Help selecting computer

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 10 Jan 2007, 20:14

Hey I'm thinking of buying/building a new PC. I need some help on what's good etc.

I take it I want an Athlon 64 X2? These are good right?
Also can someone recommend a great graphics card? Something that'll make today's games look ace... possibly HD ready...(?)... I take it needs to have 512 MB RAM?
Also the main RAM is better off being DDR II?

TBH I'd prefer to just buy the PC, minus the monitor, keyboard, mouse etc. Where's the best place to buy? I know how to install simple items like RAM etc... so even if it's partially built, that'll be good for me.

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 10 Jan 2007, 20:42

I was reading this and they reckon that

It [X1950 XT] will handily beat a 7950 GT, and will even best a 7900 GTO or 7900 GTX at most applications.

Is this possible, despite the X1950 XT being 256MB and 7900 GTO/GTX being 512 MB?

Sorry if I sound like a noob but I know nothing about today's PC's.

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 10 Jan 2007, 21:19

Note: I'm an avid AMD-ATI fanboy. Anything I say can and will be used against me by Intel-NVidia fanboys.

I take it I want an Athlon 64 X2? These are good right?

Any dual-core AMD (X2) will easily beat an Intel Core 2 Duo in multimedia applications.
The only problem is the temperature. You need good fans to keep an AMD from burning.

Make sure you get a motherboard with an AM2 socket (not a 939 socket) and a 16x PCI-Express (not AGP) slot.

a great graphics card? ... I take it needs to have 512 MB RAM?

Nope. Most games (including the recent ones) don't know what to do with the extra RAM. 256mb is plenty.

Supremely cheap AND powerful: ATI X1900 GT.
A bit more expensive but also better: ATI X1950 Pro.
Ridiculously expensive and not that powerful: ATI X1950 XTX.

Just try to avoid the slow ones (X1600-X1650) and you'll be fine.

Also the main RAM is better off being DDR II?

You ain't got much of a choice.
If you want an Athlon X2, you need an AM2 motherboard.
I think DDR2 is mandatory on these boards.

Feel free to ask more questions.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 10 Jan 2007, 21:28

tom2681 wrote:Note: I'm an avid AMD-ATI fanboy. Anything I say can and will be used against me by Intel-NVidia fanboys.

What about? -

AMD-Nvidia
Intel-ATI

tom2681 wrote:Any dual-core AMD (X2) will easily beat an Intel Core 2 Duo in multimedia applications.

Really? What about in laptops? I've not seen any Dual-core AMDs. I'll be picking a new laptop up in a month or two.

I'm guessin Intel if AMDs get hot.

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 10 Jan 2007, 21:30

That's the problem.

AMDs need air. There's no air in laptops (that's why laptop AMDs aren't that fast).

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 10 Jan 2007, 21:41

So if I'm getting a laptop it should "definitely" be an Intel Core 2 Duo then? Oh and it's a 32-Bit chip right? I'm put off by 64-But chips. This laptop look incredible value for money:

http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/show ... p?t=459038

I've seen some Turions but they're cut down so don't interest me.

Sorry Bisc I just wanted to know that.

p.s - What happened to the Centrino range?

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 10 Jan 2007, 22:29

This laptop look incredible value for money:

"Look" is the right word for it:

Processor speed 1.83 GHz
So it's two 1,83 Ghz cores.

If you're using an application that requires lots of processing power and that can't use both cores at once, you'll be stuck with a maximum speed of 1,83 Ghz.

That's fine for 2003 but not in this day and age.

For good performance you need at least two 2,2ghz cores.

If you're going Intel, I'd suggest:
-A big Core 2 Duo (2,33 ghz x2).
or
-An old Pentium D (3 ghz x2).
or
-Wait for the Quad Cores (they'll be released in a few days).

If you still want a sub-2 ghz processor, I hope you know how to overclock it.
Otherwise it's going to be slowwwww.

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 10 Jan 2007, 22:43

Cheers Tom, my current PC is an AMD-ATI combo. I was told not to be an nvidiot heheh.

Some really useful info here. Any ideas where I can get a good (ventilated) case with mobo and Athlon 64 X2 pre-built? I think I can build the rest from there...

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 10 Jan 2007, 22:49

Can't help you with the "where", sorry...

