Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

1st build since 2002-few questions-500-700 budget+ scavenged parts

Tags:
  • New Build
  • Systems
  • Product
Last response: in Systems
Share
March 4, 2010 4:17:15 PM

Well last time i built a computer was in 2002...needless to say i need to upgraded. I've been reading a bunch, but still need to catch up on more, as things have changed a bit :lol:  But it looks like these forums will be great for that!

APPROXIMATE PURCHASE DATE: within one month (willing to find deals on components)
BUDGET RANGE: 500-700 After Rebates

SYSTEM USAGE FROM MOST TO LEAST IMPORTANT:
- general use MS office, light photoshop, ESRI ARCGIS would probably be the biggest, watch movies online Netflix/hulu and would like HDMI option to play on a big screen (1080p) eventually…
- maybe mild gaming, WOW, possibly Guild Wars 2 (if it ever comes out), I could go with cheap graphics now, and later upgrade to a good GPU

PARTS NOT REQUIRED:
I have some stuff I can scavenge off my old system…
- Windows 7 Professional
- 24” LCD - 1920x1200 rez (VGA/DVI/HDMI)
- DVD-DLRW SATA
- keyboard, speakers, Logitech MX 1100 Mouse
- couple of quite nice cases but they are ATX age, could I still use them?
(from reading a few of the threads here, it looks like yes:) )
- lots of case fans of various sizes
- DVDRW-IDE, 80GB 7.2k IDE & 120GB 7.2k IDE (not sure they would be worth even using in a new system)

PREFERRED WEBSITE(S) FOR PARTS:
- newegg.com, tigerdirect.com are two I am familiar with (basically I want to avoid NY tax)
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN: U.S. - NY
PARTS PREFERENCES: no brand preference
OVERCLOCKING: Yes, mild overclocking anyway
SLI OR CROSSFIRE: Maybe
MONITOR RESOLUTION: current is 1920x1200

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
- motherboards and cooling I have no clue, need to read more on those
- power supply ATX12V or ATX12V/EPS12V, from reading seems like it doesn’t matter, except depending on the motherboard, but no real reason not to go with ATX12V/EPS12V? Guessing I’ll need at minimum 500w

I saw on Tiger Direct this processor…which looked pretty good, if I choose this, should I look for a motherboard that supports DDR3?
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Processor EU80580PJ0606M - 2.50GHz, 6MB Cache, 1333MHz FSB, Yorkfield, Quad Core, OEM, Socket 775, Processor
$121.50 - (190-40 MiR-28.50 BCB free s/h, no tax)
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/ite...

And as a cheap starter graphics card option on newegg:
GIGABYTE GV-R435OC-512I Radeon HD 4350 512MB 64-bit GDDR2 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Low Profile Ready Video Card – Retail
$33 - (38-5 MiR) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

More about : 1st build 2002 questions 500 700 budget scavenged parts

March 4, 2010 4:32:22 PM

You can still use the cases. ATX is still the standard size.

That is a bad CPU to chose. The LGA775 socket is dead, so you won't have any upgrades. And you DEFINITELY want DDR3.

I also would buy a new 500 GB platter drive as the boot drive. The others can be used, but would be very slow.

Here's what I would build:

CPU/Mobo: X4 955 and Gigabyte GA-890GPA-UD3H $280
RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws 2x2 GB 1600 mhz CAS Latency 7 $115
HDD: Seagate 7200.12 500 GB $55
GPU: HD 5770 $150 after rebate
PSU: Antec Earthwatts 650W $75

Total: $675.
m
0
l
March 4, 2010 4:38:35 PM

what he said
m
0
l
Related resources
March 4, 2010 4:57:59 PM

Go with zipzoomfly for a hard drive, they actually package it correctly unlike newegg. For anything else I'll go to newegg over and over again, but a hdd hell no. They bubble wrap it then throw it in a box with lose packing peanuts, one of the main reasons why they have so many bad review for most of them.

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?Product...
m
0
l
March 4, 2010 5:04:18 PM

Really? Mine came in a nice plastic container...
m
0
l
March 4, 2010 5:11:30 PM

MadAdmiral said:
Really? Mine came in a nice plastic container...


They've been that way for awhile, but maybe their packing for drives has changed. Either way seagate drives scare me these days, seems like a mixed bag and you don't know if yours will work.
m
0
l
March 4, 2010 5:13:23 PM

I mean it wasn't anything fancy, just a plastic shell in a box with some other parts and a ton of packing peanuts. I wasn't really expecting much more since it was OEM...
m
0
l
March 4, 2010 5:16:39 PM

That's much better than how it's been.
m
0
l
March 4, 2010 5:19:40 PM

Hey thanks for all the replies...
- the newegg AMD Phenom II X4 955 & gigabyte combo look good, I like all the features on the motherboard and it seems to have just about everything i can think of and then some :D 
- yea the intel quad buy the time i got the cpu (122), motherboard (100), & fan would be almost as much as the combo above and still old technology
- new hard drive...check...need more storage now anyway :lol: 
- and the power supply looks like it has rock solid reviews!
- I had forgotten about zipzoomfly...used to order ram from them alot...another good place to watch for deals

MadAdmiral said:
That is a bad CPU to chose. The LGA775 socket is dead, so you won't have any upgrades. And you DEFINITELY want DDR3.

I also would buy a new 500 GB platter drive as the boot drive. The others can be used, but would be very slow.

Here's what I would build:

CPU/Mobo: X4 955 and Gigabyte GA-890GPA-UD3H $280
RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws 2x2 GB 1600 mhz CAS Latency 7 $115
HDD: Seagate 7200.12 500 GB $55
GPU: HD 5770 $150 after rebate
PSU: Antec Earthwatts 650W $75

Total: $675.

m
0
l
March 4, 2010 5:37:01 PM

As an alternative I found a western digital on tiger direct that looks good:

$55.24 (64.99-9.75 BCB)
Western Digital WD5001AALS Caviar Black Hard Drive - 500GB, 7200 rpm, 32MB, SATA-3G
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/ite...


macabre215 said:
They've been that way for awhile, but maybe their packing for drives has changed. Either way seagate drives scare me these days, seems like a mixed bag and you don't know if yours will work.

m
0
l
March 4, 2010 5:38:44 PM

The WD isn't very good. The Samsung F3 and Seagate 7200.12 are both cheaper, faster, quieter and run cooler. Stick to those (500 GB and 1 TB models only).
m
0
l
March 4, 2010 6:21:46 PM

MadAdmiral said:
The WD isn't very good. The Samsung F3 and Seagate 7200.12 are both cheaper, faster, quieter and run cooler. Stick to those (500 GB and 1 TB models only).


Hey thanks for the info, I was unaware of that...i know heat is a hard drive killer. The 80GB 7.2k in my old comp was an IBM travelstar, as the system drive it ran hot until i mounted a fan cage blowing directly on it...since then it has been on since 2002 :ouch: 

I've just been reading a review of the motherboard...and i'm liking it more and more :D 
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/gigabyte_ga890g...
m
0
l
March 4, 2010 10:39:47 PM


I was reading up on ram and trying to figure out timings...
The one listed above has: 7-8-7-24-2N @ 1.65v DDR3 1600
The gigabyte board lists: DDR3 1866 (OC)/1333/ 1066/ 800
seems with AMD you can use 8-8-8-24 @ 1.60v

The following seems to be a common reply from gskill:
Thank you for your G.Skill purchase and review. Glad to hear everything is running fine on your system. This review should assist many AMD users with any uncertainties they may have. This memory package can work for AMD platforms, but on most motherboards the rated specifications of this particular memory can not be reached due to BIOS limitations. AMD users will need to use 8-8-8-24 timings instead of the rated 7-8-7-24 for Intel platforms. Memory voltage 1.60V and memory frequency DDR3-1600 remain the same. If you have any further questions or issues, please feel free to let us know.
Thank you
GSKILL SUPPORT
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 3:08:18 AM

Problem with that combo is that it has a non-gaming CPU, slow RAM, and a poor quality PSU. I would stick to the AMD/5850 for $772. The extra $72 is definitely worth the USB 3/SATA III support, the Crossfire ability, and the quality PSU.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 1:13:50 PM

"500-700$"

Notice 772>700

Also, i3-530=Win
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 2:15:15 PM

No, the i3-530 does not equal win. It's a dual core trying to be a quad. It's also not nearly as good as the X4 955 in everything. The i3s are at the same level as the X4 620 in some applications.

Yes, 772>700. However, that extra $72 gets a lot of quality and a lot of future proofing. The $72 is worth the quality PSU and Crossfire ability alone. Getting USB 3/SATA III and a true quad core are just extras.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 2:19:25 PM

MadAdmiral said:
No, the i3-530 does not equal win. It's a dual core trying to be a quad. It's also not nearly as good as the X4 955 in everything. The i3s are at the same level as the X4 620 in some applications.

