Building My First Computer

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: user1234
In summary, the 754 socket system would be:

CPU: a64 3200+ (754) $200
Mobo: MSI K8T Neo $90
RAM: 1GB OCZ $250
HD: 160 GB Hitachi SATA 7200rpm $95 (I still recommend to double that in raid-0 2x arrary)
AUDIO: SB Audigy2 ZS $85
VIDEO: Nvidia 6800 GT $400

Total: $1120 not including shipping and tax

Possible extras: add $95 for second HD, add ~$200 for socket 939 mobo+cpu

this looks good and if you don't like msi, get a asus or about. they are all excellent.

my question to user1234 is why add a soundcard? he is using headphones.

 

[sharq]

I will side with bob4432 on this, no need to get a sound card if the motherboard comes with sound.

 

[user1234]

there is no comparison between the el-cheapo sound built into the motherboard, and the 24-bit sound with advanced dsp in the audigy-2, if you don't believe me try it for yourself. The difference in sound quality will be noticeable even with headphones (especially good ones).
btw, if maximum pc is not the best magazine, do you know a better one ?

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: user1234
there is no comparison between the el-cheapo sound built into the motherboard, and the 24-bit sound with advanced dsp in the audigy-2, if you don't believe me try it for yourself. The difference in sound quality will be noticeable even with headphones (especially good ones).
btw, if maximum pc is not the best magazine, do you know a better one ?

maybe my ears are not as good as yours, i have tested it and i can't tell the difference.

as far as the magazine, i would read many mags and online reviews to get a good overall picture, not just ones views. i do this with everything in life.

 

[sharq]

As for sound, I use on board sound and it works fine for my gaming/music/movie needs. Only time I would recommend a seperate sound card would be for:
1. Compatibility issues (eg: the onboard sound doesn't work in Linux).
2. Surround (if not supported onboard).
3. Distortion/hissing from onboard sound.

I don't use just one source for my info (computer or otherwise). I would say best resource: Google. Best magazine? None, they're all good ways to pass the time (in my opinion).
I normally use Anandtech/THG articles as a starting point, and then go to google to research the necessary topic.

 

[user1234]

Originally posted by: bob4432
honestly, you should be using scsi 15krpm u320/u160 drives in a striping raid for max performance. this will max out a 32bit pci bus. those computer makers just o/c their machines and put a cool paint job on, that is it. they are extremely overpriced machines. for $4000 you should get 15k rpm u320 scsi raid!!!!

my personal opinion is that maximum-pc is not the most influential mag for performance pcs, you need to do the research yourself and read all different aspects, not just what the max pc has to say.

First, the PCI bus is capable of handling 133 MB/Sec, more than twice the average read speed of a 15K SCSI disk (~50-60 MB/Sec), but it's true that it could max out if both drives are doing burst read (2x100).
But for SATA RAID controller integrated on the motherboard bypasses the PCI bus, and can usually transfer data at a much higher rate, thus providing another advantage to SATA RAID over scsi PCI card, especially for 4x striped arrays (raid-0). And btw, in a recent test maximum pc determined that a 10K SATA disk (raptor) was fater than a 10K SCSI disk (atlas). These are facts, I'm not sure where you get your information.

 

[user1234]

I never said I use one source, I just said that as far as printed magazines (you know the ones that actually have enough readers to attract advertisers and make money), maximum pc is the best. Obviously, I read other online and offline sources, but maximum pc still strikes me as one of the best sources for in depth and interesting information on performance computing. Have you actually read it ?

 

[user1234]

THG has a good article comparing the new and existing AMD CPUs, http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040601/socket_939-28.html
The 3200+ runs at the same speed (2GHz) as the 3000+, but it has a 1MB L2 cache instead of 512KB. But if you spend $80 more and step up to 3400+,
you get a 10% faster cpu (2.2GHz), and the same 1MB L2 cache. The 3500+ (939) is the same speed as the 3400+, but uses dual channel memory, which makes it slightly faster, even though it has only 512 MB L2 cache. As you can see from the article, 3400+ and 3500+ are very close, and the 3000+ and 3200+ are even closer in performance, so in summary I'd say go with the 3000+ (3200+ may not be worth the extra $50) or if you can spend an additional $130 go with 3400+ (the 3500+ may not be worth the extra $55 plus more expensive mobo).

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: user1234

Originally posted by: bob4432
honestly, you should be using scsi 15krpm u320/u160 drives in a striping raid for max performance. this will max out a 32bit pci bus. those computer makers just o/c their machines and put a cool paint job on, that is it. they are extremely overpriced machines. for $4000 you should get 15k rpm u320 scsi raid!!!!

my personal opinion is that maximum-pc is not the most influential mag for performance pcs, you need to do the research yourself and read all different aspects, not just what the max pc has to say.