I buy all my hardware from my dad (he builds/sells/repairs computers for a living) at bargain prices.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 10 Jan 2007, 22:53

tom2681 wrote:If you're using an application that requires lots of processing power and that can't use both cores at once, you'll be stuck with a maximum speed of 1,83 Ghz.

AMD used to bitch and moan about speed not being everything back in the day when Intel were winning the marketing war (despite AMD having the better performing chips (which is vastly different to their GHz value)) and now look at what you're doing

At the moment though, Intel do seem to have the better write-ups regarding the Core 2 for overall performance-against-price. I've always said that it's a swings and roundabouts scenario. One company is always playing catch-up and at the moment, it seems to be AMD doing so, in the domestic market, at least.
The other thing to watch out for (as Tom's already said) is the cooling. Athlon's need a fair bit to stop 'em from exploding, and then you've got to weigh this up against the noise and/or expense of keeping 'em quiet. You'll be sucking some serious juice though. Hope you've got surge protectors

As for graphics cards, I've had nVidia and ATI (currently running ATI) and I've gotta say, the drivers for ATI are garbage. An absolute pain in the arse to update compared to nVidia. The graphics themselves are nice, but I expected that spending £300 on a sodding graphics card.
The trouble with graphics cards is that some companies favour one over the other. Epic (makers of Unreal etc.) and id (yer Doom's and so on) seem to prefer nVidia and Valve (Half-Life ahoy!) prefer ATI. This follows through with the games that run using their respective engines, so it's tricky. I'd say as long as you stay in the top tier of either companies cards, you'll do fine

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 10 Jan 2007, 22:54

That's ok but I'll be pestering you for a while longer (hope you don't mind).

What's this:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu ... -AS&tool=3

Is that just a case + mobo? I can't tell... doesn't it need more fans for the type of processor I want?

IronMonkey · Post by **IronMonkey** » 10 Jan 2007, 22:58

BiscLimpkit wrote:Is this possible, despite the X1950 XT being 256MB and 7900 GTO/GTX being 512 MB?

The memory size is not directly related to the graphics card's performance. The memory is used to buffer textures so that they load quicker. More memory just means more textures can be buffered at once, but in all honesty I don't think there are many games on the market which take advantage of this.

I think the other use for onboard RAM on a graphics card is as a frame buffer & also for anti-aliasing & anisitropic filtering but I could be wrong about that...

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 10 Jan 2007, 23:03

@Bisc:
Yeah, looks like it's just a case+mobo+power supply.
Good mobo, though.

BTW:
A 250W power supply probably won't be enough.
I need 450W for my AMD + ATI X800 GTO + 2 S-ATA Hard Drives.

Regarding the fans:
One fan for the CPU, one on the GFX card, maybe one for the chipset on the mobo, one for the power supply, and most importantly:
-One at the back of the case to extract all the hot air.

That should be enough.

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 10 Jan 2007, 23:06

Are fans easy to install or does it depend on the case? Also how the hell do you keep your PC quiet with all those fans?

Also what is this?

click

It has DTS?! That must be cool!

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 10 Jan 2007, 23:19

Also what is this?

Depth: 27cm.

It's a stupid mini-booksize tower.
Sure to send your system to a fiery death.

Also: 250W power supply. Still too small.

Are fans easy to install

The kind of fan I'm talking about is an extractor.

http://www.ldlc.com/fiche/PB00035651.html

Very easy to install. You just screw it in, plug it into the connector on the mobo (all of them have connectors for fans) and voilà.

how the hell do you keep your PC quiet with all those fans?

Irrelevant question.

All PCs have several fans. AMDs just need one more than Intels.

Anyway, what I've got is a Silentium (says it all

):
http://www.ldlc.com/fiche/PB00045684.html

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 10 Jan 2007, 23:35

tom2681 wrote:For good performance you need at least two 2,2ghz cores.

Correct me if I'm wrong but talking laptops the speeds are always way less. Are 2.2Ghz even common? Most seem to be under 2Ghz. I'm not for a 1.83Ghz laptop at all just I thought that was kind of the max. for laptops.

tom2681 wrote:-A big Core 2 Duo (2,33 ghz x2).
or
-An old Pentium D (3 ghz x2).
or
-Wait for the Quad Cores (they'll be released in a few days).

Surely that sort of power would really eat at the battery? Aren't Intel's much better battery wise? (the Pentium D isn't a laptop CPU AFAIK).

