What do you think of this HP computer

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6883107398

It dosent come with a monitor but thats not really a problem for me. I can get it for about $900 total with taxes and everything from a local computer shop. I've been waiting for the prices to drop a bit on the Q6600 to build my own but then i came across this. I most likely wouldn't have overclocked anyway and i never play games. It has more ram than my homebuild computer would have and the tv tuner/remote is nice. It also has double the hard drive space my homebuild would have. It seems like a decent deal to me. What do you think?

That looks like an okay computer, and if you don't play games, I'd say go for it. Extraneous programs are mostly easy to get rid of. I have no idea why PC tv tuners suck compared to normal televisions. My ATI TV Elite Wonder is a high end tuner, but the image quality, while still very watchable and enjoyable, doesn't match any normal resolution tv. It should last you a few years, but you might actually be paying too much if you're only going to browse the net, type, etc. on it.

if you do video editing I would recommend getting a graphics card then...nothing too fancy..But the mid range ATI 2000 series card should be a good bet...I'm a video editor myself..I would never leave the video to a onboard if I'm editing...to me that is rule numero uno..especially if you're going to be playing high def video...might want to nab a ATI 2400 or 2600 since you don't game.

For video editing i dont think this is the machine for you.

1. the gpu wont be enough
2. the rams not fast enough
3. hp have all the junk on it (which even if you do remove has remnants left behind) will bog the system down.
4. vista sucks atm for video editing
5. 640Gb hdd? im assuming, actually i dont know what to assume? last i knew they came in 500gb and 750gb flavours maybe a 750gb minus the 50gb loss in formatting. minus the recovery partition 20gb? wierd.

Good price though :S

UHhhhh, quad-core is overkill and mainly suited for multi-tasking , servers and me-too's, dual-core cpu's will serve you well and graphics intensive programs like games and video editing require plenty of RAM (2Gig) and a quality video card with a abundance of video RAM (640MB)...don't fall into the quad-core trap (crap) like so many others have, jus my $.02

HP support is poor at best, it's mostly done out of India.
It's rare that you get to talk to a native English speaking person.
Make your own computer if you can, it might cost you a bit more, but it will be worth it.
Almost no one needs a Quad core computer, but it's fun to say you have one.
Windows Vista kills computer performance. Get XP, all Vista is, is pretty.
If you want Quad and want to buy a pre-made computer I saw one that Dell was selling that was cheaper.

Vista might be a bit better after SP1.

My opinion, only gospel to me.

I was looking at that same system for video editing as well. Every benchmark I have seen shows signficant difference with quad processor for video editing. For about 1150 you can configure a system that looks the same (same cpu, same disk size and memory), but with faster components. With even stock cooling, you can overclock 25% easily and have a system that is more flixible for upgrades later.

Uhhhh, sounds to me like you've never really done alot of video editing. The only time that the vid card works during video editing is during playback. An 8800 is a super overkill for that task, and even though I spit at a 8600GTS, it's still more than adequate for that plain task. Also video editing and 3D Rendering are some of the fields that really benefit from the additional cores. Since the OP said that he/she wasn't really a gamer and does video editing, quad-core does seem to fit the budget and the job. Also Tom's did an article on uber OC'ed Quad-Core and Dual-Core and the Quads were running circles on the Dual's when it came to video encoding (maybe there was a bug though with the XVid encoding).