/ Sign-up
Your question

I'm building my 1st computer

  • Homebuilt
  • Computer
  • Hard Drives
  • Systems
  • Product
Last response: in Systems

should I buy it?

Total: 7 votes

  • yes
  • 15 %
  • no
  • 86 %
January 25, 2007 1:59:55 PM

ok, I need to get this computer as soon as I can, I put together a list of parts and I would really like to know what you think about them / if they will all work with each other,
here is my list
Video Card
Sound Card
Hard Drive
CD/DVD Drive

come down to about $923, 3.2 GHz 2gb ram, geforce 9800GT, 160 gb harddrive, etc., . . . sooo what do y'all thinks?

More about : building 1st computer

January 25, 2007 2:58:18 PM

could you post the names of the products you are buying please and not just links it takes a bit longer to navigate links than it does to read a quick spec sheet
January 25, 2007 3:11:53 PM

For the love of god do not spend that kind of money on a pentium D. Buy either a E4300 or E6300 core 2 . E4300 is proving to be a great overclocker so I would go with that. Also that ram is overkill. All you really need is some decent ddr2 800. If you want that case then that is fine but the power supply that comes with it is junk. Take the money saved from the less expensive ram and buy you this.

I agree COMPLETELY. For $180+, get an E4300/E6300. The only reason to NOT buy a Core2Duo is if you simply want the least expensive machine possible.. Then you get an Pentium D 805.
Related resources
January 25, 2007 3:13:48 PM

Since this is a $1000 machine not a $300 emachine...ditto to what was said about pentium D. Get a C2d..please. ;) 
January 25, 2007 3:25:46 PM

The C2d E6300 is more expensive then the PentiumD, and the PentiumD is faster, isnt it? so why not go with that?
and do you think the ram is really that much of an overkill, its only $70 more and its DDR2 1000 instead of DDR2 800, how big of a difference does that make, is it worth it?
I'm building this computer to play the game Vanguard:Saga of heros, and it requires a high end computer, I know I wont be able to run it with top setting with this computer but I want it to run as well as possible

what makes one better then the other?
January 25, 2007 3:56:17 PM

The C2d E6300 is more expensive then the PentiumD, and the PentiumD is faster, isnt it? so why not go with that?

What are you smoking? Please share..

It's not the GHz that makes a processor fast.. it's the overall architecture. How else was AMD able to clock Athlon 64s at 2GHz and be on par with 3GHz Pentium 4's? Same concept between the Pentium D and Core2Duo.. the Core2Duo does more work per Hz so it doesn't need to be clocked at all as fast to destroy the Pentium D in all benchmarks.
a b B Homebuilt system
January 25, 2007 4:12:47 PM

Comparison Chart. 'Nuff said

Note: Yes, I realize this shows the performance of the E6400 and not the E6300, but the difference in performance between these two should be enough.

-Wolf sends
January 25, 2007 4:33:19 PM

every1 at this other site is saying I should go AMD, and gave me some links,
what would you guys suggest,
(the intel core 2 duo E6300)
( AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+(65W) Windsor 2.0GHz 2 x 512KB L2 Cache Socket AM2 Processor)

Ohh and also,
if the motherboard says "Memory Standard: DDR2 800" on it,
and my ram is DDR2 1000, what happens? should i just go for the 800 instead?
January 25, 2007 6:00:31 PM

kk, almost done, I'm a bit over my buget now though, I was thinking about the gfx cards, is SLI really that much better, and if so, is it really any cheaper? can any1 suggest some good cards? hopefully under $200
January 25, 2007 9:54:50 PM

why not the 7900GT?
isnt that better then the GS?
January 25, 2007 11:28:33 PM


What are you smoking? Please share..


January 26, 2007 4:00:51 AM

smoking's retarded, i hit Ecstasy! :twisted:
January 26, 2007 4:46:10 AM

my next question to you, the E6400 VS the E6300

now is it a huge difference, because it's a $40 difference, and that's alot of money,

At stock speeds, it's not a huge difference. If you start overclocking though.. that $40 is easily worth it for the extra 1x multiplier.

Look at it like this.. at a stock 266MHz bus, the E6300 is at 266*7=1.866GHz, and the E6400 is at 266*8=2.133GHz. 267MHz difference.. not huge.. but possibly noticeable.. worth $40? That's debatable. Consider the E4300 as well when overclocking..
MHz | GHz
FSB | E6300 - E6400 - E4300
200 | xxxxx - xxxxx - 1.800
266 | 1.866 - 2.133 - 2.400
300 | 2.100 - 2.400 - 2.700
333 | 2.333 - 2.666 - 3.000
350 | 2.450 - 2.800 - 3.150
366 | 2.566 - 2.933 - 3.300
400 | 2.800 - 3.200 - 3.600
With DDR2-667 RAM (FSB 333 with 1:1 memory divider), that's a 667MHz difference between the E6300 and less expensive E4300. Now the difference between the E6300 and E6400 is 333MHz.. getting more value out of that $40.
With DDR2-800 RAM (FSB 400 with 1:1 memory divider), that's a 800MHz difference between the E6300 and less expensive E4300. Now the difference between the E6300 and E6400 is 400MHz.. getting even more value out of that $40. Most likely, the E4300 isn't getting to 3.6GHz with air cooling, but that's fine.. it'll get to 3.1GHz with DDR2-700 memory - which any quality DDR2-667 should be able to reach. That's 3.1GHz for less money on memory and CPU than either the E6300/E6400.