Need guidance with new build configuration

[Odyssey]

It's well past time to replace my aging Dell 4600. My needs are simple: browsing, spreadsheet, word processing, music, no gaming, but I complicate the situation by keeping multiple instances of browser windows, each with multiple tabs, open all the time, so memory is important as well as whatever demands the multiple windows put on the graphics and other parts of the system. I will buy a mobo with CPU and build out around them, and will use XP, either Home or Pro, but unsure if Pro is important to me

Considering my system use:

I guess the first question is whether I should opt for a quad or duo core. So balancing cost and possible future developments, which of these do you recommend and why?

Also what is important in terms of the various buses, memory types, and how many memory sockets, PCI-16, etc?

What minimum power PSU?

I have a Diamond Viper 512MB X1650Pro which I would like to use instead of buying a new graphics card. Is this adequate for my needs?

I do not require state of the art, which by the time I get my system built and running the way I want it will not be state of the art anymore anyway. The extra cost of the latest and greatest would not be a good outlay for me as my needs are modest.

TIA

 

[wahnula]

Sounds to me like you need a midrange PC. One important thing you left out...what is your budget?

Right now it's all about Core 2 Duos & Quad. If it were my build, I'd spend a little extra for the Intel Kenstfield X6600 quad-core for ~$270, but you can get an entry-level Core 2 Duo for around $100 (if you can find one!) and they overclock like nobody's business. Compare the features here:

http://compare.intel.com/pcc/default.aspx?familyID=1&culture=en-US

Pair it with a good mainboard with 1066 DDR2 support (price reasons) but there are models out there that have DDR2 and DDR3 slots. This is pretty popular board these days:

http://www.directron.com/p5e.html

But again, budget? You should get 2GB RAM regardless of which platform you choose.

XP Home and Pro have some differences, but my feelings are for the $30 price difference I would get the full-featured XP Pro.

Most importantly, HAVE FUN!!! Don't be in a hurry to throw the system together, take the time to lay everything out in a well-lit room and be careful about static electricity.

While this is not the most recent guide, its points are still valid:

http://www.pcguide.com/byop/index.htm

Tony

Users helping Users...

 

[Nelviticus]

For the uses you described even a low-end CPU paired with a low-end graphics card will be more than enough. I say "more than" because your CPU and graphics will rarely, if ever, be taxed to the limit.

So go for a dual-core rather than a quad core - pound for pound (or dollar for dollar) a dual-core will be faster than a quad-core from the same family, which will have an impact in those rare times when CPU speed makes a difference (such as ripping CDs).

Quantity of memory will be much more important for you than speed of memory so I agree with Tony that 2GB of DDR2 is the right choice. DDR3 can be faster but costs more - wasted money for you.

As for buses and slots, it depends on what you want to put in them. If you want to re-use your current (perfectly adequate) graphics card you'll want to find out whether it's AGP or PCI-Express and get a mobo with the right slots. All decent mobos should have a few PCI and PCI-Express slots for add-in cards.

For the power supply 400 watts will be enough but make sure you get a good quality one. No-name and bargain-basement PSUs are not worth the savings.

Alternatively ... just buy an off-the-shelf PC from somewhere like Dell and make sure it has 2GB memory and discrete graphics, i.e. it doesn't use on-board graphics like Intel Extreme(ly poor). It'll be cheaper than building it yourself and it'll come with a warranty.

Regards

Nelviticus

 

[ceh4702]

I just built a computer with a core 2 Quad Q6600 Processor. The CPU cost me $279.00. It runs fine and all but it may be a bit overkill. Then newer E8400 might be a good way to save money. It is built on the .45nm Die Process and is an improvement in some ways. Should run a little cooler. It is running in price about $212.00 or so and may drop a little more in price. I think this would be a good pick. Quad is good too, but it just costs more. My son wanted a quad so that is what we got. The Quad just has more Cache Memory at around 8 Gigs or 4 X 2Meg per core. Where the E8400 has 6Meg Shared L2 Cache which is still pretty reasonable.

My daughter is in a graphics and animation program and they really like the Quad for Photoshop and other type of similar programs. Everything in computers is a trade-off. My daughter likes to chat and listen to music and stuff, so she always has a lot of programs open at once.

Seems to run fine on 2 Gigs of RAM. I dont think there is much advantage to using more RAM than that. You might go for 4 gigs if you were running 64 bit Vista. My guess is dont get Vista unless it comes with the update, or wait till the 2nd update of Vista. XP lets you turn off DRM and that is the way it should be.

Review

http://en.expreview.com/?p=68&page=5

The Asus P5K is a pretty good motherboard. So is the Abit IP35. Both make average, MATX, Wireless, and PRO models.



If you do not like my post feel free to point out your opinion or my errors.

 

[cdogg]

I think most of what you're looking for has been stated well already. For my 2¢ I would just like to chime in and say that DDR2 will suit you fine. The following is an article that talks about the advantages/disadvantages of going with DDR3:

http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/01/04/ddr3-1333_speed_and_latency_shootout/

The following is to help you select a motherboard...

