Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Which parts to buy for a computer?

Author
Message
Lukas W
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
Posted: 23rd Feb 2008 20:25
Link
Hi, it's been a while! Anyway, enough greetings.

I am looking to buy a new computer, well, computer parts actually. I'll buy one or two parts each month.

Currently I am looking at what parts I want to buy, and I can't really decide what I want. Do I want AMD or do I want Intel, do I want ATI or do I want nVidia.

From what I have found out; Intel processor depends on nVidia gpus, to make full use of the power. And since Amd bought Ati, I figure those two brands will work well together.

My current decision is to get an ATI HD3870 X2 (it supports DirectX 10.1 and shader module 4.1). I also heard that it is the best single card you can get today. I am not interested in Crossfire or SLi etc. And because of that I want an AMD processor.

So should I go for a Dual core (Athlon) or a Quad core (Phenom).

I am using Photoshop a LOT and I play games occasionally. I'm not sure how much of multi threading photoshop does, but I think that two cores should be enough to fuel it.
Also, I have heard that games aren't supporting quad cores yet. Though if I remember correctly, I think that Call of Duty4 and Unreal Tournament3 support quad core.

But then I started thinking, would it be worth it buying a HD3870 X2 when Geforce9 is just around the corner? I've always trusted nVidia and I like their products. So assuming my gut feeling is correct, the 9 series will make the HD3870 look like a 6600 GT.

Anyway, should I decide to wait for the 9 series to come out, I want an Intel processor. Again, should I settle with dual core or should I go for quad core. The E8500 looks tempting for a dual core with its 3.16ghz clock (almost as fast as the Athlon X2 6400) and 6mb in cache *drool*.

Once I have decided upon a graphics card (I really want to play Call of Duty 4 and Unreal Tournament 3 without the lag), then comes the processor (I want to use Photoshop while I scan my computer for viruses, and I also want to play newer games).

So, what are your opinions?
I am still going to use Windows XP. (Vista is too expensive, Aww..)

As a side note, I looked up my current computer specs to see how much my computer would cost today, and was sad to find out that my processor and motherboard is no longer on sale In Norway anyway. Ah well.

I allways afraided from a clowns. aww..
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Samoz83
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd May 2003
Location: Stealing Ians tea from his moon base
Posted: 23rd Feb 2008 20:41 Edited at: 23rd Feb 2008 20:41
Link
i say wait for the 9 series and get a quad core Intel way better than AMD's processors

www.firelightstudio.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 23rd Feb 2008 20:42 Edited at: 23rd Feb 2008 20:42
Link
Quote: "I am still going to use Windows XP. (Vista is too expensive, Aww..)"


Well, directx 10 is pretty useless without vista

But ye, go for the best if you can afford it. I'm with you, I'd probably pair an ati with amd, and nvidia with intel. Though you can mix and match however you want.

Another thing to consider is the fact that nvidia acquired ageia, so you'll be seeing physx support on nvidia cards (even existing ones) soon.

I personally would go for the intel quad cores. It won't be long before all the newer games take advantage of all the cores.

If you don't mind waiting, you might want to wait for the 9600 cards to come out, but remember you're always waiting for something.

You could buy the cpu first, and buy the 9600gts or whatever when it comes out, and use your current card or onboard video in the mean time.

You'll probably want to consider buying a psu and mobo that supports sli, so in the future you can add a second card to beef up the speed


Hurray for teh logd!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Lukas W
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
Posted: 23rd Feb 2008 21:19 Edited at: 23rd Feb 2008 21:24
Link
Thanks for the feedback!

Quote: "get a quad core Intel way better than AMD's processors"

Indeed, I've seen on several occasions that the Intel processors (quad cores) are way above the AMD's processors. But the new AMD processor "Phenom" (which is the first quad core from AMD) is actually quite close to compete with the quad cores from Intel.

Quote: "Well, directx 10 is pretty useless without vista"

I forgot about that. Funny how you get confused by the "latest and greatest" features .
But still, now that I think about it, it wouldn't hurt to have a DirectX 10.1 GPU in the computer for when (or if) I get Vista.

Quote: "nvidia acquired ageia,"

Ah, I read something about that some time ago. Good that you reminded me, I think I am more interested in waiting for the new Geforce cards now.

Quote: "I personally would go for the intel quad cores"

I have a feeling that is the way to go, same reason for with the graphics card. It's better to have one in wait than nothing for when the time comes.