First, the PCI bus is capable of handling 133 MB/Sec, more than twice the average read speed of a 15K SCSI disk (~50-60 MB/Sec), but it's true that it could max out if both drives are doing burst read (2x100).
But for SATA RAID controller integrated on the motherboard bypasses the PCI bus, and can usually transfer data at a much higher rate, thus providing another advantage to SATA RAID over scsi PCI card, especially for 4x striped arrays (raid-0). And btw, in a recent test maximum pc determined that a 10K SATA disk (raptor) was fater than a 10K SCSI disk (atlas). These are facts, I'm not sure where you get your information.

yes a 32bit pci bus is able to handle 133MB/s, that is obvious. 15krpm u320 scsi drives have a faster transfer rate than 50-60MB/s like you have said, my 10k rpm u160 drive does that. i have used u320 scsi raids before and have done my own benchmarking and they will sustain a transfer rate of over 130MB/s+ with just 2 drives (they are limited, in my situations to the 32bit pci bus, in a 64bit pci bus they would easily exceed 130MB/s). scsi and ide/sata drives are in a totatlly different ball park. and if you are not happy with that and say about the 4x drive arrays, bid deal, again you need to read as you can add more than that to a u320 array, not that you could use it with a 32bit pci bus. i am not knocking sata arrays but the facts are they can not compare with a u320 array in terms of ultimate performance. they are much cheaper and that is good. these are facts and they are correct.

you say you read all this info, but you keep referring to max pc as the best. maximum pc is not the end all, best place for info, it is sad that peope believe it is. you need to open you eyes and do more reading because you are still wrong. sorry to break it to you

 

[user1234]

Didn't you just agree that the scsi raid array is currently limited to pci bus speed (133 MB/s) ? And do you also agree that I could build a raid 0 array using 4 10K sata raptors and connect it to the onboard sata raid controller, and get ~200 MB/sec ? Hence, SATA is faster then scsi as a raid solution for PCs (currently, granted pci express will change that).

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: user1234
Didn't you just agree that the scsi raid array is currently limited to pci bus speed (133 MB/s) ? And do you also agree that I could build a raid 0 array using 4 10K sata raptors and connect it to the onboard sata raid controller, and get ~200 MB/sec ? Hence, SATA is faster then scsi as a raid solution for PCs (currently, granted pci express will change that).

read around about a 64bit pci bus. i should have made it more obvious and i will edit my post - 133MB/s is the max for a 32bit pci bus. if you want to think that a 4x sata is as fast as you can get, then you can think that, but it is not

 

[user1234]

Let's get back to the subject on hand: I feel you should probably leave room for future overclock since it's simple to overclock the 2GHz 3000+/3200+ to about 2.5 GHz thus gaining 25% speed increase (you'll need fast memory though). So I'm changing my recommendation for mobo based on a recent anandtech article (http://anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2063&p=4) . As I said before, the recent price drops for socket 754 cpus makes it a great deal, and in that space the 3000+ is the best value. For audio, you can read reviews almost anywhere which affirm the conclusion that Audigy-2 ZS is a must in order to maximize your enjoyment of surround 24-bit sound in games as well as mp3's, etc (this is really a no-brainer). You would also need a dvd-rw and floppy/media-reader, so the complete shopping list is:

CPU: Athlon64 3000+ $170
Mobo: Chaintech VNF3-250 $90
RAM: 1GB OCZ PC3500 $300
HD: 160 GB 7200rpm SATA Hitachi $90
Audio: SB Audigy2 ZS $85
DVD-RW: NEC $70
Floppy/Media reader: Mitsumi $30
Video: EVGA/BFG/PNY 6800 GT $400

Total: $1235

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: user1234
Let's get back to the subject on hand: I feel you should probably leave room for future overclock since it's simple to overclock the 2GHz 3000+/3200+ to about 2.5 GHz thus gaining 25% speed increase (you'll need fast memory though). So I'm changing my recommendation for mobo based on a recent anandtech article (http://anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2063&p=4) . As I said before, the recent price drops for socket 754 cpus makes it a great deal, and in that space the 3000+ is the best value. For audio, you can read reviews almost anywhere which affirm the conclusion that Audigy-2 ZS is a must in order to maximize your enjoyment of surround 24-bit sound in games as well as mp3's, etc (this is really a no-brainer). You would also need a dvd-rw and floppy/media-reader, so the complete shopping list is:

