Building A "dream Computer" In Thailand.

[CosmicSurfer]

I want to build myself a dream computer.. I'm tired of my 5-1/2 Year old Viao laptop and I want a new desktop.. More "Bang for the Buck" and as I already have a Notebook (Laptop) computer.. that I Only ever take out of my room once a year, I really don't see the need to waste money on something that is still inferior to the specs of a good Desktop.

Building a computer to my Personal needs or Specs is not any more expensive and using Name brands for the components limits any warrenty issues. But at least then I get exactly what I want or need, without being limited to what ever package is offered by Dell, HP, etc.

But the question is just what components I can buy in Bangkok, inorder to build this dream computer. I should point out That i'm neither a Gamer or Video editor, so I don't need those high maintenance capabilities, but I Do want seperate Sound and Video cards, (Not On-board), Firewire, as well as USB2, Dual monitor capability, (for the future when I plan to be rich, VISTA O/S Ready, (even though I don't plan on upgrading XP-Pro to Vista until after Vista SP2.) Quiet and Cool running, and at least 2 Hdds (320GB ea.), DVD-R/W (Is HD-DVD R/W available yet)? Any other suggestions?

And where is the best place to buy them and do the assembly?

So I want a place where I can discuss, in English, the different Specs of what Components they have available, and not leave frustrated when I ask them about a case with 2 or MORE Fans and that runs QUIET, and they look at me like I'm speaking Swahilli and why would I even care about multiple fans, CPU Cooling.. and Quiet Running. (My experience last week at Fortune Tower.)

So, What do you think> What Advise or suggestion do you have ?

What compents are available and where is the best place to have it built?

What would you buy if You were building this computer?

Thanks,

CS

Edited August 31, 2007 by CosmicSurfer

[CosmicSurfer]

PS.. I forgot to mention - 2.3 (or 4) Ghrtz Intel Duo-Core CPU, 2GB RAM Min ( Is more really functional or a waste of money?)

[A_Traveller]

On the cooling and quiet point, whilst I prefer Fortune to shop, the cooling places fold there, over in pantip there are a number of shops specialising in cases, fans, component coolers. I'm guessing the local view is 'only gamers need cooling'.

Regards

[palm]

On the cooling and quiet point, whilst I prefer Fortune to shop, the cooling places fold there, over in pantip there are a number of shops specialising in cases, fans, component coolers. I'm guessing the local view is 'only gamers need cooling'.

Regards

Check out the totally-silent Zalman case available in Pantip Plaza. No fans at all - the case is one huge heatsink. Not cheap though - I think its around 35,000 baht just for the case, but well worth it for silent computing.

[CosmicSurfer]

Check out the totally-silent Zalman case available in Pantip Plaza. No fans at all - the case is one huge heatsink. Not cheap though - I think its around 35,000 baht just for the case, but well worth it for silent computing.

35,000 baht seems just a tad out of my budget.

Has anyone seen a "Lian Li" case in Pantip? Recommended by a friend in USA... They have multiple fans... Some up to 4... Top, Front, Sides and back. .. ??? http://www.silverpcs.com/

Thanks,

CS

[A_Traveller]

Try Jedi Cool

Regards

[CosmicSurfer]

Try Jedi Cool

Regards

Well, I think we got the case and cooling sysrtem nailed... Another place in Pantip is here > http://www.busitek.com/

Now please some suggestions for Components.. motherboard, Cards, Monitor, drives, etc.

Thanks CS

[meadish_sweetball]

Just a wee note, I doubt that with 4 fans and separate fans on the expansion cards and possible the CPU heatsink, the computer will not be *really* silent even if you get the most silent fans available. There will be a distinguishable woosh.

[ukjackthai]

2 Questions:

What are the user needs and your expected budjet?

Theres no point in fitting a $800 quad core cpu if your only going to use msn, or fitting a $50 1GHz cpu to run CAD programs, for example. Be a little more specific.

Myself, built up 2 towers. So i could help you out a little; Start with what mainboard you require.

Id advise you to stick with XP until at least next year.

Regarding Noise: There are many alternatives to reduce noise such as copper piping, passive and water coolers - Dont just go to Mr. Overpriced Zalman!!

And, why do you need 2 HD's? I suggest just getting a 1 TB drive and spliting it into 2 partitions [When installing windows]

Also, if your going to be using your DVD writer drive a lot i suggest buying a very good CPU to minimise write time [it takes on average 30 mins to mount an image on a DVD for a 2GHz]

Edit:

Note, if you do intend to upgrade to vista, you will need to have a slightly better than average spec. Check it out here

Edited August 31, 2007 by ukjackthai

[quiksilva]

Jedi seem to know their stuff, they had a shop at Pantip 2 at Ngamwongwan, but it closed recently

[stumonster]

there is a place with lian li cases in pantip , on the 2nd floor east west corridor - but you are looking at 4-5000 baht.

