Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New comp. from the ground up

Last response: in Systems
Share

are those parts good?

Total: 15 votes

  • yeah
  • 14 %
  • no
  • 34 %
  • average
  • 54 %
October 28, 2006 8:50:29 AM

alrighty, so like the title says i am going to make a new computer from the ground up, main purpose is for gaming, i got a lil adviceabout the parts i should get (listed below), but i am having trouble finding the exact ones, because when i search them up to find them online to buy i get many differnt versions, and i dont know wich kind is compatible with the others so i was wondering if somebody would be willing to help me out, please?

~Parts~
Mother board: Asus P5B-Deluxe WiFi/AP
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo T6300
Ram: DDR2 800 2GB (2 1gb sticks i belive)*
---topic Suggested DDR2 667 2Gb, better?
HDD: Maxtor 300gb (Sata II?)*
Vid card: Nvidia 6800 GS (SLI)
---topic Suggested: Nvidia 7900 Gs? better?
Pow Sup: Antec 550w

Misc:
Cd Drive: DVD-RW PL
Case: Antec Nine Hundred
Monitor: Dell 19"

Note: parenteses with a * are added by me, the other was written down by guy i got advice from

hope somebody can help me XD

P.s. any good guides to how to actualy learn how to put it together? i get the general idea n stuff just dont wanan make a mistake ya know?

More about : comp ground

October 28, 2006 9:16:32 AM

Get Seagate or WD, not Maxtor.

6800 is outdated. Get other VGA card. 7800 or 7900 series if you want to stick with Nvidia.
October 28, 2006 9:19:01 AM

no. pick better parts
Related resources
October 28, 2006 9:26:09 AM

i dont have that much money.. lol


which parts would you advise then
October 28, 2006 10:29:17 AM

It's kind of hard to say if the parts are good or bad without a budget. If I go from strictly a technological point of view without worrying about cost then I would say that some parts are good, some are bad thus giving the system an average results.

What's your budget so people have a better idea of what parts to put together.
October 28, 2006 4:39:19 PM

Skip the SLI'ed 6800's and go straight for a single 7900 or X1900, you'll get comparable performance from SLI optimised titles and games without SLI support will only make use of a single 6800 (the other will just sit idle), in that situation, a 7900 or X1900 will easely pull ahead and offer more bang for your bucks.

I'm curious to know what is in your current computer to get an idea of how much of an improvement you'll be seeing.
October 28, 2006 7:10:42 PM

ok, for a budget i would say around 1,000$


"I'm curious to know what is in your current computer to get an idea of how much of an improvement you'll be seeing."
i'm not upgrading from mty current computer, i just want to build my own for personale use the current comp is for the whole family, not only myself so i cant do everything i please to do with it
October 28, 2006 8:07:57 PM

You could also cut back a little on the RAM speed.The core 2 duo runs good with 533 mhz DDR,unless you plan to overclock.That will save you a little bit of money to spend on a 7900GT or equal.
October 29, 2006 3:26:57 AM

i dont know that much about computers lol... :cry: 
so it kinda all confuses me how you talk about them, i know theres probably guides and descriptions somewhere to teach me all about how it all works and whats the difernce between everything, but i dont like to sit down and read those straight through while 50thousand Q's pop into my head, so i dont suppose somebody can teach me and tell me about this stuff on aim or something?
October 29, 2006 7:45:13 AM

OK,sorry about that :)  .What i mean is that the components you chose are good,but i would suggest a few changes.The geforce 6800 GS in sli you suggested is a bad solution compared to what you could get if you spend the money on a newer and better product,like a single geforce 7900/gs/gt or an Ati x1900/gt.About the RAM you specified DDR2 800 2x1 GB,but if you change the RAM to DDR2 533 instead,you could save some money.The little number attached to the DDR title show how fast the bus speed is running,e.g. DDR2 runs at 533 MHz,DDR2 at 800 MHz.There is a lot of technical mumbojumbo about this,but basically,the DDR2 533 is cheaper than the DDR2 800,and since you dont plan to tweak the thing you won´t notice any difference in performance.
October 29, 2006 3:35:27 PM

Quote:
i dont like to sit down and read those straight through while 50thousand Q's pop into my head, so i dont suppose somebody can teach me and tell me about this stuff on aim or something?


Can't speak to IM help. FWIW, there is an Internet Relay Chat (IRC) associated with the forumz, but I've never used it and know nothing about it. (If you want to check it out, go to the forumz Home page and look below the list of forum names for the line referring to THGC IRC Chat hub1.oddnet.net port 6667).

Milbo183's comment about saving some money by going with slower DDR2 memory is a good one. My understanding is that the stock (i.e. vanilla, unenhanced, no overclocking) setup for the Core 2 Duo (aka C2D) is to run with DDR2 533 memory. At that speed the CPU and memory are moving data at the same speed. (Another way folks can phrase this is to talk about the the Front Side Bus (FSB) to memory ratio being 1:1 or a FSB ratio of 1).

DDR2 memory is currently a component you can easily waste a lot of money on to no good purpose. Before you buy memory I'd suggest posting what you're thinking of getting here and getting a 2'nd 3'rd, or even a 4'th opinion on it.

Are you still going with the Asus P5B motherboard? (Not questioning, just asking).

-john, the mostly ignorant and definitely ambivalent dinosaur

P.S. If you're curious why the memory is 533MHz, the CPU FSB is supposedly 1066MHz, and both are actually based on a clock ticking at only 266MHz, yet all put together are moving data at the same effective speed .... well that's another discussion. It's not worth getting into unless you (a) want to know and (b) don't mind tedious arithmetic that is under the influence of marketing-speak. :roll:
October 29, 2006 5:25:50 PM

1- if the Mhz is the bus speed, wouldnt my comp go faster with the DDR2 800 instead of the 553? i wouldnt mind spend ing a lil extra money in order to obtain a lil more money, and when i looked up the prices for it, wasnt as bad as i thought, i was thinking it would of been around 400 for the two ddr2 800 1gb sticks

2- yes i am going with the Asus pb mother board, i dont see anything wrong with it, do you?

3- i do wish to learn about all this, this comp is just for me starting up but i want to learn all i can, so i can upgrade and actualy know what i am doing most of the time in the furtue
October 29, 2006 6:00:59 PM

immediately that sounds logical,but it´s not true.Like zjohnr wrote its based on a 266 mhz system bus. A 1066 CPU bus speed is actually based on a 4x266 mhz bus that runs side by side. When the ram runs at 533 mhz,it runs in step with the system bus(2x266=532(533)). the 800 mhz ram does not run natively in 266 mhz cycles,more like in 400 mhz cycles,so they are "out of step".so even though the 800 mhz can run faster,the system bus is still only 266 mhz,so you won´t get a significant diff.
If we get technical about it,the 800 mhz ram will achieve lower latency speeds when it downscales to run at 533. Now this just (tries to) explain the very basic idea,a lot of people in this forum can give you much better answers,i only have the basic knowledge about the do´s and dont´s of PC building.
October 29, 2006 10:41:17 PM

okiee this is what i got form it..

since the two parts (ram and cpu) or w.e are goign at differnt paces, they dot cooperate as well?

so even if it is aslightly lower paced ram card, it would optomize with the cpu..?

what if i got a differnt mother board, like instead of the P5B i got the P5B-Deluxe WiFi/AP, would it be the same or change?
October 30, 2006 12:02:59 AM

Quote:
since the two parts (ram and cpu) or w.e are going at different paces, they don't cooperate as well? so even if it is a slightly lower paced ram card, it would optomize with the cpu..?

Yes, that's essentially how I understand it. It's not so much that slower RAM works better as it is that faster RAM won't perform "better enough" to justify the higher price you're paying for it.

The other way this is often said is that installing RAM faster than DDR2-533 won't in and of itself result in a noticeable performance difference. Because of the complexity of memory prefetchs and memory caching things may technically be working faster. But odds are you wouldn't be able to tell the difference just by using the computer.

