Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Please asses my prospective build

Last response: in Systems
Share
July 17, 2007 12:45:33 AM

I am thinking of building a computer for home use. I will use it for running some pretty hefty programs, like Microsoft Project, some video editing, and some gaming. I have built/bought before, and I am much happier with what I build. Still, I would not consider myself an expert, and I would like a sanity check before I proceed. My current plan is to go with XP vice Vista, based on what I have read in some forums. I would really appreciate some feedback. Thanks.

- (2) SAMSUNG 18X DVD±R DVD Burner With 12X DVD-RAM Write, LightScribe Technology Black SATA Model SH-S183L - OEM
- Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - Retail
- (2) Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3320620AS (Perpendicular Recording Technology) 320GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM
- EVGA 768-P2-N831-AR GeForce 8800GTX 768MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Video Card - Retail
- OCZ GameXStream OCZ700GXSSLI ATX12V 700W Power Supply - Retail
- Patriot eXtreme Performance 4GB(2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop
- Microsoft Windows XP Professional With SP2B 1 Pack - OEM
- ZALMAN CNPS 9700 NT 110mm 2 Ball Ultra Quiet CPU Cooler - Retail
- AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 Windsor 2.8GHz Socket AM2 Dual Core Processor Model ADAFX62CSBOX - Retail
- ASUS CROSSHAIR Socket AM2 NVIDIA nForce 590 SLI MCP ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail
July 17, 2007 12:51:40 AM

Why Athlon FX?? It's more expensive and slower than an Athlon 64 X2 6000+

Why 2 DVD Burners?

And you need XP or Vista 64-bit to make use of the 4GB ram, otherwise it will only show somewhere around 2.5GB-3GB
July 17, 2007 1:00:41 AM

Thanks for the quick response.

Athlon - I don't know TOO much about mobos. Looked like the most horsepower for the bucks. I can definitely be mistaken. What are the pros/cons of the two boards?

2 Burners - For my work I transfer a bunch of stuff with CD/DVD. I find it easiest to burn disk to disk. The drives are so cheap, I figured I would just get 2 of the same.

OS - I was reading on Vista 64 and was seeing that LOTs of people are having issues with drivers, etc. (my dad (70 years old and about to shoot the customer service rep) as well) It sounds like there are hardware compatibility issues. I have used XP and I am comfortable with it. I do know that a scratch built computer should not have as many of those configuration issues, though. If folks here say Vista is good to go, I am willing to give it a shot.

Again, thanks for the post
Related resources
July 17, 2007 1:08:34 AM

Also,

As to the Athlon question, I built my computer at NewEgg, and I don't see the 6000+ there

Thanks
July 17, 2007 1:11:33 AM

That's what I meant, there is also XP 64 bit in case you didn't know.

Here, the 6000+

AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Windsor 3.0GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket AM2 Processor - Retail

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

that's a $80 difference for an underperforming processor, funny how it works eh?

And here's another nforce 590 based mobo, but from eVGA (One of my favorite brands, I prefer them a lot more over ASUS)

EVGA 122-M2-NF59-TR Socket AM2 NVIDIA nForce 590 SLI MCP ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... evga%2b590

Price Difference: $120

2x Kingston 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory - Retail

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Price Difference = $80

So far, we've cut down $280 off that list with better/similar components. That's it, other than that you're good to go.
July 17, 2007 1:12:58 AM

jboomer said:
OS - I was reading on Vista 64 and was seeing that LOTs of people are having issues with drivers, etc. (my dad (70 years old and about to shoot the customer service rep) as well) It sounds like there are hardware compatibility issues. I have used XP and I am comfortable with it. I do know that a scratch built computer should not have as many of those configuration issues, though. If folks here say Vista is good to go, I am willing to give it a shot.


I don't think he was trying to persuade you to go with Vista. I know I'm waiting, too, until they get the drivers and other issues fixed. What he's saying here is that you need to get the 64-bit version to see all 4GB of your RAM.
That applies for XP as well as Vista.

-TyShoe
July 17, 2007 1:18:55 AM

Thanks fellas.

Looks like the 6000+ is cheaper. Would you recommend XP64 or Vista 64? Also, maybe not the right forum, but how do you overclock? I have seen it a bunch, and I know what it does, but I am not sure how to actually do it. If you want to refer me to another thread, that is fine.

