Computer Quote

[bkkmadness]

I was at fortune town today and got the price for a computer set up and I'd like to know if it's suitable for net surfing/vid editing /gaming and is the price ok?

Would anybody change anything about this set up and still manage to keep it around the same price?

Here's the specs:

CPU - Core 2 Dou E6420/2.13 GHz

Ram - 1GB/667 RJNGTON x 2

Hard Disk - 320 GB / 7200 Seagate SATA

VGA - 8500 / 512 MB WINFAST

MAINBOARD - 965ED - S3

CD ROM - DVD-RWLG18X

Case - ATX

And they want 24 K for the lot. A good buy?

Thanks.

Edited May 28, 2007 by bkkmadness

[bkkmadness]

And on the other hand I am being offered this second hand computer:

Core Duo 2.13 (two processors)

80 gig SATA hard drive

NVidia Gforce7600GS,

Gygabyte mobo GA965P-DS dual Bios,

DVD burner

firewire,

USB 2,

nice case

4 months old.

Built myself at the cost of 39.000B.

(and it has 1 Gig RAM)

for 22 K.

But the first computer quote has better specs, and brand new for just a little more money, is that right?

Edited May 28, 2007 by bkkmadness

[nikster]

I am not current on desktop prices but I would just use the ArsTechnica buying guide as standard to compare against.

Budget box for may is here, a $500 computer with monitor

http://arstechnica.com/guides/buyer/guide-200704.ars

Compared to that, yours - the new one - sounds like a reasonably good deal. No monitor, but much better HD and graphics card.

Do yourself a favor and ignore the used offer...

[wpcoe]

And they want 24 K for the lot. A good buy?

Sounds reasonable. Does it include an operating system? If not, be prepared to plonk down several more thousand baht, unless you are a Linux geek.

[Richard-BKK]

The Nvidia 8500 chipset comes in two flavors, to get some performance I will advice you to go for the 8500GT flavor and if possible with DDR3 memory.

The Spark 8500GT Extreme has 256MB DDR3 memory and cost around 3800 Bht. For the computer main memory you need to ask how much extra it cost to change the memory from 667Mhz to 800Mhz. It really helps to have fast memory in a computer like this.

[Firefoxx]

I just got myself a new system so I did some research for it.

First, the CPU. You can get the E4300, the lowest Core 2 Duo. It overclocks EASILY to 3 GHz. It's a steal for around 4k baht.

Second, the RAM. Unless you're overclocking the RAM (you don't need to, the CPU is enough) you don't need 800MHz ram. I did just fine with 667. Get 2 gigs of it, more ram is better (and you'll pay around the same for 1 GB of 800Mhz ram).

HDD, no comment.

VGA: There is ABSOLUTELY no point in getting 512MB of ram on a LOW end graphics card. NONE. ZERO. You could get around the same performance with 128MB of ram on that card. If you want the ram to make a difference, get a better card, like the 8600GTS or 8800GTS. BTW, the 8500 isn't good for games, but great for HD movies, BUT doesn't have HDCP, so can't be used for blu-ray in the future. It's an oddball card. I REPEAT: IT IS A MYTH THAT YOU SHOULD BUY VGA CARD ACCORDING TO HOW MUCH MEMORY THEY HAVE. PLEASE DON'T. It's the same for your computer. You could put 5 terabytes of RAM on a 8086 and you'd still have an absolutely lame computer.

DVD drive. I've had better experience with Benq, personally.

ATX case. Probably horrible, but you're not paying much for it. The PSU probably will die within a year.

[Richard-BKK]

I agree that 512MB video memory on a 8500 chipset VGA card has nothing more to offer then 256MB. The Nvidia 8600GT or GTS are surely better VGA cards, but they also cost directly 1000 Bht more. If you not mind about a extra 1000 Bht , I will say surely do.

For the system memory, still I say go for 800Mhz, as the Intel E6420 has a 1066Mhz FSB and not like the E4300 or E4400 a 800Mhz FSB. If you buy the Intel E6420 with the idea to overclock the processor at a later stage I will say go for 1066Mhz memory (still extremely expensive in Thailand).

The Intel E6420 with 4MB cach memory can easily overclocked to run a 1330 Mhz FSB clocking 2.66Ghz and showing you speeds you never think possible....

Edited May 29, 2007 by Richard-BKK

[Firefoxx]

The E4300 actually works with DDR2-400, since it's FSB is 200x9=1.8GHz. When you overclock it to, say 300x9, you only need DDR2-600 memory, and if you overclock it to 333x9 (3GHz) you only need bog-standard DDR2-667 memory. It's the Celeron 300 of the Core 2 age, and hence the best value, AND you can change the multiplier. The E6420 doesn't overclock as well because of the added cache and the fact that it's starting FSB is higher.

DDR2-667 is the standard right now and DDR2-800 commands a hefty premium. If the price weren't so different, I'd also recommend it. 1GB of Kingston DDR2-667 costs the same as DDR2-533 (which means it's mainstream now) while increasing to DDR2-800 means you pay nearly twice (1,300 vs 2,400). Couple that with the added cost of the CPU (7,300 vs 4,500), you're not going to make the budget.