CPU: Athlon64 3000+ $170
Mobo: Chaintech VNF3-250 $90
RAM: 1GB OCZ PC3500 $300
HD: 160 GB 7200rpm SATA Hitachi $90
Audio: SB Audigy2 ZS $85
DVD-RW: NEC $70
Floppy/Media reader: Mitsumi $30
Video: EVGA/BFG/PNY 6800 GT $400

Total: $1235

i would agree with this and if you don't want to o/c you could get some pc3200 and save a couple of bucks on the ram. personally i would atleast try out the onboard audio before you drop $85 on the sound card. you may be able to pick up the drive cheaper in hot deals, and i understand what user1234 is saying and since that m/b has onboard sata raid, you may want to go a sata instead of pata IN THIS CASE as it will make for a cheap upgrade to a cheap sata raid IF YOU EVER WANT TO TRY IT OUT. i am all about spending a little more now to save a lot later.

just out of curiosity, why is everybody selecting the 6800 instead of the x800?

 

[user1234]

One correction regarding the memory, you can get 2x512 MB RAM OCZ PC4000 for $290 at newegg, which will allow to overclock to 2.5 GHz.
As for the 6800 GT, it handily beats the x800's on open-gl games, and at least matches the x800pro in most other games, while priced similarly. It also overclocks very well, so you could get close to 15K on 3Dmark03 with the cpu and gpu overclocks - pretty damn good for a <1500$ system. The x800xt is better, but more expensive. Note that 6800 takes a larger performance hit compared to x800, when you turn on the quality settings, but the gt still matches or outperforms the x800pro in most tests.
Regarding the raid-0, note that if you add a second drive later, you have to reformat (and re-install everything), so it could be a hassle to do it later.

 

[user1234]

btw, the highest 3dmark score (default settings) I've heard of is 16K, which you can get only with sick hardware from the boutique pc builders (6800 ultra, fx-53, insane overclocks and water cooling). Realistically, even 12K is phenomenal.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: user1234
btw, the highest 3dmark score (default settings) I've heard of is 16K, which you can get only with sick hardware from the boutique pc builders (6800 ultra, fx-53, insane overclocks and water cooling). Realistically, even 12K is phenomenal.

hell, you could build it yourself

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: user1234
One correction regarding the memory, you can get 2x512 MB RAM OCZ PC4000 for $290 at newegg, which will allow to overclock to 2.5 GHz.
As for the 6800 GT, it handily beats the x800's on open-gl games, and at least matches the x800pro in most other games, while priced similarly. It also overclocks very well, so you could get close to 15K on 3Dmark03 with the cpu and gpu overclocks - pretty damn good for a <1500$ system. The x800xt is better, but more expensive. Note that 6800 takes a larger performance hit compared to x800, when you turn on the quality settings, but the gt still matches or outperforms the x800pro in most tests.
Regarding the raid-0, note that if you add a second drive later, you have to reformat (and re-install everything), so it could be a hassle to do it later.

this is his first build, he will probably re-install everything a couple of times every 6 mos or so...

 

[user1234]

Originally posted by: bob4432

Originally posted by: user1234
btw, the highest 3dmark score (default settings) I've heard of is 16K, which you can get only with sick hardware from the boutique pc builders (6800 ultra, fx-53, insane overclocks and water cooling). Realistically, even 12K is phenomenal.

hell, you could build it yourself

true, and hopefully i will on my next build, but not for a while as my current 3200+/6800gt/2x160G raid-0 rig is quite capable of handling my needs for the foreseeable future.

 

[user1234]

Originally posted by: ShaunyR
I have a budget of about $1200.00 and I'm getting the stuff in late august. I already have my case (Thermaltake Tsunami) and my power supply (AeroPower II+ Modular Power Supply, from frozencpu.com). I also already have my mouse (Logitech MX510), keyboard (Logitech Elite), mousepad (X-Ray Pad), and my headset (Sennheiser PC155, not wanting any speakers). All I need is a monitor and hardware components for under $1200.00. If you have any recommendations or ideas please share them with me. Thanks.

Did you mean you want the monitor included with the other components for $1200 ? Since a good 17" LCD is at least $400, you want all the rest for $800 ? If so, you'd need to downgrade some of the stuff I suggested... Here I was giving you suggestions for a top performer with great value for small amount of money, but you're actually looking for a low-end budget machine.

 

[bob4432]

sh!t, i thought he already had a monitor. you going to have to get a 9800pro and then a decent monitor -> 19crt or 17lcd

 

[Yanagi]

I would say go with a socket 754 A64 3000+. If you want to save some cash go with the 2800+.
As for gfx card minimum vanillla 6800 since you're doing alot of gaming.