Thanks
July 17, 2007 1:24:47 AM

There's a forum explicitly devoted to OC'ing, you should go there for help, I haven't OC'ed yet (but I understand it and know what is needed very well) just need the practice, I rather have someone else guide you through.

Read my latests edits, that's $280 saved from your original list. And I'd go with XP 64, I've been trying to find a copy of XP 64 for myself, but in my country it's hard to find that kind of software, especially because average joe loves $400 dells.
July 17, 2007 3:10:32 PM

Aah you found it... Im debating whether I should order it online or not now :) 
July 17, 2007 4:08:44 PM

dont buy oem software.

do you really "need" pro for anything?

if so, buy a pro upgrade retail
July 17, 2007 4:16:00 PM

The last thing I want is to sound like an Intel fanboi, but especially for the video work you do, you may find an Intel CPU offers better performance. Check the CPU charts.
That said, I'm sure you'll be very happy with the 6000+ anyway; the difference does not appear to be huge. What do you have now?
With Win XP Pro 64-bit, you can use all 4 GB.
July 17, 2007 11:23:22 PM

jtt,

The last computer I built was about 5 years ago, so the equipment is pretty dated. It worked pretty well for me and I was happy with it. I learned some lessons, including getting some advice before I start throwing one together. I don't remember specifics, but it was an asus mobo, an amd athlon single processor, and a raedon all-in-wonder (8100?) video card. It pretty well died about a year ago, and since I am stationed overseas, I thought I would do the easy thing and buy a machine off the shelf. I am ashamed to say I bought an HP Pavillion dual core athlon that SUCKS. I am pretty sure it is just that you get mediocre equipment assembled in a sub standard array when you buy off the shelf. I am not trying to make a machine that is single purpose and top of the line, but I refuse to settle for the crap I ended up with last time.
July 17, 2007 11:50:19 PM

One thing I must correct you on. This machine can be considered top of the line on my book :) 
July 18, 2007 12:16:14 AM

Thanks to everyone for the responses. It is interesting to me to get feedback on what I am planning on doing.

To feed the fire a little, here are some possible discussion points.

AMD vs. Intel. I know this is a huge battle. I have gone with AMD in the past. It looks to me like you get more for your money with AMD. I might be wrong. I use some programs that are pretty processor and RAM intensive. I don't think I need to go to quad core, but I think a good, robust dual core is what I am looking for. So far the recommendations have been what I came up with, AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 Windsor 2.8GHz, what Emp suggested, Athlon 64 X2 6000+, and a basic Intel option from Jtt. Pros and cons or recommendations would be interesting.

Asus mobo vs evga. Looking at reviews on NewEgg, it looks like more people have issues with the evga vice the asus. Also, it looks like the physical configuration of the evga might be a problem. (processor and heat sink location)

XP vs. Vista. Again, a whole topic in its own, but if I could get a couple of opinions, it might sway my decision. I am leaning towards XP right now. Tried and true. A subset of this is what shadowmast brought up. Why Pro? Doing some research, it looks like you get some more performance from pro, and I really don't care about the bells and whistles of Home. If they are both the same in performance, I think I would go with Home. Also, OEM vs Retail.

I think that about covers it.

And, OBTW, I just realized I am a complete idiot and I am calling you asses in the thread of this group, vice asking you to ASSESS my prospective build. What a marook!

Thanks, fellas

Boomer
July 18, 2007 12:30:44 AM

AMD right now is offering more for your money in that segment, but remember that the Athlon 64 X2 6000+ (Trades blows with the E6600) is the top CPU that AMD has to offer, so after this price point it's pretty much intel's ground all the way. If you're not overclocking I usually lean towards AMD because I feel that the user gets more for their money.

About the socket location, I think it's just fine? seems pretty standard to me, you won't find many motherboards that will place the socket on the bottom (if that's what you're referring). And I honestly can't give you an unbiased comparison between the two, simply because I have lost faith in ASUS slowly because of problems I hear with some of their mobos, while I would even buy an eVGA case if they were bothered to make one.

If you can try to get XP retail, I wouldn't get vista unless you have money lying around and feeling the need to burn it, because you'll get better performance in XP and it will be supported for quite a while. (I do have vista 64 DVD, haven't installed it though, but it was a gift, and why not if it was free? :) )

!