How To Build, Part 1: Component Selection Overview
Tags:
- Homebuilt
- Build
-
Components
-
Systems
- Product
Last response: in Systems
pschmid
November 20, 2006 2:25:54 PM
apt403
November 20, 2006 2:31:44 PM
Doughbuy
November 20, 2006 3:17:57 PM
Useful for a first time builder. Offers the standard guidelines. I still recommend most people to talk on the forums though, since there are hordes of people here who have experience. However, if you're seeing this post, you most likely are on the forums anyways, so I'm just preaching to the choir...
Related resources
- Build: Component Overview and Case Suggestions - Forum
- Wanted a final overview of the components selected for my pc build. - Forum
- Overview of my 3570k build / help with mechanical keyboard selection - Forum
- Help on component selection - $1k build - Forum
- First Time Build: Part selection check/help $1.5k-2k - Forum
NotAPimecone
November 20, 2006 3:34:15 PM
There's a bad link on http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/20/how_to_build_part_1/page7.html to the hard drive charts. It's looking like there's a space right before the http:// resulting in an effective link of: http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/20/how_to_build_part_1/%20http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage.html
icthy
November 20, 2006 4:08:43 PM
Crashman
November 20, 2006 4:13:26 PM
icthy
November 20, 2006 4:24:34 PM
Thanks for the quick response. I'm interested in doing some fairly high-end scientific processing (mainly working in Matlab). My guess is if I start needing to do math on fairly large files (say > 2Gb) I could use a server chip, and if I'd want to run a process for a long period of time (> 1 week), I might want ECC memory.
Does that sound reasonable?
Does that sound reasonable?
Crashman
November 20, 2006 4:28:51 PM
exarrkun
November 20, 2006 4:35:01 PM
icthy
November 20, 2006 4:35:51 PM
Crashman
November 20, 2006 4:47:26 PM
Inexpensive is older, Independant is more popular
Originally you had a choice in server disks, SLED or RAID. SLED stood for Single Large Expensive Disk, and RAID stood for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks. Now, "Inexpensive" didn't sound like a nice way to put it, and the drives were mechanically independant of each other, so the word "independant" eventually won favor.
Yet tradiitonalists will argue for the word "inexpensive" which probably explains why it's used here.
Originally you had a choice in server disks, SLED or RAID. SLED stood for Single Large Expensive Disk, and RAID stood for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks. Now, "Inexpensive" didn't sound like a nice way to put it, and the drives were mechanically independant of each other, so the word "independant" eventually won favor.
Yet tradiitonalists will argue for the word "inexpensive" which probably explains why it's used here.
weilin
November 20, 2006 4:49:20 PM
exarrkun
November 20, 2006 5:48:38 PM
SunnyOverHere
November 20, 2006 6:05:56 PM
In the article - I'm glad you stated that the power supply is the most critical component. I've put together 19 unique computer systems over the years and one thing I learned more than anything else, USE A GOOD REPUTABLE POWER SUPPLY AND HAVE AT LEAST 100 WATTS MORE THAN YOU ANTICPATE. My first couple systems, I used the power supplies that came with the cases and/or bought bargain budget power supplies. None of them ever blew up on me but I noticed that those computers using budget power supplies caused many instability problems which I spent way too much time trying to resolve. I would experience both software and hardware related glitches caused by power fluxuation, hard drive failure, bootup blue screens etc.
Bottom line: Power supplies aren't the sexiest things in the world, but in a computer it's the heart. If you are a new computer builder, I hope you buy a power supply that is in the $50-$75 range at the least. I use Antec almost exclusively but I've also had good luck with Silverstone.
One more thing - I also suggest buying a power back up supply even if you live in a house or apartment that doesn't experience electrical brown outs. The power back up helps buffer these house/apartment electrical problems which ultimately will make your computer last longer. I use two inexpensive power backups (APC 500 good for about 5-10 mins - about $30 - $50 depending if you buy it on sale or with rebate) one for the computer and one for my two lcd panels.
Bottom line: Power supplies aren't the sexiest things in the world, but in a computer it's the heart. If you are a new computer builder, I hope you buy a power supply that is in the $50-$75 range at the least. I use Antec almost exclusively but I've also had good luck with Silverstone.
One more thing - I also suggest buying a power back up supply even if you live in a house or apartment that doesn't experience electrical brown outs. The power back up helps buffer these house/apartment electrical problems which ultimately will make your computer last longer. I use two inexpensive power backups (APC 500 good for about 5-10 mins - about $30 - $50 depending if you buy it on sale or with rebate) one for the computer and one for my two lcd panels.
zjohnr
November 20, 2006 7:17:45 PM
Quote:
PC-3200 (DDR-400) is so common that 512 MB modules can be found for as little as $10...after a few mail-in rebates.OK, fine. But where is it??
Every time I've done an informal comparison of DDR to DDR2 prices they came in about roughly the same. 1GB of DDR or DDR2 is in the range of $100; 512MB is in the vicinity of $50-$60. Sure, the DDR is a little cheaper than DDR2. But it's not a jaw-dropping gap of difference.
I have never seen 512MB of PC3200 "for as little as $10". Even if I used Tom's exalted price search engine. So just where is this cheap PC3200 SDRAM??
-john the redundant legacy dinosaur.
gm0n3y
November 20, 2006 7:26:15 PM
Crashman
November 20, 2006 9:00:36 PM
If you can't find dirt-cheap PC-3200 you're not looking in the right trash. Sites like TigerDirect and several brick-and-mortar discount stores offer these huge mail-in rebates around once a month as a promotion. The rule about rebates is always tenacity, since many companies will try to frustrate you into not collecting on them.
ikjadoon
November 20, 2006 9:06:41 PM
yyrkoon
November 21, 2006 1:00:05 AM
Well, I have a *small* problem with the following:
And this is why:
![]()
Note that Refference disk #1 is a 4x RAID 0 array, using 4x 36GB Raptors. The screenshot of the benchmark of my array, is an XP pro software 4x RAID0 array, made up of mix/matched HDDS. They consist of:
2x 40GB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda (ATA 100)
1x 80GB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda (ATA 100)
1x 250GB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda (SATA 150)
Each drive was paritioned approx 37.2GB in size, since thats the most the 40GB drives would yield, and the SATA drive has two partitions, one for the OS, one for the striped array. Note that the random access times of my array is nearly 35% faster, and that the Raptors only performed 12MB/s faster. This is by far NOT a complete speed test, but let me tell you . . . IT_IS_FAST, at least , for what it is.
The point you ask ? That you dont have to shell out more money Per GB to get nearly the same performance, and 1/5 the storage space. Warranty wise, they are equal. MTBF is the same, but I'd expect that the Raptors would live a tad longer, just because they are supposed to be enterprise drives, but this doesnt nessisarily mean this assumption is true.
If I had done this in hardware, the results probably would have atleast been slightly better, depending on which RAID controller I used. However, I probably couldnt have used mis-matched interface types.
Anyhow . . .
</rant>
B.T.W. , no, I dont work for Seagate . . .
Quote:
Western Digital's latest Raptor 150 GB drives lead the Serial ATA race, but the much slower Seagate Barracuda 750 GB leads in capacity.And this is why:

Note that Refference disk #1 is a 4x RAID 0 array, using 4x 36GB Raptors. The screenshot of the benchmark of my array, is an XP pro software 4x RAID0 array, made up of mix/matched HDDS. They consist of:
2x 40GB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda (ATA 100)
1x 80GB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda (ATA 100)
1x 250GB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda (SATA 150)
Each drive was paritioned approx 37.2GB in size, since thats the most the 40GB drives would yield, and the SATA drive has two partitions, one for the OS, one for the striped array. Note that the random access times of my array is nearly 35% faster, and that the Raptors only performed 12MB/s faster. This is by far NOT a complete speed test, but let me tell you . . . IT_IS_FAST, at least , for what it is.
The point you ask ? That you dont have to shell out more money Per GB to get nearly the same performance, and 1/5 the storage space. Warranty wise, they are equal. MTBF is the same, but I'd expect that the Raptors would live a tad longer, just because they are supposed to be enterprise drives, but this doesnt nessisarily mean this assumption is true.
