Here's the deal:
How can I effectively hook together a system that will be stable (very little crashing) and affordable, yet be able to rip through today's graphic-intensive FPSes?
I understand that apparently the Athlon architecture allows it to process graphics much more efficiently than a similar mHZ Pentium. I also understand that they may have compatibility issues with less graphics but more memory intensive office software that I may end up using, so actually I'd prefer to create this using a Pentium board/CPU if feasible.
The more price-effective the system, the better it is for me. Component-wise here's the gauntlet as I see it:
A GeForce 4 128 MB goes for about $200 now,
A 40GB 7200 IDE for around $50,
A 40/16/10x CDRW and 12x DVD combo drive for $100 (s/h included)
A standard NIC for approx $20
A standard 17' for $50 (or a 19' for $200)
A SB Live! for approx $50
Keyboard and mouse for $20 total
($490 so far, and shipping and handling on the different components could add up to another $100 considering a monitor is heavy)
BUT here are the questionable components:
1) RAM 2) Motherboard 3) CPU
How can I get the most effective, best speed for the lowest cost? It seems that some mid-range CPU's happen to be very overclockeable simply due to their base mHZ in-built multiplier whereas some decently high-end models get virtually no speed increases possible. I want a machine that will really perform and do something like 2.6 or 2.8 gigs with all under a cost of about $500 (for motherboard and chip) and probably under a $100 total for RAM (512mb or 1gig depending; always good). Are there swaps in the other components you'd use or particular board/CPU setups?
Most especially I'd like to know if something like this with an effective mHZ rating of 2.8+GHZ can be built, stably, from components totalling near or under $1000.
I have not yet built any comps from scratch though I've installed drives and cards before without trouble (video, sound, etc) so I'd like to know what you all think and have to say. Ideally I want to build this system soon with components out now because I want to pay a friend back for a big favor with something like this.
Thank you all for your time, I enjoyed the posts and articles I've read here thus far greatly. I look forward to posting more yet.
I just have one point to make: The monitor you're looking at probably won't do justice to your PC. You'll probably need to spend around 250 - 300 bucks on a decent monitor. I'd go with a 19" monitor. That'll be about $260 or so. If you don't get a decent monitor, you'll be really crippled and might as well spend less on the graphics card. Get something that can put out 1024x768 @ 75hz. CTI might be a good brand to look at, Viewsonic would be better. I'm pretty sure you can get a decent Viewsonic 19" for at least 250 - 300. Luck.
If you are lookingfor price performance ratio, an amd chip is the way to go, there is no compatability issues and the performance per dollar is amazing, grab a good kt333 motherboard(or nforce 2) and 512 of pc2700 ddr, and a 1600+, all that should come un under 300 total, you would have to spend that much to get the equavalent p4 and mobo alone!
Any cpu, whether its athlon, p4, celeron, C3 or 300mhz amd k6-2 will run office applications reliably and stupidly quickly, the days of waiting for the text to catch up with the cursor are long over.
If you really are sticking to a low budget the athlon will give you more bang for your buck.
Most benchmarks you see of the P4 will be done using rambus memory for the maximum performance, without it is a different story, this is also expensive.
Hstated he was thinking of price/performance primarily, he dosent need 2.8ghz to feed his gpu, a 1600-1800+ will go fine, furthermore he has set a limit of 500 bucks for the cpu/mobo, and he cannot get a 2.8ghz system with that, hes much better off getting a 1800+ and a gf4ti4600 with the saved money
The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark
Most especially I'd like to know if something like this with an effective mHZ rating of 2.8+GHZ can be built, stably, from components totalling near or under $1000.
I edited my post after I posted it, reread his post.
PS: the edit took me 35 seconds jesus your fast
The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Matisaro on 08/31/02 03:11 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Add another $100 for a decent case and good uninterrupteable power supply.
I'd basically be spending about $700 on parts not including RAM, motherboard or CPU already so getting twice the performance for a total of say $500 extra instead of $300 sounds good, so please carry on the suggestions. This is good reading
I want a machine that will really perform and do something like 2.6 or 2.8 gigs with all under a cost of about $500 (for motherboard and chip) and probably under a $100 total for RAM (512mb or 1gig depending; always good).
