Buying New Comp Parts...

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Mon May 04, 2009 5:59 am

It's that time again where the computer takes a dump, and it's the "hey, it's a good time to upgrade" cycle.

I'm willing to spend around $700 (maybe stretch an extra 100 or so) for the following components...

CPU - leaning towards Intel, but not a requirement (~$150) Quad-Core seems to be where the action's at...
Mobo - obviously (~$150), Gigabyte seems to be my ideal choice this time around (mostly for their dual-BIOS shit, which is kinda important to me).. only real major requirement is that I have at least 1 PCI slot available (yes, the regular PCI slot)
RAM - performance DDR2 is probably what I'd end up with (~$50) 4GB for 2 pairs of 2GB, but I'm not going to spend more than $100 for DDR3 (6GB for Intel's i7 core stuff is not entirely out of the question)
PSU - looks like 500W will be the minimum, but ~$100 is to be spent here for those that are 80% efficient (seems to be the "new thing" these days)
Video Card - I'm heavily leaning towards NVidia this generation, currently I'm eying the eVGA 260 GTX Superclocked version (I'll get a link if that's needed), which should cost about ~$170 (and less if I looked hard enough). NVidia is my preferance mainly because of OpenGL and Linux (maybe one day I'll have it running for kicks). If you really think ATI is the option, make a convincing argument.

Right now, I'm primarily aiming for mid-range to performance/lower high-end parts (in other words, I don't need the most fucking blazing fastest shit).. I just need the most bang for my buck.

If there are certain details that you think may be important (other components like hds or DVD burners are irrelevent... it's only limited to those 5 components), make sure to speak up.

Edit: Oh yes, SLI/Crossfire is NOT AN OPTION. I don't care for it, so don't even bother trying.

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Mon May 04, 2009 6:41 am

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6817151057

Should be plenty, and it's from one the best lines currently out. If a little nervous about having "only" 430 watts or you intend the PSU to outlast the PC(Certainly possible with these models!): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6817139004 or http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6817151027

As for the GPU, I suggest spending a little more and getting this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814125267

Should be quite a bit faster(10% or so roughly) without costing more than 15 bucks extra.

If you want an AMD card, here's a good one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814102801 few bucks more than the GTX 260 216 I linked, but otherwise equal, not counting games that dislike one architecture, of course.

For the motherboard, this will be fine: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813128371

For CPU and RAM, if you want to go i7 route it will go above 700 dollars, given the cost of the CPU(cheapest CPU is 289.99), RAM(Which will likely be 70 dollars or more) and motherboard(cheapest i7 board that isn't open boxed is 189). Given your cost situation, I would not advise it. The CPU i'd choose is http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115131

Cheapest one with more than just a little L2 cache per core. With the cheaper ones, you'll have Pentium Dual-Core(Allendale based) level performance per core, which, while quite nice, can be better. If you really want to go cheaper, on the other hand, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115057

I chose that one rather than the 8200 due to the higher multiplier. Gives you more room to work with when OCing, which I would do given the nature of the Core 2 CPUs.

If you want to go AMD with the CPU and motherboard, I'm afraid my expertise ends there. I only found out all this when looking into a recent upgrade to an Intel system I have...

As for RAM: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820148212

If you're concerned about OCing headroom for some reason, these will be fine as well: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820104098

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Mon May 04, 2009 8:27 am

I did forget to mention that no overclocking is planned on being done..

I am certainly willing to tweak memory settings (without increasing power) with memory that can natively clock at higher speeds and have lower latencies... memory has been async with the FSB clock for a while now right (like, it's stopped being true post-DDR)? The price disparity between a slower and faster speeds are relatively minimal these days (unlike nearly half a decade ago)... not just the memory sizes (which was a bit more common back then)...

Edit:
Regarding the video card.. I was kinda looking at this...

http://www.microcenter.com/single_produ ... id=0292272

Newegg equiv: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814130372

The only major difference that I can tell is the lesser # of shader processors (and that would affect shaders more obviously), but the tradeoff is having a higher clocked card (core and memory)... is the performance difference dramatic (of course it's game dependant), or is it relatively comparable?

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:50 pm

it also effects TMUs. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/ ... -55nm.html I would pick a 216 over the normal model if you have the cash. if not, that's OK.

Started with DDR2, actually, with the advent of DDR2-800 and DDR2-1066. Both sets I picked, BTW, have low latency. I'm not sure how much lower the 1066 will go if reduced to DDR2-800 speeds, as latency is not something I messed with.

No OCing, eh? OK. You might want to spend a bit more on the CPU then. Not a hard line, but just a recommendation.

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.as ... 6819115131 (Now with newegg.cabecause microcenter has shit for Intel CPUs) for quad-core if you decide you want a faster quad.

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.as ... 6819115037 for dual-core if you decide you do not want a quad after all.

EDIT: FIXED BOTCHED LINK

byuu · Post by **byuu** » Mon May 04, 2009 3:23 pm

CPU - leaning towards Intel, but not a requirement (~$150) Quad-Core seems to be where the action's at...

I'm sure quad is nice for media encoding and stuff I never do. I've only found one use for it, and it makes it totally worth every penny: make -j 4. It scales almost 100% with each extra core.

But if you do decide to go dual anyway, get the E8400. The individual cores are even faster than the Core i7 (even at the same clock speeds -- L2 cache on i7's suck), and it's only ~$130 or so.

I'd second not touching i7. It's too over-priced. DDR2 is way cheaper, as are 775 mainboards. And you can get a nice nForce chipset like the 780i for 775.

funkyass · Post by **funkyass** » Mon May 04, 2009 5:35 pm

byuu wrote: I'm sure quad is nice for media encoding and stuff I never do. I've only found one use for it, and it makes it totally worth every penny: make -j 4. It scales almost 100% with each extra core.

thats pretty much it. I have a quad core, by in large I barely make use of most of the cores on the thing.

I'd go with the e8400 too.

Post by **odditude** » Mon May 04, 2009 6:33 pm

i have a boxed e8400 that will be in use as soon as i pull the trigger on the motherboard and video card (for my purposes, an intel dg45id + radeon 4770).

that being said, if you're looking midrange quad core, apparently the phenom II's are excellent and the best value for the dollar... see here for a fairly good comparison if you're so inclined. if you do go phenom, i'd recommend going with a 790FX+SB750-based board (such as this one, since you're partial to gigabyte).

I.S.T.'s suggestion in PSU is solid. it's the same thing as an antec ea430, my standard suggestion (seasonic is the oem for many of antec's PSUs).

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Mon May 04, 2009 8:27 pm

byuu wrote:And you can get a nice nForce chipset like the 780i for 775.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Confirme ... 3748.shtml

This applies to all earlier 775 socket nVidia chipsets too.

AVOID LIKE THE FUCKING PLAGUE, IF YOU HAVE ONE UPGRADE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

Also, i7s aren't slower at the same clock speed in everything... Just things that are L2 cache loving. If it's more bandwidth loving or stuff like that, the i7s will generally be as good or better. In the end, however, they cost too much. Core 2s are better because of that. You can get in most cases nearly the same speeds(In some cases much faster, in some cases much slower, though that doesn't happen too often) out of a much cheaper chip, and a far cheaper motherboard.

byuu · Post by **byuu** » Mon May 04, 2009 9:17 pm

Never had problems with my 650i or 680i ... though the former is a terrible over-clocker. Good to know about the 790i though, thanks. Hopefully the X58's will drop in price soon.

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Mon May 04, 2009 9:21 pm

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/new ... corruption

http://www.nforcershq.com/nvidia-nforce ... -problems/

I'm fucking serious, switch your board ASAP. It's a time bomb.

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Tue May 05, 2009 1:38 am

Quad-core is not a priority... I'd rather have as much overall performance I can get (at least relative to dual-core standards).

I forgot to mention that the min memory I want on it is 4GB...

As I said, I have a preference, but if other options are better... don't hold back..

I'm reading the Phenom link, and I'll get back to you on that as soon as I'm done reading it...

Hasn't the NForce series of boards been mediocre for a while now? It sounded awesome when it was first done, and now it's just "meh", relative to Intel chipsets (not sure if AMD/ATI chipsets are better, although AMD's prior track record for it has been just as good as Intel's)

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Tue May 05, 2009 1:51 am

Deathlike2 wrote:Quad-core is not a priority... I'd rather have as much overall performance I can get (at least relative to dual-core standards).

I forgot to mention that the min memory I want on it is 4GB...

As I said, I have a preference, but if other options are better... don't hold back..

I'm reading the Phenom link, and I'll get back to you on that as soon as I'm done reading it...

Hasn't the NForce series of boards been mediocre for a while now? It sounded awesome when it was first done, and now it's just "meh", relative to Intel chipsets (not sure if AMD/ATI chipsets are better, although AMD's prior track record for it has been just as good as Intel's)

Their Intel versions are shit, to be blunt. Dunno about their AMD versions.

As for the memory, I linked to 4 gig sets. They're quite nice sets.

The Phenom 2 sucks if you're gonna run it under XP, FYI. http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=54013

Dunno how it will run under Linux, BSD, etc. I highly suggest you look up how they run under those OSs if you plan on running them.

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Tue May 05, 2009 3:05 am

If you get a Nforce motherboard, are you also getting a Creative soundcard? as there X-FI range have known issues with some of the Nforce motherboards.

sweener2001 · Post by **sweener2001** » Tue May 05, 2009 4:19 am

nforce boards seem to have more issues than other major vendors, from what i've read. mostly with sound, specifically creative, like franpa said.

from what i've msi or asus are pretty solid, msi being the slightly more reliable of the two.

as for a processor the e8400 is a solid choice.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115037

unless you are heavy into the multi-tasking, in which case i would second i.s.t. and c2q q8400. from a gaming standpoint the faster dual core e8400 would be the better choice, since games don't usually take advantage of more than two cores.

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Tue May 05, 2009 7:18 am

franpa wrote:If you get a Nforce motherboard, are you also getting a Creative soundcard? as there X-FI range have known issues with some of the Nforce motherboards.

To be fair, the X-Fi range is known to have some issues, full-stop.

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Tue May 05, 2009 1:58 pm

Mostly due to Creative's incompetent(Or ordered to be incompetent) driver team. I've heard few complaints about the Auzentech X-Fi stuff.

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Wed May 06, 2009 12:50 am

I.S.T. wrote:Mostly due to Creative's incompetent(Or ordered to be incompetent) driver team. I've heard few complaints about the Auzentech X-Fi stuff.

True. But still!

And I don't think it's purely orders(though that's certainly part of it, it seems).
They haven't had decent drivers in ages.

And God DAMN but there was a lot of bloatware on my Sound Blaster Live disk. Did they really think I WANTED an extra screen-edge toolbar, a second CD player, and two more media players?

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Wed May 06, 2009 12:57 am

Gil_Hamilton wrote:
I.S.T. wrote:Mostly due to Creative's incompetent(Or ordered to be incompetent) driver team. I've heard few complaints about the Auzentech X-Fi stuff.
True. But still!

And I don't think it's purely orders(though that's certainly part of it, it seems).
They haven't had decent drivers in ages.

And God DAMN but there was a lot of bloatware on my Sound Blaster Live disk. Did they really think I WANTED an extra screen-edge toolbar, a second CD player, and two more media players?

Their assumption is those programs will be the only ones of that type you'll ever use.

Sadly, it held true for some people.

Fuck Creative. Seriously, fuck them to bankruptcy.

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Wed May 06, 2009 2:17 am

I'm coming off an ASUS board, and their BIOS handling is total meh IMO. God forbid their website and BIOS updating utility...

MSI seems ok, but I forget what complaint was with them (not mine, but MSI on the surface seems alright).

Creative is not in the cards at all. Fuck them for sucking this long. Onboard sound has come a long way.

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Wed May 06, 2009 2:22 am

Deathlike2 wrote:I'm coming off an ASUS board, and their BIOS handling is total meh IMO. God forbid their website and BIOS updating utility...

MSI seems ok, but I forget what complaint was with them (not mine, but MSI on the surface seems alright).

Creative is not in the cards at all. Fuck them for sucking this long. Onboard sound has come a long way.

If you go that route, make sure you have speakers already that have volume adjustment. Fucking Realtek has their volume in the drivers set way too low, no matter the OS.

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Wed May 06, 2009 2:35 am

I usually set the volume pretty high... and since when did computer speakers not have a volume adjustment?

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Wed May 06, 2009 2:51 am

I only buy cheap 10$ speakers and use the amp to power my hifi stereo speakers.

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Wed May 06, 2009 2:51 am

Deathlike2 wrote:I usually set the volume pretty high... and since when did computer speakers not have a volume adjustment?

Mine didn't, so I replaced them.

>.>

and I'll rephrase about the volume: Even at the highest settings, I couldn't get more tan just above a whisper out of my realtek board. On the same speakers and a previous PC, I rarely had to use max volume unless the file I was playing was fucked up.

Post by **odditude** » Wed May 06, 2009 2:56 am

I.S.T. wrote:Even at the highest settings, I couldn't get more tan just above a whisper out of my realtek board. On the same speakers and a previous PC, I rarely had to use max volume unless the file I was playing was fucked up.

sounds like you had unpowered speakers and previously had a(n old) sound card with an amplified speaker-out. last one of those i had was an SB AWE32 (woo, full-length ISA card!).

there are no issues with volume and realtek codecs in general. i've built many a machine based of a variety of different aunboard audio solutions, and volume level has never been an issue.

out of curiosity, dl2, what's the native res on the display you're planning on using?

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Wed May 06, 2009 3:46 am

I.S.T. wrote:
Gil_Hamilton wrote:
I.S.T. wrote:Mostly due to Creative's incompetent(Or ordered to be incompetent) driver team. I've heard few complaints about the Auzentech X-Fi stuff.
True. But still!

And I don't think it's purely orders(though that's certainly part of it, it seems).
They haven't had decent drivers in ages.

And God DAMN but there was a lot of bloatware on my Sound Blaster Live disk. Did they really think I WANTED an extra screen-edge toolbar, a second CD player, and two more media players?
Their assumption is those programs will be the only ones of that type you'll ever use.

Sadly, it held true for some people.

The toolbar was obnoxious, there's no two ways about it. And they got rid of it later.

The CD player should've been integrated into their media player.
And there's no way in hell I needed TWO Creative-branded media players.

Fuck Creative. Seriously, fuck them to bankruptcy.

I'd rather see them stop sucking.
If they'd focus on creating a quality product and providing quality support, they'd be a great thing.

Decent soundcards being widely available and a third MP3 player line with both quality and wide market appeal would be nice(the Zen line has a lot going for it, but it's seriously hindered by poor support and crappy quality control).