Newbie Needs Advise

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Hello all,

I would like to build a PC with my son who is about to turn 12. I am
reasonably knowledgeable about PC's in general, but am clueless about
what components would make up a decent computer for a young boy who
loves to play SIMS and NEED FOR SPEED games.

Are there websites that discuss stuff like this? Are there writeups
on how others have designed their own systems?

This homebuilt PC would hopefully operate with our wireless home
network for internet access and printing.

All thoughts and suggestions welcome.

TIA,

Douglas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Douglas Fifield" <fifieldmccann@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:9c9nq097gnpm8qtkib78deo6mrui890t37@4ax.com...
> Hello all,
>
> I would like to build a PC with my son who is about to turn 12. I am
> reasonably knowledgeable about PC's in general, but am clueless about
> what components would make up a decent computer for a young boy who
> loves to play SIMS and NEED FOR SPEED games.
>
> Are there websites that discuss stuff like this? Are there writeups
> on how others have designed their own systems?
>
> This homebuilt PC would hopefully operate with our wireless home
> network for internet access and printing.
>
> All thoughts and suggestions welcome.
>
> TIA,
>
> Douglas

OK, start with the following:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1549123,00.asp

That article is a little dated, so I'd substitute some parts, such as this:

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=13-123-217&depa=0

And go with a 1M Cache 800FSB Socket 478 processor at ~3.0GHz. A gaming PC
is basically built around the video card, but the ATI Radeon 9800 Pro for
about 200 bucks is a good choice for gaming that won't break the bank.

The rest looks pretty good, though you might want to go with a larger hard
drive, as long as it is still 8MB cache and 7200RPM. I'd also suggest a DVD
burner instead of the combo drive. Then add the following to get it up on
your network. -Dave

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=33-127-118&depa=0

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Douglas Fifield <fifieldmccann@comcast.net> wrote in
news:9c9nq097gnpm8qtkib78deo6mrui890t37@4ax.com:

> Hello all,
>
> I would like to build a PC with my son who is about to turn 12. I am
> reasonably knowledgeable about PC's in general, but am clueless about
> what components would make up a decent computer for a young boy who
> loves to play SIMS and NEED FOR SPEED games.
>
> Are there websites that discuss stuff like this? Are there writeups
> on how others have designed their own systems?
>
> This homebuilt PC would hopefully operate with our wireless home
> network for internet access and printing.
>
> All thoughts and suggestions welcome.
>
> TIA,
>
> Douglas
>

ok IMO go by price www.pricewatch.com promo prices for the most part

stick to a via chipset more tolerant memory wise etc

avoid the km266 chipset is was horrid would lean to the kt600 or better the
kt880
CPU AMD socket A if you chose the kt880 chipset should have all the features
needed for a few years and the bartons are plenty speedy
would use a 76~85$ amd xp2400+ mobile


x-- 100 Proof News - http://www.100ProofNews.com
x-- 3,500+ Binary NewsGroups, and over 90,000 other groups
x-- Access to over 1 Terabyte per Day - $8.95/Month
x-- UNLIMITED DOWNLOAD

 

[Bradley]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

http://www.ardice.com/Arts/Movies/Titles/1/100_Proof

 

[user]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:45:28 GMT, Douglas Fifield wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I would like to build a PC with my son who is about to turn 12. I am
> reasonably knowledgeable about PC's in general, but am clueless about
> what components would make up a decent computer for a young boy who
> loves to play SIMS and NEED FOR SPEED games.
>
> Are there websites that discuss stuff like this? Are there writeups
> on how others have designed their own systems?
>
> This homebuilt PC would hopefully operate with our wireless home
> network for internet access and printing.
>
> All thoughts and suggestions welcome.
>
> TIA,
>
> Douglas

A decent graphics card would be recommended if he is a gamer.

Depending on your budget, something like a Radeon 9600pro or FX5700ultra
would be a good entry level.

512MB RAM is currently well priced, and get a hard drive that offers a good
balance between price and capacity (currently 80 to 160's seem to offer a
good $/MB ratio).

As for the rest, pretty much mix and match according to your budget and his
needs.

 

[jk]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Skip Intel and use an Athlon 64 processor. A $140 Athlon 64 3000+
beats an $840 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz EE in Doom 3.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7

"Dave C." wrote:

> "Douglas Fifield" <fifieldmccann@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:9c9nq097gnpm8qtkib78deo6mrui890t37@4ax.com...
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I would like to build a PC with my son who is about to turn 12. I am
> > reasonably knowledgeable about PC's in general, but am clueless about
> > what components would make up a decent computer for a young boy who
> > loves to play SIMS and NEED FOR SPEED games.
> >
> > Are there websites that discuss stuff like this? Are there writeups
> > on how others have designed their own systems?
> >
> > This homebuilt PC would hopefully operate with our wireless home
> > network for internet access and printing.
> >
> > All thoughts and suggestions welcome.
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Douglas
>
> OK, start with the following:
>
> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1549123,00.asp
>
> That article is a little dated, so I'd substitute some parts, such as this:
>
> http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=13-123-217&depa=0
>
> And go with a 1M Cache 800FSB Socket 478 processor at ~3.0GHz. A gaming PC
> is basically built around the video card, but the ATI Radeon 9800 Pro for
> about 200 bucks is a good choice for gaming that won't break the bank.
>
> The rest looks pretty good, though you might want to go with a larger hard
> drive, as long as it is still 8MB cache and 7200RPM. I'd also suggest a DVD
> burner instead of the combo drive. Then add the following to get it up on
> your network. -Dave
>
> http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=33-127-118&depa=0

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"JK" <JK9821@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:41AD09F3.B834D34C@netscape.net...
> Skip Intel and use an Athlon 64 processor. A $140 Athlon 64 3000+
> beats an $840 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz EE in Doom 3.
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7
>
According to www.pricewatch.com, same price range at the moment would be:

P4 3.2 Prescott vs. Athlon64 3200+ or

P4 3.4 Prescott vs. Athlon64 3400+

Beyond that range, you can pay up to several hundred dollars for either an
Intel or AMD chip, but hardly anybody gives a damn about those chips, as
hardly anybody spends as much on a processor as they do on the entire rest
of their system combined.

So the P4 3.2/3.4 and Athlon64 3200/3400 would be the best indicators of who
has the best bang for buck, at the moment.

Gaming: OpenGL: The Intel chips are much faster
Gaming: DX8: The AMD chips are faster, no doubt about it
Gaming: DX9: It's virtually a tie, as the AMD chips are two to three
TENTHS of a percentage point faster than Intel.
So on the gaming benchmarks, that's one win for Intel, one win for AMD and
one tie.
GAMING OVERALL: TIED

Business Applications: Office Applications: Intel blows AMD away
Business Applications: Internet Content Creation: Intel blows AMD away
Business Applications: Overall: Intel blows AMD away

Video Encoding: This one is so lopsided, AMD should have thrown in the
towel before entering the ring. Intel wins by a landslide.

Audio Encoding: Again, Intel wins by a landslide

Synthetic Benchmarks: (PC Mark 2004): Here, Intel blows AMD away on both
*CPU* and memory benchmarks

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040322/index.html

Even at the same price for CPU, an Intel system can be cheaper to
build, as the P4 boards are more mature at this point, and thus there are
better bargains to be found. Considering that an Intel system will likely
be cheaper to build and WILL perform better on all benchmarks except DX8,
it's kind of a no-brainer as to which chip to build with, at the moment.

The following is an article on the Athlon 64 2800+. But more interesting
is,
the benchmarks included in the article are a GREAT comparison of the 3.2GHz
P4
processors with the Athlon64 3200+. In this article, these two processors
are
pretty evenly matched, with Intel being faster on some benchmarks, and AMD
being faster on others.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2038&p=1

Now lets look at what Sharky Extreme has to report in their article about
the
3.4GHz Prescott processor. This one has benchmarks that are a great
comparison
of the 3.4GHz Intel chips with the Athlon64 3400+. Here, you have to be
careful,
as Sharky doesn't organize their charts in order of fastest to slowest. And
on
some charts, LOWER scores are better. But if you read all the benchmarks,
you
will again notice that the two chips are pretty evenly matched, with AMD
faster
on some and Intel faster on others.

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3329681__1

Intel is better than AMD, at the moment. The only way AMD could change that
would be to drop their prices by 30% or better. -Dave, updated 10/19/04

 

[jk]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Dave C." wrote:

> "JK" <JK9821@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:41943476.5ECF3B10@netscape.net...
> > Why a Pentium 4? Why not an Athlon 64?
> > The Athlon 64 is a great performer running 32 bit software using a
> > 32 bit operating system. If you use a 64 bit operating system, you
> > can run 32 bit software side by side with 64 bit software. Many
> > people who buy a 32 bit processor in '04 or ealy '05, will probably
> > regret not buying a 64 bit processor instead, as plenty of great 64 bit
> > software is released in the second half of '05.
> >
> > http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=6
> > http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=1
> >
> According to www.pricewatch.com, same price range at the moment would be:
>
> P4 3.2 Prescott vs. Athlon64 3200+ or
>
> P4 3.4 Prescott vs. Athlon64 3400+

Not quite. The Athlon 64 3500+ is less than the Prescott 3.4 ghz.


>
>
> Beyond that range, you can pay up to several hundred dollars for either an
> Intel or AMD chip, but hardly anybody gives a damn about those chips, as
> hardly anybody spends as much on a processor as they do on the entire rest
> of their system combined.
>
> So the P4 3.2/3.4 and Athlon64 3200/3400 would be the best indicators of who
> has the best bang for buck, at the moment.
>
> Gaming: OpenGL: The Intel chips are much faster

Not quite.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=10



>
> Gaming: DX8: The AMD chips are faster, no doubt about it
> Gaming: DX9: It's virtually a tie, as the AMD chips are two to three
> TENTHS of a percentage point faster than Intel.
> So on the gaming benchmarks, that's one win for Intel, one win for AMD and
> one tie.
> GAMING OVERALL: TIED
>
> Business Applications: Office Applications: Intel blows AMD away

Not quite. Even an Athlon XP3000+($95) beats a Pentium 4 3.2 ghz in Business Winstone
2004.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=6




>
> Business Applications: Internet Content Creation: Intel blows AMD away

Not quite. See the Content Creation Winstone 2004 results.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=6



>
> Business Applications: Overall: Intel blows AMD away

Even an Athlon XP3000+($111) beats a Pentium 4 3.2 ghz in Business Winstone 2004.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=6



>
>
> Video Encoding: This one is so lopsided, AMD should have thrown in the
> towel before entering the ring. Intel wins by a landslide.
>
> Audio Encoding: Again, Intel wins by a landslide
>
> Synthetic Benchmarks: (PC Mark 2004): Here, Intel blows AMD away on both
> *CPU* and memory benchmarks
>
> http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040322/index.html
>
> Even at the same price for CPU, an Intel system can be cheaper to
> build, as the P4 boards are more mature at this point, and thus there are
> better bargains to be found. Considering that an Intel system will likely
> be cheaper to build and WILL perform better on all benchmarks except DX8,
> it's kind of a no-brainer as to which chip to build with, at the moment.
>
> The following is an article on the Athlon 64 2800+. But more interesting
> is,
> the benchmarks included in the article are a GREAT comparison of the 3.2GHz
> P4
> processors with the Athlon64 3200+. In this article, these two processors
> are
> pretty evenly matched, with Intel being faster on some benchmarks, and AMD
> being faster on others.
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2038&p=1
>
> Now lets look at what Sharky Extreme has to report in their article about
> the
> 3.4GHz Prescott processor. This one has benchmarks that are a great
> comparison
> of the 3.4GHz Intel chips with the Athlon64 3400+. Here, you have to be
> careful,
> as Sharky doesn't organize their charts in order of fastest to slowest. And
> on
> some charts, LOWER scores are better. But if you read all the benchmarks,
> you
> will again notice that the two chips are pretty evenly matched, with AMD
> faster
> on some and Intel faster on others.
>
> http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3329681__1
>
> Intel is better than AMD, at the moment. The only way AMD could change that
> would be to drop their prices by 30% or better. -Dave, updated 10/19/04

Very funny. A $140 Athlon 64 3000+ (socket 754 )beats an $840 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz in Doom 3.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7

A $111 Athlon XP3000+ beats a $205 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz in Business Winstone 2004.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=6


http://techny.com/articles.cfm?getarticle=606&go=0.53769656