Were you distracted from reading the new AMD white paper?
Matisaro knows nothing. I hereby throw a big black glove in his face and say you should by a 4200 instead. That's much cheaper and you'll still get great performance that will be plenty for quite a while. You should be able to run any game that comes out within the next year, maybe the next 2 years. Matisaro... . J/K.
Sure is good price/perf. For me w/ a 1.8A running at 2.4 for months, that would be a downgrade. Price is great though on the 2000.... performance is lacking. Keep in mind we're approaching 3ghz. Good buy if you're willing to sacrifice some performance, and maybe have to upgrade sooner.......either way, you're going to have to spend the money. If I was all hung up about buying an AMD chip, I wouldnt buy one right now, Id be waiting till the Hammer. Maybe that's why their sales and prices are so low....everyones waitin.
AMD:
Quality Motherboards are only 80$ away, an MSI KT333 Ultra is barely expensive. Also the Epox 8K3A has been a primo choice of many enthusiasts and really does not cost a lot.
For CPU, the XP2000 is a damn powerful price/performance bargain, and in benchmark scaling, the thing should give roughly 5% less in gaming since most games use the GPU and rely on it. Only lousy programmed games like Commanche 4 need a 2.8GHZ to run smoothly. And for Office, if you type about 500 letters a second, maybe a high speed P4 is needed, but to me, Office is nothing, it's just type and type, there is merely anything to crunch the CPU and make it run hot.
PC2700DDR is fairly cheap now, and I'd say grab 512MB for the sake of future performance. This is needed in WinXP for the best potential performance, while 256MB is the best you need for Win98. 256MB of PC2700 is no more than 60$ in most places.
XP2000=~90$
8K3A=~100$
RAM=60$
250$ total, you are well within HALF the range and can get satisfying gaming and office performance. I could settle for even less but since you want future gaming, it's fine as it is.
Intel:
The motherboards on Intel's side are a bit more expensive when DDR is used, while the RDRAM boards are by far much more expensive.
I'll give you a DDR setup because you want to save money!
The Abit SR7-8X is a future-insured mobo with AGP 8X and ATA133 support. It has the Sis 648 chipset and IMO this is one of the best price/performance chipsets offered on Intel systems.
The 1.8A is a good bargain and can overclock to 2.4GHZ fairly safely with the retail heatsink fan. I'd personally choose a 2.26GHZ but I think it might jack up the price you target.
Again same thing, PC2700DDR. You can opt for PC3200 also which is a bit more expensive but has competitive results to PC1066 RDRAM.
The Intel system summed up:
1.8A=~139$
2.26GHZ=~202$
ABIT SR7-8X=~108$
256MB PC3200=~65$
The Intel system using the 1.8A is 312$, the 2.26GHZ is 375$.
Both are in the range, the 2.26GHZ is about 20-25% better than the XP2000 but the whole is 125$ more. The 2.26GHZ can overclock to 2.8GHZ with Retail HSF pretty safely but I'd ask the forum members here for their experience with it if I were you!
Well it all depends, but in the end it's always the same thing and remains the same as Matisaro puts it: If you overclock, Intel, if not, AMD.
Good luck!
--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!
A P4 is a lot more OC'able than the Athlon. For RAM, get DDR. It shouldn't be too much more than standard SDRAM, but there is a big performance gain. Motherboard: NonAbit or Gigabyte boards should be fine. Also stay away from Via chipsets. I would look into SiS 648 based boards.
"Hstated he was thinking of price/performance primarily, he dosent need 2.8ghz to feed his gpu, a 1600-1800+ will go fine, furthermore he has set a limit of 500 bucks for the cpu/mobo, and he cannot get a 2.8ghz system with that, hes much better off getting a 1800+ and a gf4ti4600 with the saved money"
Then get a 2.4a. Intel just cut prices and there is a decent motherboard out there that is well within his budget. Plus it would give him better performance than a 1600-1800+.
The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark 