Please assess my C2D rig before I buy it.

Kayden

Distinguished
Nov 28, 2005
52
0
18,630
Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 Conroe 2.66GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80557E6750
Antec earthwatts EA500 ATX12V v2.0 500W Power Supply
Crucial 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model
Foxconn P35A LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard

SUPER EASY BULLET LIST:
-Not looking to OC (much)
-No SLI
-RAID not needed
-Gaming oriented
-Vista/XP 64-bit
-Don't care about DDR3


I'm a gamer. I can't stand to play at medium or low. Settings must be at high for anything I play or else I get crabby. :kaola: I don't care for SLi. My current box is SLi and I really didn't notice anything worth the price of two 7800GTXs (Thank god they were free). So I'm just going to be running it on one card, most likely nVidia.

I picked the E6750 because it was only $20 more than the 6550 and $100 less than the E6850. Seemed a no brainer. I picked out the board because it had all the features I wanted and it had a nice big $50 rebate. It also knocks $30 off the ram which additionally has its own $25 rebate.

I don't really need help (yet :pt1cable: ) with anything beyond the MLB, PSU and -to a slight degree- the RAM. I'd like a critiquing of how this base system would interact or if theres an item to avoid.



Advice, tips, pointers, complaints?
 

chookman

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2007
3,319
0
20,790
Single GPU you are better off with P35 or X38 chipset so good choice there. The Foxconn im not sure many will agree on though. Gigabyte, Asus and Abit have been the bigger movers for the P35 chipset which currently (barring the x38) is the best performing single GPU solution out there. Personally id get an Asus P5K-e.

If you want high everything and want it now you will have to go with GTX or Ultra (ultra if you dont wanna OC the GTX yourself). But the other big question is what resolution do you play at. Anything less than 1440x1050 or even 1920x1200 its a waste to have a GTX.

The Antec Earthwatts is cheap in the eyes of all involved i believe espectialy running a high powered GPU. Look at Antec's Trio range or the Corsair 520W or 620W are nice solid PSU's that will run high power GPU's with no worries ;)

You dont have a case listed there... to fit a GTX in your gunna need a roomy one. Lian Li A10 , A71 or Antec 900 or Thermaltake Armour...

Have you looked at the Q6600 also? quad core and can OC a little to catchup to a e6750... Could be worth it with Crysis comming with more quad core enabled games in future.
 

tlmck

Distinguished
I second the Gigabyte, Asus and Abit with P35. Foxconn seems to get mixed reviews. Other components are fine.

You would also be better off with 32 bit OS for now. 64 bit is still a bit iffy. If you are going to stick with one 7800GTX card(still good), you really don't need Vista since the card will not do DX10 anyway. And, DX10 is a disappointment so far IMO.
 

andybird123

Distinguished
Feb 23, 2007
373
0
18,790
All the rumours seem to be pointing to new ATI and Nvidia cards coming out in November, it may be worth hanging fire on a graphics card choice until then... if the offering from nvidia ISN'T a new high end card, then the RV670 may well be worth a punt.

If you aren't overclocking much then the foxconn mobo will be fine.
 

andybird123

Distinguished
Feb 23, 2007
373
0
18,790


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! LMAO!

First off, E6750 is FSB1333 not 1066... PLUS Intel CPU FSB's are quad pumped, memory is DDR (Double Data Rate)... the base FSB for a 1066FSB CPU is 266 - which is DDR-533, 1333FSB is 333 base, or DDR2-667... he'd have to be hitting FSB1600 (400x4) to even need DDR2-800 if trying to maintain 1:1 ratio (and even then most DDR2-800 will hit 1000mhz ddr by setting the timings to 5-5-5-15)

Congratulations on trying to tell someone to needlessly spend more on memory when he's not looking for extreme overclocking.

E6750 = $190
Q6600 = $280

My maths must be a bit screwed because I think that works out nearly $100 more expensive?

Ah man, you've made my day, keep the good suggestions coming.
 

plguzman

Distinguished
Nov 14, 2006
337
0
18,780


I have Vista 64 and runs perfectly. A lot more stable than XP. I forgot what a BSOD is. And comparing performances now Vista and XP are the pretty much the same, since the release of latest drivers. If you go to this link:

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_nvidia_windows_vista_driver_performance_update/default.asp

You will see what I'm talking about. It was a difference performance-wise before. Not now.