Regarding SLi or Crossfire, I am not interested in it. I think that going with two graphics cards (or even four) is a waste of money and electricity. In my opinion you only need one card to enjoy a game. I understand that you earn improved performance, but how great is it? From what I've seen it's 50% improvement (sometimes even 60%). So by the time you can afford two graphics card, a new card would probably be out that improves the performance 40%, so it's a 10% gain which is too little for the money spent. But I may be totally wrong. I am basing my opinion on several performance benchmarkings I've seen while searching for graphics cards. For instance a 50% gain on a SLI 7900GT over a single 7900GT. And now the 8800GT is way more powerful than that card.

Anyway,
While I've been writing this post my mind has been thinking a lot, and I think it finally made up its mind.
I'll go with a Quad processor from Intel (although it will probably not be the best choice today, but still almost 400% better than my current processor, and a good start for future applications and games. Also I will wait for the 9 series from nVidia to come out. I assume that the GT or GTS version will have an ideal price for me.

I allways afraided from a clowns. aww..
Back to top
Profile PM Email
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 23rd Feb 2008 22:21
Link
Just make sure you get a mobo that supports the pci-e x16 2.0 interface. Your card should still work in a regular pci-e x16 slot, but I don't think it'll be able to take advantage of the extra features. (I could be wrong, haven't researched this).

I think the neat thing about getting an sli capable mobo is that in a year or two you can upgrade to another 9600 (or whatever you get), and it'll be really cheap, but should provide enough power to last you another year or two. Of course, this is if you don't want to remain at the top end of the gaming hardware.

You're right in that one 8800gts is faster for the price than, say, two 8800 gt cards.

Another added benefit is the increased ram capacity of 2 cards vs 1, which will allow you to play at higher resolutions if you need that.


Hurray for teh logd!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Preston C
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th May 2003
Location: Penn State University Park
Posted: 23rd Feb 2008 22:29 Edited at: 23rd Feb 2008 22:33
Link
Quote: "Regarding SLi or Crossfire, I am not interested in it. I think that going with two graphics cards (or even four) is a waste of money and electricity. In my opinion you only need one card to enjoy a game. I understand that you earn improved performance, but how great is it? From what I've seen it's 50% improvement (sometimes even 60%). So by the time you can afford two graphics card, a new card would probably be out that improves the performance 40%, so it's a 10% gain which is too little for the money spent. But I may be totally wrong. I am basing my opinion on several performance benchmarkings I've seen while searching for graphics cards. For instance a 50% gain on a SLI 7900GT over a single 7900GT. And now the 8800GT is way more powerful than that card."


It depends on the game you play. Some are written to work well with SLI. Others, not so much. I've seen several cases where SLI decreases performance of games. Really, unless you have a large, high resolution monitor, you won't really need SLI, or that powerful of a graphics card.

As it stands, the NVIDIA 9600 is probably your best bang for your buck atm, I'd go with that paired with an Intel Dual Core/Quad Core.

[Edit] If you'd be willing to overclock, I'd also recommend this beastie:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037

From 3.0 Ghz to more than 4.0 Ghz on air. Nice improvement.

Also, Vista isn't so expensive depending on the version you get. If you're smart, the OEM versions work quite well, and Vista Home Premium is perfect for most users, and costs less than the OEM of Windows XP Professional last I checked.



AMD Opteron 185 2.6 Ghz | 2 GB RAM | 8800 GTS 640MB | Vista Home Premium
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Lukas W
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
Posted: 23rd Feb 2008 23:16 Edited at: 23rd Feb 2008 23:20
Link
Quote: "Just make sure you get a mobo that supports the pci-e x16 2.0 interface."

I haven't heard of pci-e 2.0 before. I need to read a bit about it.


Quote: "Another added benefit is the increased ram capacity of 2 cards vs 1, which will allow you to play at higher resolutions if you need that."

Quote: "unless you have a large, high resolution monitor, you won't really need SLI, or that powerful of a graphics card. "

I am also looking to buy a new monitor. I've had this CRT monster for years now. I did use my LCD TV as a monitor for a while, but then I bought a Wii and Xbox 360, so I can't really use it with my computer any more.

I am looking at a 22" Widescreen LCD monitor running at 1080x1050 or something (I forgot what the resolution is), and I also read in a magazine (as well as I noticed it with my LCD TV) that if running a non widescreen resolution or running at a resolution lower than the "recommended" (in this case 1080x1050 pixels) resolution, the image becomes stretched (with my TV I could change aspect ratio to 4:3 so it didn't really matter) or the image is blurred because the pixels are too large.
So in order to fix that, you need a graphics card powerful enough to render at the resolution required.

If two graphics cards is helping in that, as you've just said, then I am a bit more interested in using a SLI setup.

Just to be safe I'll do what Jerico said, and buy a PSU and motherboard that are SLI ready/compatible.
So just in case I can't stand the rendering I have a backup. An expensive backup.

Quote: "If you'd be willing to overclock, I'd also recommend this beastie:"

I have never overclocked anything before, and I probably won't. I'm afraid I'll break something.

Quote: "Also, Vista isn't so expensive depending on the version you get. If you're smart, the OEM versions work quite well, and Vista Home Premium is perfect for most users, and costs less than the OEM of Windows XP Professional last I checked.
"

It will be a last priority, but that's an interesting idea.
But I haven't really understood yet, what the difference between the OEM and Rental version of Vista is.
I think in the OEM version you can only install the operating system once? While in the Rental version you can install it up to three times, as long as you uninstall it from the old computer?

edit,
Oh and with the Rental you can choose 32 or 64 bit, as well as install the operating system in any language you want.
while in OEM you can only use either 32 or 64 bit, depending on which version you buy, and you can only use the language that you payed for. In my case I can only have Norwegian.

I allways afraided from a clowns. aww..
Back to top
Profile PM Email
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 23rd Feb 2008 23:58
Link
Quote: "Oh and with the Rental you can choose 32 or 64 bit, as well as install the operating system in any language you want.
while in OEM you can only use either 32 or 64 bit, depending on which version you buy, and you can only use the language that you payed for. In my case I can only have Norwegian."


That doesn't make a lot of sense, because you can install language packs in vista, at least in ultimate, you might want to look into that more.

Vista 64bit is pretty much compatible with everything that vista 32 bit is. (I only found 1 game that didn't, and it was old). I recommend getting 64bit vista if you're running a 64bit system.

As for the OEM, you can only install it on one machine (as many times as you need). If you get a new machine, you can't transfer vista to it. You also don't get free ms phone support. If you do need to phone activate it though, that's no big deal, it's pretty easy (though tedious, because it's voice activated).

But at half the price of the retail version, that's not bad.

I recommend the oem version unless you plan on changing your computer and wanting your os to go along with the change.


Hurray for teh logd!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Preston C
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th May 2003
Location: Penn State University Park
Posted: 24th Feb 2008 04:09 Edited at: 24th Feb 2008 04:11
Link
Quote: "I am looking at a 22" Widescreen LCD monitor running at 1080x1050 or something (I forgot what the resolution is), and I also read in a magazine (as well as I noticed it with my LCD TV) that if running a non widescreen resolution or running at a resolution lower than the "recommended" (in this case 1080x1050 pixels) resolution, the image becomes stretched (with my TV I could change aspect ratio to 4:3 so it didn't really matter) or the image is blurred because the pixels are too large.
So in order to fix that, you need a graphics card powerful enough to render at the resolution required.
"


Aye, that's true. If you don't run an image at an LCD monitors recommended resolution, it does turn really ugly looking...

But as it stands, with resolutions around 1280x1024, one card is quite adequate.

I'm assuming the monitor you're looking at is a resolution of 1680x1050, then take a look at some card benchmarks. From the looks of things, a single 9600 can even handle Crysis on mostly high settings at that resolution with a hiccup here or there.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/02/21/nvidia_geforce_9600_gt/page13.html

Here is another showing Crysis being benchmarked, although at a lower resolution:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQ2NiwzLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

Other than Crysis, the 9600 is shown to run games such as Call of Duty 4 and Unreal Tournament 3 at resolutions higher than 1080p (1920x1200) at great framerates.

Again, most people should only ever need most graphics cards, but I guess the 9600 is cheap enough that you could plug two in without another hit to your bleeding wallet



AMD Opteron 185 2.6 Ghz | 2 GB RAM | 8800 GTS 640MB | Vista Home Premium
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Lukas W
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
Posted: 24th Feb 2008 13:22 Edited at: 14th Mar 2008 12:39
Link
Quote: "That doesn't make a lot of sense, because you can install language packs in vista, at least in ultimate, you might want to look into that more."

Sorry, but I did mention that I haven't really understood the concept between the OEM and Rental. So thanks for clearing up a few things.