Lurking behind this discussion is the fact that the designers of the Core 2 Duo paid a lot of attention to reducing the CPU's need to interact directly with the memory. And the things they did seem to work very well because in the tests reports I've read, the performance of the C2Ds is not strongly influenced by changes in memory speed.

So since DDR2 memory costs a heck of a lot right now and since the C2D is not going to show a huge benefit from installing faster RAM, it doesn't make sense to spend money on it.

If you're wealthy and the cost is not an issue for you, then, sure, go ahead and get it. It's not likely to hurt. But most people are willing to save a few bucks or, at least, spend it some other way that has more "bang for the buck".

(You may have noticed that in the above I tried to slip in phrases such as "in and of itself" when talking about installing faster RAM. This is because installing faster RAM can be worth doing if you plan to overclock. If you're curious, here's a link to the Core2Duo Overclocking Guide v1.1 post in the CPUs section).

Quote:
what if i got a different mother board, like instead of the P5B i got the P5B-Deluxe WiFi/AP, would it be the same or change?

No difference that I know of. I believe both boards use the same Intel P965 chipset so they'd perform essentially the same. What you usually get with the Deluxe boards is more features such as the WiFi capability, more SATA ports, et cetera.

-john
October 30, 2006 12:07:39 AM

well thats why i wanted to get the deluxe wi-fi, so i dont have to by another wireless card to go with my new comp,

umm... whats c2d's mean?

if i planned on upgrading the cpu later, should i rther get the ddr2-800? i mean, i appreciate the information but after reviewing it my instincts tell me to go with the ddr2-800 still... lol, dont know what instincts have to do with all this tough
October 30, 2006 1:35:43 AM

c2d is an acronym for Core 2 Duo (the Intel processor line).

The DDR2 800 is kind of pointless, because your CPU won't really gain from it. If you want something in between, consider DDR2 667. But I would just get DDR2 533, because you won't be able to notice the difference.
October 30, 2006 1:37:39 AM

can i still get the DDR 533 in 1GB sticks?
October 30, 2006 1:43:53 AM

Quote:
umm... whats c2d's mean?
It's an abbreviation for "Core 2 Duo" used intermittently in posts. It's similar to abbrevs like OP for "Original Post(er)" and YMMV for "Your Mileage May Vary" , et cetera.

Quote:
if i planned on upgrading the cpu later, should i rather get the ddr2-800?

The dynamics of the interaction of memory speed and the CPU is very heavily dependent on the CPU architecture. The performance of the Core 2 with it's very large on die caches and sophisticated (or so I've read) pre-fetch mechanism is influenced much more by the speed the processor is run at than on the speed of the RAM.

So if your "upgrade processor" uses the same architecture as the Core 2s ... which it most likely will ... my guess is that you still won't see any noticeable benefit from faster memory unless you're planning on overclocking. In fact, since the E6600 and higher C2Ds have 4MB of cache, not just 2MB as on the E6300 & E6400, it's plausible that the effect of memory speed on performance may be even less with the higher end C2Ds.

AnandTech has a recent article about Intel P965 chipset motherboard performance that might be of interest. I haven't read it yet, but here's a link in case you want to look at it: Intel P965: DDR2-667 Memory Performance

Perhaps another point of view might also help. Below is a link to a blog entry by a software guy (Jeff Atwood) who recently built a Core 2 system. He describes what parts he got and why he got them. In particular look at his list item 2 which discusses his RAM choice and why he went that way.
Here's the link: Building and Overclocking a Core 2 Duo System

(An interesting side-note. While overclocking he destroyed his board and had to RMA and replace it. If you're interested you can read about what went wrong in the discussion posts following the blog entry itself. It's a potentially sobering reminder that there are risks to overclocking).

-john
October 30, 2006 1:49:18 AM

I believe you and I are in the same boat because I am planning to build a computer in the near future and have never built one before also. But I have over the past few months looked at numerous articles on everything related to building a computer. I am replying to your whole article in general. In my opinion I think you may want to not get ddr2-533 but maybe ddr2-667 ram. I think so because for a while I believe the standard bus was 200 and below and recently intel pushed it forward witht the CD2 to 266. So I think that ddr2-667 ram should probably last you a good year or so because you will still have faster ram than required. The price difference between 667 and 800 isn't very large so if you feel you want to spend the extra 20-60 dollars for faster ram, thats fine. Also if you do not plan on getting Windows Vista 1 gig of ram will suffice. If you feel you need another gig when in a year Vista is a near necessity, get the ram then. The ram prices should be down considerably by then.
Regarding a graphics card, I advise you to spend a minimal amout of money now, maybe as low as $40, and wait about 6 months for the moderately priced Direct X 10 cards to come out. If you don't want to wait, I advise the 7900 GTO.
Regarding a hard drive, I advise you get a Seagate with 7200.10 in the name. That means it uses perpendicular recording. It is just a new type of hard drive which is generally faster.
Regading the CPU, do what I plan to do and get the E6400 instead of the E6300, the $30-40 will be well spent.
Regarding a monitor, get a 20". Don't try and save money on something that you could keep for a good 5-6 years. Spend the extra couple of bucks, get a 20".
Finally, regarding things you didn't think you needed, Arctic Silver is a good idea for helping cool your system, and it's only $6. You might want to get a floppy drive becaus you never know when you might need one. I don't know if you thought of this but most software such as virus protection and Windows is for one user so don't plan to use your old software currently installed on another computer for this.
Putting it together is a subject I have virtually no experience in. (I only ripped apart a computer once for kicks and I installed a new graphics card, power supply, and ram before.) This should cost you about $1500 dollars depending on how much of my advice you take.
Most of these expenses are unavoidable. You can save about 100 on the motherboard, totally eliminate the peripherals cost by using an old keyboard, speakers, and mouse. You can eliminate the software cost by using free software, Linuz, or uninstalling software from another computer. The same goes for any spare parts that you can get your hands on.
Any generic DVD Burner. ($30)
A generic, cheap case. ($50-100)
CD2 E6400. ($220)
7900GS. ($160-200)
Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 250GB ($80)
CORSAIR ValueSelect 1GB (2 x 512MB) 667 ($110)
Asus P5B ($220-250)
20" Monitor ($280)
Antec 550 watt PSU ($80-90)
Peripherals ($50-150+)
Arctic Silver ($6)
Software Including Windows XP ($90-200+)
Shipping ($40-200+)
(This totals a minimum of 1416)
October 30, 2006 1:59:24 AM

right now i am just trying to get the general idea of the parts n such that i wanted, i most likely wont buy anything until febuary when prices g odow nafter critsmas, as for windows vista, i plan on getting it, and liek you i have never built a computer either, you have more experience then me, only ything i ever done was put in a new hdd, and as for the 40-200$ shipping u listed, most parts i have found included free shiping XP

and what does overclocking actualy mean? cause zjohnr, you said the guys computer kinda died from overclocking.. and i really dont knwo what that it
October 30, 2006 2:15:55 AM

Overclocking is basically raising the speed of a CPU, GPU, or ram. I plan to overclock my CPU, hopefully to 3Ghz on an E6400. I don't advise you try it because it's too much time and effort for something that could potentially cost you hundreds of dollars. I am a major computer person and building and overclocking a computer has been on my agenda for quite a while. If you want the easiest possible overclocking experience, get a Gigabye motehrboard (I plan to get a Gigabye motherboard) because many of the motherboards have software so that you can overclock numerous things in Windows. Also since you will get Vista you might want to get 2 gigs of ram and wait for the Direct X 10 cards, it will be worth it. It will also cost you a considerable amount more, as much as $500. Since I plan to buy this before anyone reads this post I will share something with you. You can buy Windows XP now and then upgrade to vista FOR FREE through newegg.com. I advise you purchase pro because Business is the best version of Vista. Also if you want to wait, I believe Samsung is coming out with Hybrid hard drives that are much faster than current hard drives. I have no clue as to the pirce but they will be fast.
October 30, 2006 2:21:02 AM

My definition of overclocking is running a computer component faster than the speeds the manufacturer tells you to run it at. Usually the component that is overclocked is the processor chip and in the case of the Core 2 Duo it would mean running the system clock or FSB at a speed faster than 266MHz.

A consequence of increasing the system clock is that the RAM also runs faster. For example, if you increase the system clock from 266 to 333MHz the the RAM will go from DDR2-533 speeds to DDR2-667 speeds. (However, if what you installed is DDR2-667 RAM, then you are not really overclocking the RAM, just the CPU).

A C2D E6400 runs at ~2.13GHz when the FSB is running at the Intel specified speed of 266MHz. If you increase the FSB to 333MHz, then the E6400 runs at ~2.66GHz and will perform similar to an E6700. The processor and the motherboard will also both consume more power and produce a lot more heat. If you don't make sure things are properly cooled, they will burn up and no longer work.

Make sense?

-john
October 30, 2006 2:23:48 AM

i already planned on getting 2G of ram, 75% of this thread was for at wich speed..

and buying windows XP now and upgrading it later, i dont see much of a point, i cant install it or anythign because i wont have most of these parts anytime soon, i would prpbably buy the case and thats it for now, i have to save up for insurance and this computer basicalyl making 100$ a week, i am only 16 so i cant afford much

and seeing as how overclocking has the possibility of making some parts unusable and breakign them, i wouldnt do it, seems to complicated for me, hell i dont understand half what these damn numbers mean, but i try my best to understand and learn, i dont want to make anythign dramatically expensive on my new comp for that reason alone, while i do need a decent compter, this will also be a learning experience and anythign could go wrong, thats why i come here to ask advice and try to learn as much as i can before actually buying anything (sept maybe the case like i said... cause i say the antec nine hundred is koo... )

i was reading about the processors and came up with that articsilver stuff, what exactly is it for and do? i'm sure its a brand name, and teres others like it but i dont see the purpose of them right now, either that or i forget..

i gots short term memory loss... fun eh?
October 30, 2006 2:26:38 AM

Quote:
My definition of overclocking is running a computer component faster than the speeds the manufacturer tells you to run it at. Usually the component that is overclocked is the processor chip and in the case of the Core 2 Duo it would mean running the system clock or FSB at a speed faster than 266MHz.

A consequence of increasing the system clock is that the RAM also runs faster. For example, if you increase the system clock from 266 to 333MHz the the RAM will go from DDR2-533 speeds to DDR2-667 speeds. (However, if what you installed is DDR2-667 RAM, then you are not really overclocking the RAM, just the CPU).

A C2D E6400 runs at ~2.13GHz when the FSB is running at the Intel specified speed of 266MHz. If you increase the FSB to 333MHz, then the E6400 runs at ~2.66GHz and will perform similar to an E6700. The processor and the motherboard will also both consume more power and produce a lot more heat. If you don't make sure things are properly cooled, they will burn up and no longer work.

Make sense?

-john

you must of typed this up while i was replying to the other post, and yes that does make sense, heres a dumb Q. "E6400" is just a model number right? or does it actually have any significants?
October 30, 2006 2:48:05 AM

go the 667MHz for the ram then if down the track you upgrade to a quad core the memory runs in time with the fsb. The quads will have fsb 1333MHz which is 333MHz x 4. but will also give a small benefit now in terms of speed. (not much but a bit.) Thats what im doing with my new building in 6/7 weeks.

the difference in cost is minimal. 2GB of DDR2 533MHz (2x1024MB) about $200-$220 when for $220 after rebate from newegg you can get this

CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 675 (PC2 5400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1682...
October 30, 2006 2:48:26 AM

Quote:
"E6400" is just a model number right? or does it actually have any significants?