Get Vista 64.
 

sedaine

Distinguished
Sep 10, 2007
282
0
18,790
I would get slower memory and more of it. i.e get 4GB DDR2 667 if you plan on using Vista. It will pay off more than using 2GB DDR2 800. Vista will actuallyrun smoothe and faster since memory will not be the main bottleneck. You see - you still risk using the harddrive for paging etc. when you have 2GB RAM (if what you do is mem intensive).

What good is fast memory if it's not enough for the purpose?

 

Kayden

Distinguished
Nov 28, 2005
52
0
18,630
I'm already running Vista 64, so thats not a worr7y for me. Its stable as can be on my current system.

Would performance really be better with DDR2 667 instead of 800?
 

sedaine

Distinguished
Sep 10, 2007
282
0
18,790




It will roughly cost you the same to get 2GB or DDR2-800 OR 4GB of DDR2-667. It seems you won't even use the full 800Mhz so hey why not.

That said - even if you were going to use the full 800 - I think Vista 64 would benefit more from 4GB of RAM than slightly faster RAM.
 

jevon

Distinguished
Jun 6, 2004
416
0
18,790
Yeah, the difference between 667 and 800 simply means you have more overclocking room with the 800 BEFORE you would have to OC the memory.

Andybird did the numbers (albeit rudely:)), so you can see you're much better off getting 4GB of DDR2-667 vs 2GB of DDR2-800; ESPECIALLY since you're running Vista 64 - it will love you long time for the extra memory.

This also means that if you got a Q6600 and a P35 motherboard, you can get a pretty much "free" overclock by bringing the processor up to the motherboard's FSB speeds (since it runs at 1333 and the processor is only 1066) and the DDR2-667 /2 = 333 *4 = 1333 :) You wont have to adjust any voltages or anything, just change the FSB in BIOS for the CPU. Simple overclocking guides can even tell you where to do this for most P35 mobos now.

Cheers!
 

joex444

Distinguished
2GB of DDR2-800 is like $60 now after rebates, just looking at Newegg selling A-Data RAM. 4GB of 800MHz shouldn't cost you more than $150, and I think we can all agree more of the fast stuff is the best solution.
 

Kayden

Distinguished
Nov 28, 2005
52
0
18,630
I'm not really concerned with the price difference between 667 and 800.

If 4GB is the way to go, I'll do it. I was just going to get 2gb now and then 2 more later if I found it necessary.

My main concern is the performance. If 4GB of 667 works better with a 6750, I'll go with 667, however, if 4GB of 800 works better, I'll go 4GB.

Essentially, if I got 800 DDR2, would I be clocking it down to optimize it with the 6750?

I'd surmise yes. However, say I did get the wild hair to OC the 6750 to the 3.0 of a 6850, in such a case, would it be worth while to get the 800 or would I just be increasing the multiplier instead of the clock and still be better off with 667?
 

sedaine

Distinguished
Sep 10, 2007
282
0
18,790
You never have to clock down - the memory does it by itself. So if cost is not an issue get 4GB OF FASTER memory. But you will need that 4GB if you are running a lot of mem. intensive applications.
 

dashbarron

Distinguished
Sep 9, 2007
187
0
18,680
Reading forum with interest.

Plguzman how do you enjoy Vista 64? I'd love to get it just so I can address a full MB worth of 8GB and give me some more headroom.

Are you finding compatibility issues with old 32-bit games? Only fear I have or I'd do it in a heartbeat :)
 

plguzman

Distinguished
Nov 14, 2006
337
0
18,780
Vista 64 is a great system. I waited 6 months to install it (waiting for Microsoft to address all the basic issues) and is working just fine. Is much more responsive than XP, and even more stable now. I can see my 4Gb completely.

I have no issues in compatibility. All my games ran perfectly, even a game from 2005 I have installed. And with Rivatuner you can overclock your card with no problems.

There was a difference in performance XP vs. Vista in games. But since 163.69 driver that difference is unnoticeable or even disappeared completely.

You are safe to upgrade. Most of the people that is trashing Vista doesn't even have Vista installed.