Yes, 772>700. However, that extra $72 gets a lot of quality and a lot of future proofing. The $72 is worth the quality PSU and Crossfire ability alone. Getting USB 3/SATA III and a true quad core are just extras.




totally agree with Mad Admiral
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 5:59:31 PM

MadAdmiral said:
No, the i3-530 does not equal win. It's a dual core trying to be a quad. It's also not nearly as good as the X4 955 in everything. The i3s are at the same level as the X4 620 in some applications.

Yes, 772>700. However, that extra $72 gets a lot of quality and a lot of future proofing. The $72 is worth the quality PSU and Crossfire ability alone. Getting USB 3/SATA III and a true quad core are just extras.


Wel, the 955 is 40$ more than the i3-530. The i5-750 is 40$ more than the the 955.

So if you want to say that the 955 beats the i3-530, ok, then I'm gonna point out that the i5-750 beats the 955, at the same price diffrence.

It's like saying the GTX 285 beats the 4890, so Nvidia is a better value. ( Before the luanch of the 58xx). The cards are priced very diffrently, and the GTX 285 beats the 4890 by a small amount, at a much higher price, but the 4870x2 dominates the GTX 285 at the same price diffrence. So saying the 955 is better than the i3 isn't fair the same way saying the GTX 285 is better tghan the 4890 isn't fair.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 6:04:07 PM

Quote:
So if you want to say that the 955 beats the i3-530, ok, then I'm gonna point out that the i5-750 beats the 955, at the same price diffrence.


But the 1156 is also a dead socket so the 40 bucks might not be as well spent......

Always have to be so argumentative....lol
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 6:04:40 PM

Here's some benchmarks, you can see that the i3-530 beats the 965 in WOW, and comes close to it in Dawn of war 2, a d the i3-530 is much cheaper than the 965. The i3-530 dominates all AMD chips at it's price range.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=372...


EDIT: At OSU, by the time you need to uopgrade you're CPU, you're going to want to buy a new MOBO anyways, so saying that it's a dead socket in a few years is true, but so its any motherboard you buy now is going to be sucky in a few years.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 6:08:57 PM

Which would matter if this was for gaming. This is a work build.

Scroll down to the actual CPU benchmarks (HD encode, Adobe). Notice how the i3 is getting the crap kicked out of it by the X4 620 (at $30 less).
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 6:13:19 PM

"maybe mild gaming, WOW, possibly Guild Wars 2 (if it ever comes out), I could go with cheap graphics now, and later upgrade to a good GPU"

- The OP.

Notice that the i3-530 beats the 965 in WOW.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 6:15:43 PM

But would suck at the main use. The difference wouldn't be noticeable. Besides, most gaming benchmarks are created ARTIFICALLY by handicapping the system to force the CPU differences to show. That means that in the real world, there wouldn't be any difference.

Also, I'll point out that the OP said maybe. That doesn't mean the OP does it now, or will definitely do it in the future. So you shouldn't sacrifice something that will absolutely make a difference in their use for something that might.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 6:30:19 PM

The i3-530 is a better all around, general CPU than any other CPU at it's price range from AMD. This is a genral purpose build. Also look at those amazing low, low power numbers. Just amazing.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 6:35:06 PM

It's not the best CPU. It's good for it's intended uses (low power consumption, high quality integrated graphics). As a working CPU, it falls short on power. As a gaming CPU, it's a little expensive when counting the added cost of a good LGA1156 gaming board, as CPUs have no effect on gaming. You'd be better off buying a cheaper X4 620 for a work build or a X3 425 for a gaming build.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:04:32 PM

The i3-530 destorys the x3 425 when it comes to gaming, and the h55 mobos are dirt cheap. Also, don't tell me the story about most benches exagerating cpu usage by downclocking the GPU, soem straight up rewiews have shown CPUS having strong effects on the FPS.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:11:30 PM

No they don't. The reviews don't specifically say it, but they do change settings and make it so the CPUs show more a difference.

As for the i3 being "better" for gaming than the X3, possbily. But the $100 saved on the CPU and cheaper AMD gaming boards is better spent on the GPU. H55 boards are cheap, but they aren't good for gaming. The effect of spending that $100 on the GPU over the CPU is a huge FPS difference, while spending it on the CPU *might* get you a couple FPS in a real world setting.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:23:41 PM

builderbobftw said:
"maybe mild gaming, WOW, possibly Guild Wars 2 (if it ever comes out), I could go with cheap graphics now, and later upgrade to a good GPU"

- The OP.

Notice that the i3-530 beats the 965 in WOW.


the 965 kills an i3 in gta 4 even a 620 beats the i3 in gta 4 and multicore applications

but as games advance so too will tech WOW could be quad core optimised in a few months or a few yrs but it will happen then what will the dual core fraternity be sitting with
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:26:44 PM

Here's a 50$ with shipping AM3 board.x3 435 is 75$. Diffrence is 45$.

The preformance diffrence justifies the 45$ difference in price. The low power usage will save way, way more than 45$.

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



At obsidain: The 965 doesn't compare to the i3-530 in price, so stop talking about it. The competing AMD chip is the X3 720 BE. Yeh, the 965 beats the i3-530 in some things. But the i5-750 beats the 965 in all things. If you want to comapre a 180$ chip to a 125$ intel chip, go for it, but then a want to cpmpare the 200$ i7-920/i5-750s to the 965. ( The i7-920 has fallen to the 200$ price range in the aftermath of the i7-930 relase, and even befor that, at microcenter.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:29:30 PM

Whatever MadAdmiral says it is most likely correct ;) .
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:29:38 PM

No, I said $100 difference for AM3/435 and i3/GOOD gaming board. The H55 doesn't have good gaming boards. They're really good HTPC/micro boards, but not good gaming. You'd really need to get a P55 board if the purpose is gaming.

Here are the two fairest comparisions of good gaming boards:

Two PCIe 8x/8x: LGA1156 $190
AM3 $125 (minus $15 for combo)
Difference = $80.

One PCIe: AM3 $85 (minus $12 for combo)
Gigabyte GA-P55A-UD3 $135
Difference = $62

I even gave you the benefit by not counting the combos and taking the smaller difference...
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:31:23 PM

builderbobftw said:
Here's a 50$ with shipping AM3 board.x3 435 is 75$. Diffrence is 45$.

The preformance diffrence justifies the 45$ difference in price. The low power usage will save way, way more than 45$.

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

thats $45 towards a graphics card

that $45 is the difference between getting a 5670 or a 5770,which would you rather be gaming with
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:32:07 PM

Alright, So i agree that 62$ is a fair price diffrence. But the power savenings will save much, much more than that. Also, the Intell chip is faster.

At obsidaibn: Don't use 5670. 62$ is the diffrence bewteen a 5770 and a 4850 1gb. Also, power savings negate those 62$ diffrence.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:35:45 PM

That $62 doesn't account for the price difference between the CPUs. That's another $53. So you're looking at a total of $115, which is darn close to being the difference between a 5770 and 5850...

The i3 is only faster in certain applications and ONLY WHEN COMPARED TO CHEAPER CPUS. But yes, it is faster...

And don't use the 4850. The 5770 is faster and more efficient.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:41:59 PM

builderbobftw said:
Alright, So i agree that 62$ is a fair price diffrence. But the power savenings will save much, much more than that. Also, the Intell chip is faster.

At obsidaibn: Don't use 5670. 62$ is the diffrence bewteen a 5770 and a 4850 1gb. Also, power savings negate those 62$ diffrence.

so its bout saving power ? well why dont we all just get single cores with igp boards and green drives then (edit add gold 80+ rated psu on second thought make that a platinum 80+ psu and ultra low voltage eco stick ram) :bounce: 
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 7:49:36 PM

Except it's not good for gaming (H55 by definition). It's in no-man's land as far as the PCIe slots goes because it has 2, but one is unusable. It's also not a high quality board.

I picked equivalently priced boards. All of them are from top notch manufacturers and come highly recommended. Both sets have nearly identical specs, and what isn't identical won't affect the price. You're the one that has picked lopsided boards to show "proof"...

@obsidian: Don't forget the 80+ Gold PSUs and "Eco" sticks...
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 8:08:41 PM

Integrated Graphics - Slower than AMD, Still Perfect for an HTPC

Intel was very careful to seed reviewers with the Core i5 661, it provides integrated graphics performance equal to if not better than the best integrated graphics from AMD and NVIDIA.

The same, unfortunately, can’t be said about the Core i3 530. With 81% of the GPU clock of the 661, the i3’s graphics are obviously slower. It’s not a huge drop, but it’s enough to be noticeable and enough to be slower than AMD: said:
Integrated Graphics - Slower than AMD, Still Perfect for an HTPC

Intel was very careful to seed reviewers with the Core i5 661, it provides integrated graphics performance equal to if not better than the best integrated graphics from AMD and NVIDIA.

