They're both $699, but I don't know enough about all the technical details to know which is better.
640gb space vs 500gb space
GeForce 9800GT vs GeForce 9600GT
Athlon X2 6000+ Dual core vs Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300
4gb ram vs 4gb ram
vista Home Premium 64bit for both (I've never used 64 bit before... )
and more features at the source, like Tv tuner, and various things I'm not too sure about.
I would like to use the computer for graphic stuff, like Photoshop and 3d programs, as well as being able to do everyday things like surfing the web and watching videos, playing the occasional game, etc.
Which do you recommend and why?
Are they good deals (especially for what I need with a limited budget of $700 or less)? Do you know of better deals?
The Gateway refurb has a MUCH faster CPU and a significantly faster graphics card. However, it probably has a short warranty as a refurb, and Gateway does not have the best quality reputation (and may be bankrupt soon). The other is a no-name brand, so who knows if its quality and backing is any better.
Of course, you'll save money by building your own computer, but for a "store-bought" computer these are probably OK deals. Just realize that quality and warranty support will likely be lacking with these specific choices. You might want to check out Best Buy or see what closeout deals Circuit City is offering.
Do not listen to dragonsprayer. All he ever does is go on and on about his systems. And he says the idiototic crap like the q6600 is better than the q9300 in this instance. And also says the AMD X26000 dual core is the better choice over a q9300 system for the exact same price. Bunch of nonsense.
xbit show as i have preached for years that the q6600 at 3.6ghzis the optimal c2d cpu.
xbit shows the q6600 beating the new phenom II -- this does not factor in many things, such as multitasking where the q6600 is even stronger but it does show how little you you know (ya ok amd how right have been over the last 1.5 years)
"For instance, the similarly priced Core 2 Quad Q6600 can hit much higher frequencies than Core 2 Quad Q8300, even though it belongs to the previous generation. So this processor can be on average faster than Phenom II X4 920 working at a higher frequency, too."
quote from dragonsprayer aug 10 2007 (few days after the q6600 go is released):
"My point is the new speed 3.61ghz - the systems run super fast and are super responsive. " <ok fine that is me quoting me!
"as far as amd goes - i can only hope that one of their "real quad cores" will run 3.6ghz????? " < yes it took almost 2 years for amd to reach this point and there lack of cache can still not match intel - as predicted by me all most 2 years ago
Yeah, Cause we all know about those great overclocking GATEWAY systems. How about you actually stick to the machines the OP posted for once?
What was that? Did you even look at the links of the systems the OP posted? Or did you just what you always do. Look at the specs and just come in say get a q6600 and overlcock it to 4ghz.
The OP is looking at prebuilt systems. The OP doesnt know much about computers. And like always you come and toss around all your stupid crap.
Nobody cares what you have said.
It proves your ingorance to go on and link to xbit articale. Again with the overclocking. WHICH DOESNT APPLY TO THE OP. The OP is also looking a system with a q9300 not the q8300. Same GHZ but with 6mb of cache instead of 4.
I dont even need to say anything. You already shown your ingorance 3 times in this thread alone.
The only reason not to go the gateway route is the reason Mondoman said. Other than that there is no reason what so ever anybody should pick the AMD system. And yet you say pick the AMD system and that the q9300 is crap, better off with Q6600 when the op is looking at a gateway that doesnt overclock.