Edited May 30, 2007 by Firefoxx

[paveet]

Get the E4400 instead of the E4300 if you're ever thinking of getting one..

Edited May 30, 2007 by paveet

[Richard-BKK]

I tested a Intel Core2 Duo E4300 1.8Ghz, with Asus P5B-E mainboard. Then when I set the memory to 667Mhz and bring up the FSB to 325Mhz x 9 (which works well with the stock processor cooler) the auto memory clock controller brings the memory clock up to 813Mhz. With 667Mhz memory it hangs after working a few minutes, and after reboot a woman voice with highly Chinese accent keeps telling "Your system failed due to overclocking" With 800Mhz memory we never see this problem.

After testing the newer Intel Core2 Duo E6420, the whole system hang when using 800Mhz memory, 667Mhz memory we where not able to overclock seriously. With 1066Mhz we where able to get serious again with overclocking. Downside is that 1066Mhz memory is in Thailand 4 or 5 times the price of 667Mhz memory.

Edited May 30, 2007 by Richard-BKK

[paveet]

Can you not set the FSB:DRAM ratio?

[Richard-BKK]

Sure can set the FSB:RAM-ratio but I found that the combination of 325 FSB and 813Mhz RAM works the best and offers the best performance. With the combination 325 FSB/667 RAM the Asus P5B-E (Intel P965 chipset) did not perform better then a old Intel 875 mainboard with 400Mhz DDR memory in Sandera MemTesting. (Sandera is not the best but still good indication).

The 325/813 setting with 800Mhz memory outperformed the Intel 875 on all fronts, twice and a bit more on memory transfer.

Paveet, you want to buy the Intel E4400, this processor is with overclocking in mind a bit slower as it cannot be as heavy overclocked as the E4300. With the E4300 we got with additional cooler to 3.8Ghz, but did not get it 100% stable (playing games and other heavy processor load SETI@home)

[Firefoxx]

Err? You're supposed to set a 1:1 FSB:RAM ratio, at least that's what all the overclockers kept saying. It's also what the system (my P5B) defaults to. As in, at 250, you get 500 ram, at 300, you get 600 ram, etc. It's what my experience was, at least. Again, if the price differential wasn't so steep (you could buy almost 2 sticks of 667 for the price of 1 stick of 800), then I wouldn't have any issue with this.

Really, what are we aiming for in this discussion anyways? A serious overclocker's wet dream system, or a nicely overclockable and stable system within a set budget? If it's the first, we'd also need some water cooling, a *really* good PSU and case, and a *much* better graphics card. What are we talking about, 50k?

[paveet]

Err? You're supposed to set a 1:1 FSB:RAM ratio, at least that's what all the overclockers kept saying. It's also what the system (my P5B) defaults to. As in, at 250, you get 500 ram, at 300, you get 600 ram, etc. It's what my experience was, at least. Again, if the price differential wasn't so steep (you could buy almost 2 sticks of 667 for the price of 1 stick of 800), then I wouldn't have any issue with this.

Really, what are we aiming for in this discussion anyways? A serious overclocker's wet dream system, or a nicely overclockable and stable system within a set budget? If it's the first, we'd also need some water cooling, a *really* good PSU and case, and a *much* better graphics card. What are we talking about, 50k?

I don't think the 1:1 FSB:RAM ratio matters much as it used to back in the Athlon XP on nForce 2 days when everyone insisted 1:1. I'd rather have a core2 duo @ 3.4ghz but 5:3 than 2.7ghz at 1:1 for example.

It may well differ for different systems, but this is what I've found on my Intel Bad Axe 2 (D975XBX2) with a E6600.

Edited May 30, 2007 by paveet

[paveet]

Paveet, you want to buy the Intel E4400, this processor is with overclocking in mind a bit slower as it cannot be as heavy overclocked as the E4300. With the E4300 we got with additional cooler to 3.8Ghz, but did not get it 100% stable (playing games and other heavy processor load SETI@home)

The reason I said get the E4400 rather than the E4300 is because of the higher multiplier of the E4400. With Core 2s, you'll most probably hit a FSB wall on the chipset before the frequency wall on the CPU. I've found this with an Asus P5W-DH and an Intel D975XBX2.

[Richard-BKK]

We tested about all Intel Core2 Duo, and we found that all where not able to go over the 3.80Ghz for a few models the limit was 3.9Ghz. We talking here about extreme cooling and using a somewhat higher core voltage.

For the Intel E4300 we used a FSB of 428Mhz to get to the same clock speed with a E4400 we use a FSB of 381Mhz (anything higher we needed to rise the core voltage pretty high). The temperature of the E4400 running at 381Mhz was higher then the E4300 running at 428Mhz, simple because the core voltage for the E4300 was much lower. We where able to use the E4300 at regular core voltage at 428Mhz but the system hang sometimes when paying heavy games.

------------------------

For BKKmadness I will say buy a computer system with a E4300 or E4400, use the money you save for 800Mhz memory and overclock the system just a little bit. Overclocking the Intel Core 2 Duo E4300 learned me that it can easily beat any processor on the market now...even the Core2 Duo Extreme serie or even the Intel quarto core (This mostly that no software package uses the 4 cores)