DDR2:

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/31/x38_comparison_part_1/

DDR3:

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/26/x38_comparison_part2/

~cdogg
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Einstein
[tab][navy]For posting policies, click [/navy]here.

 

[wahnula]

As for the PSU (not a very sexy part), your PC will not bear a heavy burden power-wise. Get a brand-name (Antec, Thermaltake, Sparkle, Seasonic, FSP, OCZ/PC Power and Cooling etc.) ~400-watt PSU and you will be fine. I personally like Nexus PSUs for their sheer and utter silence (

http://www.endpcnoise.com)

but most popular brand names are quiet now too.

And yes, your video card should be fine. Let us know your selections...or your budget concerns!

Tony

Users helping Users...

 

[paparazi]

I think most of these recommendations are fairly 'high end' for your requirements but without a rough idea of budget it's hard to know where to take an aim.
Looking at you comments again I think you will be fine with an Intel P35 chipset board, something like:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130098

Processor: one of the low to mid range 1333fsb dual cores, you really don't need quad. something like:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115029

Two gig of PC2 6400 DDR800 (best value/performance)
Something like:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134583

Nice case with solid power supply, something like:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129024

I think if your X1650Pro was fitted in the 4600 it is likely 8X AGP and not the required PCIe interface you will need for a new setup. Thats actually a bit of a shame because this card would have been ideal.

Soo... something like this for graphics:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127286

Hard drive:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152052

Litescribe DVDRW:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151155

Nice midling system, capable without breaking the bank.
Should be rock solid with quality parts, Intel chipset/CPU combo, top memory brand plus stability with the Antec Earthwatts PSU.
Martin



On wings like angels whispers sweet
my heart it feels a broken beat
Touched soul and hurt lay wounded deep
Brown eyes are lost afar and sleep

 

[Odyssey]

Budget isn't really an issue. I could afford a really high end system, but prudence guides me to what I need rather than a show system. As always it is a tradeoff between cost and benefit, as suggested regarding DDR2 vs DDR3, and duo core vs quad core.

I could just upgrade the Dell 4600, but thinking that my needs will be better met with the duo core.

My biggest problem is overload resulting from so many open windows, including windoze explorer, music player/s, Crazy Browser, Opera, and Firefox, usually all open and multiple instances of each with multiple tabs. Yes, I know that I could close a few and solve the problem, but there is a logical explanation for all the windows, and in any case that is the way I like to work.

My 4600 (vintage 2004) has integrated video (no card.) It has PCI slots but not, I believe, PCI Express (not sure when the latter came out, but I think after my computer was mfgrd.) The recently acquired Diamond X1650Pro video card that I have is PCI Express and so I assume that it cannot be used in the 4600?

So am I correct in thinking that the video card might be a big help in dealing with window overload, since this is a key component of the decision to build a new one or try to improve the 4600?

The 4600 already has 1.3 or 1.4GB of RAM and I take the point that 2GB is probably all that XP will efficiently handle, but the type and speed of the ram may also be a factor, and so this might be a reason to upgrade. I would not go to DDR3 as that is probably not cost effective.

One reason I thought to build my own is that I have the video card, extra CD and DVD writers, ATA hard drives, an Antec 500 watt PSU and case, so the main ingredients needed are only mobo, cpu, and ram. One question here is whether SATA hdds would be helpful in dealing with my needs. (The 4600 does have SATA connectors on the mobo, BTW.)

I am leaning toward a duo core, but just want to be sure that this is likely to help solve my overload issue.

So there is some additional thoughts to stir in. Your further comments will be appreciated.

 

[jlockley]

I am ripping my hair out over an Acer off the shelf, and at this point of no sound and still loads of bloat ware, plus truly uninspired techs, I would strongly advise you to do a build or buy a good barebones and plug in the pieces you need. Once again I love Tiger Direct (call them and you will be well served) and like NewEgg. There are other great resources.

The nice thing about building is that you have control which escapes you with off the shelf. You will also have all installation disks, which you may not get with a Dell, Inspiron, Acer, etc. Of course you get to swear more while you build, too.

I am going to go entirely agains the grain and tell you that I have a Vista home premium on c2d at home and an older Athlon at the office running XP64, and I much prefer the Athlon system, even though it is on a cheap board (Microstar, whaterver that is called today). The Asus P5K mentioned above was my first choice had I not foolishly gone off the shelf, and all my research shows it to be a magnificent choice.

You will probably want to have your new desktop Vista ready if not vista (I would strongly advise you to stick with XP after not only my own Vista experiences but after reading others' - see the Vista Forum..there's a question about what do you like most in Visat..answers are enlightening)- and that means you want plenty of memory, which is getting cheapar all the time (I think Tiger has 2gb Kingston for $70 right now..someone does..check dealnews.com to find it.)

Note that Vista and Vista compliant boards apparently stop short of the amount of Memory the claim you can use. If my reading is correct, Vista sort of tops out at 2K. That's a little complex, and perhaps someone else can explain the details.

The point about case is well taken. It's a major expense. I love Antek, but Coolermaster has a very sexy, tool free case or two which are often very affordable. The m ore snap in/out the better.