The same, unfortunately, can’t be said about the Core i3 530. With 81% of the GPU clock of the 661, the i3’s graphics are obviously slower. It’s not a huge drop, but it’s enough to be noticeable and enough to be slower than AMD:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=372...

from your referenced review
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 8:22:28 PM

It's a blance of speed,price,and power usage.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 8:56:39 PM

Of which the i3 excels at only one: power usage.
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 9:24:23 PM

Speed. And the price is reasonable. So it's realy quite good at all 3.

Speed: 40%

Price: 30%

Overclocking Headroom: 10%

Idle power: 18%

Active power: 2%
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 9:38:15 PM

MadAdmiral wrote :

"Problem with that combo is that it has a non-gaming CPU, slow RAM, and a poor quality PSU. I would stick to the AMD/5850 for $772. The extra $72 is definitely worth the USB 3/SATA III support, the Crossfire ability, and the quality PSU."


Ok Whats the final build for the $772?
Cuz it sounds pretty good and I might just build it now.
Also Thanks to everyone Helping the Original Poster.
I too have the exact same problem.
m
0
l
March 6, 2010 12:01:52 AM

Why don't you make your thread instead of hijacking someone's? We can give you a much more specialized build then...

It's actually $768.

CPU/Mobo: X3 435 and Gigabyte GA-770TA-UD3 $148 after rebate
RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws 2x2 GB 1600 mhz CAS Latency 7 $115
HDD: Seagate 7200.12 500 GB $55
PSU/Case: Antec 300 Illusion and Earthwatts 650W $125
Optical: Cheap SATA DVD burner $25
GPU: HD 5850 $300

Total: $768. No Crossfire with this build though. To get that, it's $805 with this combo
m
0
l
March 6, 2010 12:29:56 AM

I'd like to add that the power difference won't save you a lot. You'd save roughly $2 if you ran your computer 24/7 for a whole month.

AMD = 125W
Intel = 73W

125-73 = 52W

1000W/52W = 19.2 Hrs for 1 KWh
Computer on AVG 24 hrs

24 Hours*31 Days = 744 Hours in 1 month
744/19.2 = 38.75 KWh in 1 month
$.05 for 1 KWh
.05 x 38.75 = 1.9375 > $1.94
m
0
l
March 6, 2010 12:34:26 AM

Uh, well thats 24$ a year, over 3 years, almost 75$. Also you got some cheap electricity there, wish i could get in on some of that.
m
0
l
March 6, 2010 11:06:14 AM

builderbobftw said:
Uh, well thats 24$ a year, over 3 years, almost 75$. Also you got some cheap electricity there, wish i could get in on some of that.


Wow i look away for a day and...
Some very interesting discussion going back and forth here.

Electric usage may be something worth looking into for the future, hadn't really even thought about that...as i would LOVE $0.05/KWh, the section of NY we are in it is more like $0.17/KWh. Now the wattage rating on the chips is only the peak draw i would imagine, so it would be far less on idle...(note AMD 955 is ~10.2w idel) But never the less i have also had thoughts of building a HTPC, and it seems your could have significant electric saving in the long term using low power parts and the i3 chip would be a good good candidate there.

Read a review on the 955
http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//index.php?option=com...

:o Where can i read more about RAM timing to better understand it:o 
RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws 2x2 GB 1600 mhz CAS Latency 7 $115
The one listed above has: 7-8-7-24-2N @ 1.65v DDR3 1600
The gigabyte board lists: DDR3 1866 (OC)/1333/ 1066/ 800
seems with AMD you can use 8-8-8-24 @ 1.60v

The following seems to be a canned reply from gskill:
Thank you for your G.Skill purchase and review. Glad to hear everything is running fine on your system. This review should assist many AMD users with any uncertainties they may have. This memory package can work for AMD platforms, but on most motherboards the rated specifications of this particular memory can not be reached due to BIOS limitations. AMD users will need to use 8-8-8-24 timings instead of the rated 7-8-7-24 for Intel platforms. Memory voltage 1.60V and memory frequency DDR3-1600 remain the same. If you have any further questions or issues, please feel free to let us know.
Thank you
GSKILL SUPPORT
m
0
l
March 6, 2010 11:18:48 AM

Uh, the i3 is great for both idle and peak power draws.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=372...

You save 20W at idle, and 173W at load verus AMD quad cores.

So at .17C per KW,

Assuming it's on 4 peak a day,and idle the rest.

You save 692W a daw while at peak.

You save 460W while at Idle a day.

You save 1152W a day.

At .17C per KW, Rounded to the nearest hundreth place, 20cents a day.

20 cents a day.

6$ a month

72$ a year.

216$ over life of build, 3 years.
m
0
l
!