Mobo choice depends alot if you want to overclock or not. That goes for the ram aswell. I would say, if you dont overclock do not get PC 4000 ram. just get Kingston PC3200 valueram. it'll save you some more cash. 512mb ram as a minimum. I would recommend 1gb though.

I agree that you should use the onboard sound. Try it out and see if it fits your needs. if not, you could always buy a soundcard later on.

As for harddrive. I would say a single 160 gb drive to start with. Since those are the best bang for the buck right now. I dont know about your harddrive needs but i fill my drives up pretty quickly. So 240 gb total for me is a tad low.. But as I said. Start out with a 160 gb drive and add a second later if you feel you need the space, no need to do RAID 0 even with 2 drives. If one fails you're screwed. I tend to keep away from raid unless i would do raid 0+1. But i dont feel the need to do raid 0+1. nor do I feel the need for a raid 1 since i need the space :/

Optical drives, will the NEC 2100A seems like a good buy. I would stay away from Dual layer atm and wait until prices on DL bruners go down and media prices go down aswell. Currently DL burning is at 2.4X speed which is ridiculous IMO. I would buy a cheap NEC 2100 now and a DL burner in about a year from now.


As far as a monitor is concerned. I dont knopw if oyu wanna go with CRT or LCD. And im not a monitor expert so I'll leave that up to the experts in that area..

I think thats about it. Hopefully you will find what everybody here said is usefull and dont trust one single source. read through all of the replies then think of YOUR needs. What YOU need in terms of harddrive space, CPU and so on. Dont base your whole buy on other peoples conclusions. DO a bit of both and see what matches your needs..

Alright. im done now i think.. heh. Good luck with your build as im sure you will enjoy it bigtime

 

[user1234]

Originally posted by: bob4432

Originally posted by: user1234

Originally posted by: bob4432
honestly, you should be using scsi 15krpm u320/u160 drives in a striping raid for max performance. this will max out a 32bit pci bus. those computer makers just o/c their machines and put a cool paint job on, that is it. they are extremely overpriced machines. for $4000 you should get 15k rpm u320 scsi raid!!!!

my personal opinion is that maximum-pc is not the most influential mag for performance pcs, you need to do the research yourself and read all different aspects, not just what the max pc has to say.

First, the PCI bus is capable of handling 133 MB/Sec, more than twice the average read speed of a 15K SCSI disk (~50-60 MB/Sec), but it's true that it could max out if both drives are doing burst read (2x100).
But for SATA RAID controller integrated on the motherboard bypasses the PCI bus, and can usually transfer data at a much higher rate, thus providing another advantage to SATA RAID over scsi PCI card, especially for 4x striped arrays (raid-0). And btw, in a recent test maximum pc determined that a 10K SATA disk (raptor) was fater than a 10K SCSI disk (atlas). These are facts, I'm not sure where you get your information.

yes a 32bit pci bus is able to handle 133MB/s, that is obvious. 15krpm u320 scsi drives have a faster transfer rate than 50-60MB/s like you have said, my 10k rpm u160 drive does that. i have used u320 scsi raids before and have done my own benchmarking and they will sustain a transfer rate of over 130MB/s+ with just 2 drives (they are limited, in my situations to the 32bit pci bus, in a 64bit pci bus they would easily exceed 130MB/s). scsi and ide/sata drives are in a totatlly different ball park. and if you are not happy with that and say about the 4x drive arrays, bid deal, again you need to read as you can add more than that to a u320 array, not that you could use it with a 32bit pci bus. i am not knocking sata arrays but the facts are they can not compare with a u320 array in terms of ultimate performance. they are much cheaper and that is good. these are facts and they are correct.

you say you read all this info, but you keep referring to max pc as the best. maximum pc is not the end all, best place for info, it is sad that peope believe it is. you need to open you eyes and do more reading because you are still wrong. sorry to break it to you

First, can you give some details on 64bit pci bus, is that really relevant here, or is it some kind of exotic super expensive solution ? Do you mean pci-express ?
Second, 15Krpm SCSI drives, which are the state of the art in hard drives, are actually not optimized for sequential read, but rather have a very fast access time (around 5 ms). They are ususally used in multi-user server envrinments where the access time matters most. So in reality, thier sustained transfer rate for sequential is really 50-60 MB/Sec, not much different than 10K drives. Guess what? if you read max-pc you would have known all that, as they tested the maxtor atlas 10K, and atlas 15K scsi drives.