I would avoid onboard video and audio, although dual video with HDMI capabilities is very tempting, considering the expected evolution of online video -- this would include some busienss apps.

You should be aware that some drives in your old systems may not be compatible with your new one if you do upgrade the system, so be sure to cable transfer before dismantling. Actuallly it's a good idea to invest in a sizable external drive before changing and transferring everything onto that as a guarantee for not losing bits and pieces ..which you will notice long after you have reformated your drives.

I really like SATA drives and love the new CD RW, whatever they are. If you want to recycle your old ATA drives, then look for a board with a connector (they often do for the CD write).

Newer components tend to run hot, so plan on an extra fan or so.



Newer components also use a lot of energy (Athlon has a couple of chips which offer great energy usage)so don't get a case with a 350w psu. Better to get a case without and buy at least 500w.

If you can afford more, then go to town with great components. I truly envy you.

Note that ACER has a great reputation, but at this point I am truly disgusted with mine, and I hear similar reports from people who do self builds and try Dell... as I said, maybe a control thing.

 

[tf1]

For the use you describe, you don't really need a powerful system. OTOH, if you aim too low, you'll be upgrading again too soon!

My suggestion is a motherboard with an Intel G35 Express chipset paired with a Core2Duo E6750 (great value) and 2 x 1Gb PC800MHz RAM. That should give you 1333 FSB and the GMA X35 should be more than sufficient for your needs.


Regards: tf1

 

[Nelviticus]

My biggest problem is overload resulting from so many open windows, including windoze explorer, music player/s, Crazy Browser, Opera, and Firefox, usually all open and multiple instances of each with multiple tabs.

Those windows will be taking up a fair chunk of memory but very little processing time. The answer to 90% of your problem is therefore to put in as much memory as you can use. My machines at home and work both run 32-bit Windows XP. The work one has 3GB of RAM and can 'see' all of it, the home one has 4GB and can 'see' about 2.93GB. So whatever you get, give it 3GB of RAM.

DDR RAM should ideally be in identical pairs for optimum performance, so two sticks of 1GB and two of 512MB is what you need.

The recently acquired Diamond X1650Pro video card that I have is PCI Express and so I assume that it cannot be used in the 4600?

Correct.

So am I correct in thinking that the video card might be a big help in dealing with window overload, since this is a key component of the decision to build a new one or try to improve the 4600?

It will make some difference but not as much as the memory. There was a recent thread on here where someone switched from on-board video to a (cheap) discrete graphics card and reported that moving windows around, switching between them and so on was smoother.

One question here is whether SATA hdds would be helpful in dealing with my needs.

Yes, but not because they're SATA. Newer drives are faster than older ones due to advances in technology and larger drives are (generally) faster than smaller ones because the data is packed closer together so the read/write heads don't have to move so far to reach it. As Windows always uses virtual memory, which uses the hard drive, switching to a faster drive will improve your Windows experience. I suspect your SATA drives are faster than your IDE ones because they're newer and/or larger.

I am leaning toward a duo core, but just want to be sure that this is likely to help solve my overload issue.

In one way no, because your current CPU is probably not the bottleneck, but in another way yes because having more than one core makes operating a PC a smoother experience anyway.

Regards

Nelviticus

 

[Odyssey]

Great, these are all very helpful. Many thanks for your extensive comments.

 

[dseaver]

IMO, I would go with the new Intel Core 2 Duo Wolfdale processor. I have heard that many people have overclocked it from 3 ghz to 4 without any problems. Its also the newest one out.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037

I'm going to build my next system around this, depending if something better comes out first

 

[wahnula]

Something better will always come out the day after you buy.

Tony

Users helping Users...

 

[jlockley]

I second Dseaver on the better chip. If you are not concerned with financial questions, then get more memory, better chip and board. It's not that you need it now, but applications always swell to meet the latest and most powerful components, so you will be pushing your next purchase further out.

 

[cdogg]

I haven't seen any benchmarks for it yet but judging from the 3GHz speed with 6MB of L2 cache, it looks like a steal at only $216 (E8400 on pricewatch.com). I find it hard to believe that's the price it was released at.

In comparison, the slower E6750 is still being sold for almost $200. It hardly makes sense not to go with the E8400.

~cdogg
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Einstein
[tab][navy]For posting policies, click [/navy]here.

 

[tf1]

The new E8400 looks stonking good value considering it is basically an E6850 enhanced with 6MB L2 cache using the latest 45nm technology. I look forward to seeing it tested on Tomshardware to see the benefits of the additional cache.

I'm not sure why it is an E8400 rather than an E8450 though as the '50' was added to the E6xxx series to indicate a 1333MHz FSB!

At this price it is a steal.


Regards: tf1

 

[cdogg]

I think they are saving the '50' for Wolfdale models that will run at 1600MHz FSB.

 

[jerkputter]

Everyone here seems to be giving you good advice. I would recommend that you fetch you a copy of norton ghost and use it. I have built many many systems since 1997 and Ghost has saved many a customer. I ususally buy from ebay for a great price. I use Norton Ghost 2003. Just a tip to save your day after you get that system up a running.