If I had done this in hardware, the results probably would have atleast been slightly better, depending on which RAID controller I used. However, I probably couldnt have used mis-matched interface types.
Anyhow . . .
</rant>
B.T.W. , no, I dont work for Seagate . . .
gometro33
November 21, 2006 1:53:06 PM
zjohnr
November 21, 2006 2:30:16 PM
Quote:
The link to the Google search for "power supply calculator" is complete. There is no query in the link. Just a heads up.By "no query in the link" I take it that you meant you just gave them a link to Google?
OK, fine. Buuuuuuuut :?, a bit confusing to me since the link text says "power supply calculators" but there's nothing remotely connected to PSUs showing up when you follow the link to the Google search page. OTOH, this also isn't be the first time I've found myself muttering "WTF do they mean?" while reading a Tom's article. Obfuscation happens.
Out of curiousity, what is the reason for linking only to the Google search page and not doing something more like this: power supply calculators . It's not immediately obvious to me why it's a bad thing editorially to embed meaningful search parameters into the Google link?
-john, the often confused and always redundant legacy dinosaur
Crashman
November 21, 2006 3:43:12 PM
rwaritsdario
November 21, 2006 9:57:22 PM
kaorisdad
December 5, 2006 4:07:20 PM
The article is well written. However, I cannot see any mention of the most fundamental question builders ask clients or themselves - "What are you going to do with the computer? Games? Media center? Video editing? Business applications?" Answering this will dictate many of the selection of components and budgeting guidelines. As an example, if I am building a system for gaming, I usually say the buyer should spend about as much on a graphics card as they do for thier CPU. Video editing setups should have no less than 1 gig of RAM, preferably 2 gigs. A PC for business or just casual Internet browsing does not require much CPU or graphics horsepower. IMHO, this is the first question that must be answered before any components are selected and dictates power, storage, RAM, CPU/motherboard/graphics card selection, etc. It may seem obvious to most experienced builders, but inexperienced builders need to know basic requirements for the system that will suit thier needs.
panks
October 24, 2007 5:18:52 PM
Wilson
October 24, 2007 5:49:01 PM
zjohnr said:
Quote:
PC-3200 (DDR-400) is so common that 512 MB modules can be found for as little as $10...after a few mail-in rebates.OK, fine. But where is it??
Every time I've done an informal comparison of DDR to DDR2 prices they came in about roughly the same. 1GB of DDR or DDR2 is in the range of $100; 512MB is in the vicinity of $50-$60. Sure, the DDR is a little cheaper than DDR2. But it's not a jaw-dropping gap of difference.
I have never seen 512MB of PC3200 "for as little as $10". Even if I used Tom's exalted price search engine. So just where is this cheap PC3200 SDRAM??
You are wrong, 1GB of DDR2 ram is not 100$, lol. Here is an example of 2GB of DDR2 800 for 53.99 after rebate. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
And here is one 512mb stick of ddr400 (pc3200) ram for 22.49, not quite 10$ but its cheap.
fail i say
einstein4pres
October 24, 2007 6:09:22 PM
Related resources
- SolvedNew build review of component selection Forum
- SolvedBuilding a PC. I need help with the part selection. Forum
- Have Build Selected - Could Someone Overview It? Forum
- Enthusiast Mini-ITX Build - Some Help With the Component Selection Forum
- New Build Part Selection Forum
- SolvedFirst time building a gaming PC, feedback on component selection? Forum
- SolvedFirst Build component selection help Forum
- SolvedFirst Build - ~$2500 budget, need help with final component selection! Forum
- Solved1st Time Computer Build: Will the Parts that I have selected work? Forum
- micro ITX build part selection help Forum
- SolvedMid-Range Gaming PC (first build, did part selection, please advise) Forum
- Help with part selection for my first ~$800 gaming build Forum
- First time gaming computer build, help with part selection Forum
- Final overview of my 1st build Forum
- SolvedFirst time build - part selection okay? Forum
- More resources
Read discussions in other Systems categories
!