Nope, just a model number. My understanding is that the models in the current Core 2 series are:
[*:b0c78f7cd0]Core 2 Duo E6300 1.86GHz ~$180
[*:b0c78f7cd0]Core 2 Duo E6400 2.13GHz ~$220 ($40 more)
[*:b0c78f7cd0]Core 2 Duo E6600 2.40GHz ~$315 ($95 more)
[*:b0c78f7cd0]Core 2 Duo E6700 2.66GHz ~$495 ($180 more)
[*:b0c78f7cd0]Core 2 Extreme X6800 2.93GHz ~$910 ($415 more)
The frequencies next to each processor are the speed the CPU runs at when the system clock is running at the Intel specified speed of 266MHz. You only need DDR2-533 to match a FSB of 266MHz.

If money is tight you can save money by going with DDR2-533 if you know you're never going to overclock. That's all I've been trying to say. Of course, if you're not buying until February then memory prices may be completely different at that time. (Hopefully a lot lower!)

Edit: I wasn't aware that Intel is thinking of increasing the FSB from 266 to 333. In that case, yes, DDR2-667 might be the more prudent way to go.

Sheesh! Intel is sure turning things around and upside down quick these days!

-john
October 30, 2006 3:14:04 AM

"CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 675 (PC2 5400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory "

was that runnign at 667? if so i might get them
and john, i noticed somkething, the parts ur explaing are
Core 2 Duo <b>E</b>6300

while i had
Core 2 Duo <b>T</b>6300
written down,
whats the differnce between the T and E series?
October 30, 2006 3:19:37 AM

Quote:
whats the differnce between the T and E series?

Afraid I haven't a clue. Sorry.
October 30, 2006 3:50:05 AM

lol, well thansk for your help i think i know what iam ganan get now..
October 30, 2006 6:02:21 AM

yeah that stuff will go at 667MHz. Standard it is 675MHz which is slightly faster so can down clock to it easily.

The difference between the T & E series is that the E series is the desktop line C2D (Conroe) which is clocked higheron most models, while the T series is the Laptop/mobile versions (Merom) that have a lower fsb (667MHz), use different motherboards, but use less power, and are clocked lower. THe T series has higher performance per watt, but the E series is the best choice for desktops as thats what its designed for.
October 30, 2006 8:27:50 PM

hmm..i wonder why they told me to get a Tseries instead of an E-series.. i'll ask em alter

so should i look for the DDR2 667 or 675 though?
October 30, 2006 11:01:04 PM

look for either they will both give pretty mutch the same performance if they have the same timings i.e. cl 4-4-4-12 oor 5-5-5-15. I'd recommend going either 667 or 675 MHz cl 4-4-4-12 ram. I my self will be going 2GB of that sort of RAM in about 6-8 weeks on my new build as DDR2 800 is just too expensive in Australia starts at $450 but most are around $500+. to go with a C2D E6600 (2.4GHz), Gigabyte P965 DS3 Motherboard, 8800GTS, 2GB of RAM, 2x 320GB Seagate barracuda 7200.10 Hard disks and all the other components except PSU are form old computer.
October 30, 2006 11:20:52 PM

here's a link to a guide on how to put a system together by corsair. It's very good, guide's you through most things and if your having trouble doing something not mentioned how to do on there you can always ask on toms hardwaare, I'm sure someone would help.

http://tools.corsairmemory.com/systembuild/report.aspx?...

it helped me when i first did major works on a system. (Transfer all components to a new case and add a couple extra, while also reformating and starting from scratch.)
October 30, 2006 11:30:22 PM

alrighty thanks , i'll take a look at the link..and i found DDR2 800 2x 1GB, for around 250$ on newegg.com o.0

alot of parts are cheaper there, and alot of parts where cheaper than i thought, thus allowing me to get a better dif part.. like Asus P5B-Deluxe WiFi/ap instead of a normal P5B

butits all still in the plannign stages, no purchasing yet, think i will wait until chrismast passes when prices go down

Edit: OMFG! THE LINK HAS PICTURES!!!!!!!! I LOVE YOU!!!
!