I'll have a look at prices for the OEM version, and add the operating system to my list. But it'll be something I buy lastly.

Preston,
The first link you showed me, indicated that the ATI HD3870 rendered a little bit faster than the NVIDIA 9600GT.
But as it is, you (all of you who posted) have recommended the 9600 so I will probably stick with that.

I will probably try out Crysis some time in the future, but first comes Unreal Tournament 3 and Carr of Duty 4. I haven't played them enough yet.

I allways afraided from a clowns. aww..
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Lukas W
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
Posted: 14th Mar 2008 12:45
Link
Hello again!

So I've started buying parts one at a time, because at the moment I have some money to spare. My car just broke (one week after I had it repaired, and guess what? It was the same part that they repaired that is broken. Again.) and I need to have a few spare cash in case they are insiting that I pay even though it was their fault for not repairing it good enough to last.

Anyway,
I've bought the MSI P7N DIAMOND which supports up to 4 pieces of 1.8v PC2-8500 memory sticks.

My question is this:
Will I be able to use a 2.2v memory stick (PC2-8500) in the 1.8v slot?
Or do I have to find a 1.8v memory stick, which has been impossible to find so far, and buy that?

Sincerely, Lukas W.

I allways afraided from a clowns. aww..
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Lukas W
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
Posted: 14th Mar 2008 19:49 Edited at: 14th Mar 2008 19:54
Link
Sorry about the triple post, but it's been a while, and I haven't received an answer yet.

Anyway, I made a quick search on Kingston's website, and it gave me a list of compatible memory sticks∆ (from kingston).
All of the memory sticks (at least all of them that I looked at) used 1.8V consumption.

So my guess is that using a 2.2v memory stick in a 1.8v memory socket is a NO! But I don't know.

At least I have found a 1.8v PC2-8500 memory stick now.
It has a latency of CL7, which is worse than CL5, which was the original stick I wanted to buy. So that sucks.

Hopefully, two gigs of 1066mhz memory (even though it's CL7) is better than my old 2.5Gigs of 200mhz (CL3) sticks. aww.. a clowns told me that .


∆ because apollo doesn't like urls with % signs in it, I'll put the link here:
http://www.ec.kingston.com/ecom/configurator_new/modelsinfo.asp?SysID=43305&mfr=MSI&model=P7N+Diamond+Motherboard&root=us&LinkBack=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.kingston.com&Sys=43305-MSI-P7N+Diamond+Motherboard&distributor=0&submit1=Search

I allways afraided from a clowns. aww..
Back to top
Profile PM Email
GatorHex
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 14th Mar 2008 20:15 Edited at: 14th Mar 2008 20:31
Link
I'd get an e8400 the price difference for a e8500 is not worth it. You can overclock it to 4Ghz for free anyway.

If you can't wait I'd get a nVidia 8800GT which will handle every game out there without going crazy money. DX-10.1 is a minor update that will not stop a DX10.0 card working. It basically makes AAx2 manditory. A 512mb 8800GT will have no issues with AAx2 but a 256mb model struggles on the reduced RAM.

I'd rather have 4Gb of 800Mhz ram than 2Gb of 1066Mhz RAM for the same price. If you go for Vista 32bit don't forget it's 3Gb max. I'd probably go 64bit vista premium OEM now unless you really need to run legacy games.

Rather than a 150Gb Raptor I'd get 2x 500gb Seagate Baracudas and run them in RAID 0 for the same price.

I've not seen any LCD stretching issues on modern LCD monitors so I wouldn't worry about that.

Watch out for nVidia motherboard most of them don't do Dual Channel memory access so should be avoided.

DinoHunter (still no nVidia compo voucher!), CPU/GPU Benchmark, DarkFish Encryption DLL, War MMOG (WIP), 3D Model Viewer
Back to top
Profile PM Website
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 14th Mar 2008 20:32
Link
Quote: "I'd get an e8400 the price difference for a e8500 is not worth it"

true, if you can find a e8400 anywhere, not price-gouged. I wanted that cpu for my new machine, to go nicely with my 2 gigs of ddr3 1333, but I ended up getting a q6600 Quad 2.4ghz lga 775, which can overclock to dreamy heights if I wanted to (if I get my mobo working lol)

[href]mod2software[/href]
Back to top
Profile PM
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-20 00:39:19
Your offset time is: 2024-11-20 00:39:19