I've not even seen any of those in laptops. I said I'm not buying one until Feb-March and just want to know if I should look at AMD or Intel right now

I seriously doubt that sort of power is needed unless you do lots of high powered graphical work or play computer games. I never do either. It's MP3s, DVD Burning, Internet, E-mail, Word Processing, Wireless for me.

There's more to a computer than the process. I just meant that deal seems to have a nice spec. for the price (2Gb, 256MB dedicated graphics card).

tom2681 wrote:If you're going Intel, I'd suggest

I'm not you said avoid AMD for laptops so that surely leaves Intel? You never said what happened to the Centrino range?

p.s - Sorry Bisc Tom didn't answer my questions

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 10 Jan 2007, 23:39

BiscLimpkit wrote:Cheers Tom, my current PC is an AMD-ATI combo. I was told not to be an nvidiot heheh.

Sky or Cable? Like lots of these things it heavily comes down to who you ask. Both ATI and Nvidia are very good and sell AFAIK similiar levels of graphics cards.

Back when I did know about these things 2-3 years ago Intel and AMD were really about equal, it just depended who you asked. I usually went for AMD (my current PC is 3 years old and is AMD, soon to be replaced) as they were always way cheaper.

BiscLimpkit wrote:It has DTS?! That must be cool!

I'm sure that's common for 5.1 sound cards now.

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 11 Jan 2007, 00:04

Brad wrote:Sorry Bisc Tom didn't answer my questions

That's because I don't have any answers for you.

I don't know much about laptops (couldn't care less about them) and I don't know what happened to the Centrinos.

Brad wrote:Aren't Intel's much better battery wise?

I don't know the exact numbers but yes, Intels are less power-hungry.

Intels tend to be better at all the stuff I don't care about

(word, excel, dvd-burning, internet, etc...).

Lourdes · Post by **Lourdes** » 11 Jan 2007, 01:27

Umm at the moment the Intel Core 2 Duo chips are ahead by a mile and well priced to boot.

Bisc, what are you planning on using the system for?

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 11 Jan 2007, 19:08

Games machine - my current PC can't handle anything.

I think I'm gonna bite the bullet and build it. Details of what I've decided coming up soon...

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 11 Jan 2007, 19:14

Have you ever built a PC before? It's pretty easy now a days.

Thanks anyway Tom. You don't care about the Internet??? Or DVD Burning?

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 11 Jan 2007, 19:51

Just get an ATI Radeon X1950Pro for about 120 quid and bobs your uncle

or buy 2 and go Crossfore for super speed for cheap, hell I am going Crossfire hopefully soon and hope theres some new Direct X 10 cards as good quality as this out in a few months

but as cheap and powerful.

Hell I am getting my new PC in few months and I dont think I can be arsed to build one, may add some bits and bobs I guess, but hell I dont want the bother. It will go nicely with a new 42 inch Full HD LCD, no need for a new screen when you use your TV

but I am still waiting for the new Direct X10 cards to take hold and to see what the hell happens with Vista. So maybe 3 or 4 months from now and it may be easier for me to start the buying.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 11 Jan 2007, 19:56

romerojpg wrote:Hell I am getting my new PC in few months and I dont think I can be arsed to build one, may add some bits and bobs I guess, but hell I dont want the bother.

If you want THE best performance you'll build your own.

You'll know exactly what components it has then and will have hand picked them. This isn't possible with off the shelf pc's. For example do Dell who let you (kind of) build your own pc choose the motherboard or speed or memory? Nope.

Hassle? Have you ever done it? It's not half as complicated as you think. Personally I'd never buy a pc (except for a laptop).

romerojpg wrote: It will go nicely with a new 42 inch Full HD LCD, no need for a new screen when you use your TV

IMO I disagree that size screen for general usage everyone says is far to big.

romerojpg wrote:but I am still waiting for the new Direct X10 cards to take hold.

Is DX10 out? Why on earth has it taken so long?

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 11 Jan 2007, 19:59

Theres a few DX10 cards on the market, not sure if they are in shops yet.

I know the new king of graphics cards the NVidea Geforce 8800 GTX is DX10

but hell its over 400 quid

no way...

Lourdes · Post by **Lourdes** » 11 Jan 2007, 20:27

romerojpg wrote:Theres a few DX10 cards on the market, not sure if they are in shops yet.

I know the new king of graphics cards the NVidea Geforce 8800 GTX is DX10 but hell its over 400 quid no way...

The 8800GTS is as low as £250 which is very reasonable.