Hyper Transport 3.0, PCI-e 2.0, DDR2-1066 and plenty more.
 
Simple, AMD is cheaper for the performance, sure the 'quality' may not be as great as an Intel, but hell I'd rather spend $129 on an AMD 5600+ x2 with 2.8Ghz than the Intel Core 2 Duo Q6420 which is stock 2.13Ghz.

Yeah, I don't care how much you can over clock the Intel, if it can be overclocked so much without causing future damage then why don't they sell them at higher speeds?
 
Hmm, Elvrage, we had this argument elsewhere, too. You found ONE comparison, which come to find out the Intel outperformed the AMD, and the fact that the AMD consumes more power, and has less cache, (1MB L2 compared to 4MB L2 on the Intel), and you post THIS?

Then, the Ghz is, by far, not the only thing you should look at. Would a P4 at 3.6ghz outperform the E8400, even though it has slight less Ghz? No.
 
Elvrage said:
Simple, AMD is cheaper for the performance, sure the 'quality' may not be as great as an Intel, but hell I'd rather spend $129 on an AMD 5600+ x2 with 2.8Ghz than the Intel Core 2 Duo Q6420 which is stock 2.13Ghz.

Yeah, I don't care how much you can over clock the Intel, if it can be overclocked so much without causing future damage then why don't they sell them at higher speeds?
Click to expand...
Rubbish. Quality does not figure anywhere here. Both companies make chips of the highest quality, so that's a moot point.
As for the CPU frequency, if you know so much about AMD, why don't you know about the fact that their Athlon 64 CPUs were easily able to beat higher-clocked Pentium 4 and Pentium D CPUs? That is the same situation now, except that the roles are reversed.
As for OCing, what you said is just crap. You obviously need to learn about how CPUs are manufactured.
 
Well anyways, i got the AMD setup.

Sure it may not be as great as the Intel setup but hey, I'm happy :)

The Onboard graphics are impressive to me :)

POST is really quick, it just blasts by to loading Vista in just 5 Seconds.
 
You referring to me or them?

BTW, it was just a personal choice because of a motherboard warfare.

If it weren't for the AMD motherboard, i would of gotten the Intel setup.

Anyways Intels OC better but i don't OC so kind of no point :)
 
wasn't about you, don't worry XD

Intel's chips do OC better, but their superiority doesn't stop there. They also pack more punch, and consume less power. Heats up less as well, the last time I checked (which was sometime ago, but hey, AMD hasn't released K10 yet, or have they?)
 
It's not a good comparison at all for current dual-core CPUs. The Pentium 840 had HT, which affected its multitasking performance. HT is not present on current-gen Intel CPUs. Any current generation Core 2 Duo is faster and much more energy-efficient than any competing AMD CPU due to its overall architecture, not because of a single feature like HT. The bottom line is that AMD is the best choice for budget systems now, whereas Intel rules the roost at the mid and upper ranges.
 
lmao, I finally thought I'm gonna have to eat humble pie and retract some statemetns I made.

That was until I clicked the link, and saw that the whole article was missing the 3 special words: Core 2 Duo.

You have to realise that in the computing industry, a single year might as well be a lifetime. And when evaluating articles, its date is a huge factor.

You wouldn't want us comparing P3s with AMD's Thunderbirds. Which is similar to what you're asking us to accept in that article. Core2Duos are nothing like the Pentiums, which is what Intel's trying to distance themselves from right now, by changing the name of their processors.
 
Hall of Fame........

Rage_3K_Moiz said:
It's not a good comparison at all for current dual-core CPUs. The Pentium 840 had HT, which affected its multitasking performance. HT is not present on current-gen Intel CPUs. Any current generation Core 2 Duo is faster and much more energy-efficient than any competing AMD CPU due to its overall architecture, not because of a single feature like HT. The bottom line is that AMD is the best choice for budget systems now, whereas Intel rules the roost at the mid and upper ranges.
Click to expand...

The next thousand bucks I get, I'm gonna head straight to the Intel CPU Museum an' gits me one of them thar 840EE 's
 
Rage_3K_Moiz said:
Rubbish. Quality does not figure anywhere here. Both companies make chips of the highest quality, so that's a moot point.
As for the CPU frequency, if you know so much about AMD, why don't you know about the fact that their Athlon 64 CPUs were easily able to beat higher-clocked Pentium 4 and Pentium D CPUs? That is the same situation now, except that the roles are reversed.
As for OCing, what you said is just crap. You obviously need to learn about how CPUs are manufactured.
Click to expand...


I know about OCing, and I just am not that much into it.

Simple. Lets say we're talking about getting and OCing a Core 2 Duo alright?

Intel builds their CPU's like so. Generally, their CPU's are built well, the more money, the better and sturdier the build.

I.E. The Core 2 Duo E6300 is built with cheaper materials than the the Core 2 Duo E8500. This is where OCing comes in. Sure, you can probably get double out of the E6300, maybe even more if you OC it just right, but it's not going to be as stable as the E8500 at that same speed, simply because it's built with better materials.

Anyways, that's getting off subject, what I was intending was that AMD = More BFTB (Buck for the Bang) Intel = OC Heaven

It depends on what you're into. And what are you talking about, I would've known the fact that the Athlon x2 outperformed the P4?

I was just suggesting the cheaper build, taking in that this guy was probably around my age (16) and was building a budget computer, because I didn't want to do the research to find out. So I told him the AMD build.

Okay, Sorry that I ruffled your feathers there bud.

-Elvrage
 
Elvrage said:
The Core 2 Duo E6300 is built with cheaper materials than the the Core 2 Duo E8500.
Click to expand...

LOL

We're not talking about making cabinets here mister, the materials you're talking about were never in question. I suppose it would be if they discovered some new superconductor, or semiconductor with superior properties, and were bringing them out in a new line, but unless I missed out on something, the E8500 and E6300 were built using the same technologies (I'm talking materials, processes, etc, not circuitry blueprints)

Secondly, you're talking about 2 different CPU lines. You might as well be saying that the Core2Duo that runs at 2.13ghz can be overclocked to the same speeds as a Dual Core Pentium 840EE, and it wouldn't be overexagerrating the point.

In my Overclock FAQ, there's a little on the fabrication process. Here's an excerpt:
FAQ said:
they do not have a different fabrication process for the different speeds of the same family of chips. Therefore, when you receive a Core2Duo E6600, its from the same batch of chips some E6700, X6800, E6400, E6300 come from. They differentiate this through testing after these chips are produced. These tests determine how much imperfections there are in each individual chip. From this testing, they decide that one chip may perform at X ghz, while another will perform at only Y ghz, and they sell them accordingly.
Click to expand...


I don't mind being corrected if I'm wrong. I will of course doublecheck whatever information in question.
 
Elvrage said:
Intel builds their CPU's like so. Generally, their CPU's are built well, the more money, the better and sturdier the build.

I.E. The Core 2 Duo E6300 is built with cheaper materials than the the Core 2 Duo E8500. This is where OCing comes in. Sure, you can probably get double out of the E6300, maybe even more if you OC it just right, but it's not going to be as stable as the E8500 at that same speed, simply because it's built with better materials.
Click to expand...
I just hate it when misinformation is being spread around. Fabrication processes do not work that way, since that would increase the cost of producing higher-end CPUs, and make Intel less likely to produce them. The majority of the cost when making a chip goes into the R&D behind it. Every chip that comes out of the fabrication process has imperfections, which means each chip has a different range of safe operating temperatures and frequencies according to Intel. Thus, while chip A may only be able to run at 2.83GHz stably, chip B may run at 3.16GHz stably, thus chip A will be branded as an E8300 while chip B will be branded as an E8500, despite coming from the same fabrication process.

The above is simply a detailed version of what CMH has quoted from his FAQ.
 
Yeah, its just like making chocolate! They make a whole bunch of spherical chocolates, the nicer tasting ones they sell as M&Ms, while the crappier ones they sell as Smarties!!

*p.s. M&Ms are produced by Mars, Smarties by Nestle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

yRaz
My current switch from Microsoft to Linux, de-googling my life and what it takes.
Replies
2
Views
2K
yRaz
yRaz
Scorpus
Intel lifts the lid on Arc laptop GPUs, here's what you need to know
Replies
15
Views
3K
meric
M
N
Nvidia 8500G stop working
Replies
2
Views
2K
nickyclp
N

Latest posts

Back