[A_Traveller]

Just a wee note, I doubt that with 4 fans and separate fans on the expansion cards and possible the CPU heatsink, the computer will not be *really* silent even if you get the most silent fans available. There will be a distinguishable woosh.

I wish I'd said that Heard across the office, "Sorry, it's just my distinguishable woosh."

Regards

PS Well it made me smile, off for the medicine now.

[Guest Reimar]

Jedi seem to know their stuff, they had a shop at Pantip 2 at Ngamwongwan, but it closed recently

I wouldn't tell something about JEDI but may you do a search here at the forum and you'll find some topic a few month agao about JEDI!

If I remember right there was something like: After Sales NO Service!

[CosmicSurfer]

2 Questions:

What are the user needs and your expected budjet?

Theres no point in fitting a $800 quad core cpu if your only going to use msn, or fitting a $50 1GHz cpu to run CAD programs, for example. Be a little more specific.

Myself, built up 2 towers. So i could help you out a little; Start with what mainboard you require.

Id advise you to stick with XP until at least next year.

Regarding Noise: There are many alternatives to reduce noise such as copper piping, passive and water coolers - Dont just go to Mr. Overpriced Zalman!!

And, why do you need 2 HD's? I suggest just getting a 1 TB drive and spliting it into 2 partitions [When installing windows]

Also, if your going to be using your DVD writer drive a lot i suggest buying a very good CPU to minimise write time [it takes on average 30 mins to mount an image on a DVD for a 2GHz]

Edit:

Note, if you do intend to upgrade to vista, you will need to have a slightly better than average spec. Check it out here

As I think I said in my original post, I'm NOT a Gamer or Video Editor and have no Need for CAD either, and I DO plan on loading VISTA later, but not until AFTER SP2 is released, So XP-Pro is the O/S for now.

I primarily use My computer for Office related stuff... and Internet stuff.. and listening to Music, it has become my primary source of music, but I may want to get into some Small Graphic editing later or even minor gaming.. (Who Knows.. as I get older I have more time to waste.) I'm just tired of SLOOOW response and heavy demand on resources. Multi-tasking is crucial, and video conferencing as good as Thai Broadband (AKA Glorified dial-Up ) Allows. DVD Writing is definately in my future plans.

I like having Seperate physical drives... Then I can Keep Programs, & O/S seperate from my Data.. Also in the Future I plan to keep a Data Back-up seperate on a 3rd drive. Finally, I find that with my Current SLOow 1Ghtz CPU It takes forever to run security Scans... On my current 320 External... Even takes long on my laptops 40GB Internal... I'm sure a new Computer with 2+Ghtz will improve that speed, But I feel that seperate drives will allow for faster scanning.

Finally.. a 1Tb Drive in Thailand (if you can find one) is more expensive than 320 drives... It's Cheaper to buy 3x 320.. and what if a 1Tb crashes... Then I lose Everything.... Safer to run smaller multiple drives.

Just my opinion. Thanks for your input.. I'm looking forward to anything you want to add.

CS

[A_Traveller]

Jedi seem to know their stuff, they had a shop at Pantip 2 at Ngamwongwan, but it closed recently

I wouldn't tell something about JEDI but may you do a search here at the forum and you'll find some topic a few month agao about JEDI!

If I remember right there was something like: After Sales NO Service!

Maybe you remember wrong. There was a discussion about another place at Pantip, the name of which I can't recall, which had a very poor reputation, however I don't recall a similar thread about Jedi. I have used them, on a number of occasions over the years without incident. If you could find the thread please do highlight it, I did search before posting but I didn't find any such thread, though that might be my searching skill.

Regards

/edit typo//

Edited August 31, 2007 by A_Traveller

[CosmicSurfer]

2 Questions:

What are the user needs and your expected budjet?

Theres no point in fitting a $800 quad core cpu if your only going to use msn, or fitting a $50 1GHz cpu to run CAD programs, for example. Be a little more specific.

Sorry.. Forgot to answer your first Question about Budget...

I hold to the old addage... "Buy the Best Computer you can afford." as the Technology will be out of date in 6 months.

So I don't really have a budget for this project... But I figure that wilh a monitor... 19 or 22", I'll end up spending around 60,-70,000 Baht. Of course, 60 is better than 70.. and 50 is better than 60... That's why I'm looking for feedback.

I don't want to buy more than I need, but at the same time I want this machine to last for about 5 years... so I don't want to be too cheap either.

CS

[Guest Reimar]

If I you I would buy:

MB: MSI Diamond K8 (LAN x 2, Bluetooth, WiFi, Creative Audio, IEEE1394, SLI) app. THB 7,000

CPU: AMD Athlon 6000 X2 (Dual CPU) app. THB 6,800

Memory: DDR2 1200 4 GB (4 x 1 GB) app. THB 5,200

PCI-X: NVidea 8600 GTS 256 MB or better app. THB 8,000

HDD: 500 GB WD-Raptor SATA2 x 2 app. THB 10,000

DVD: 2 x ASUS DVD-RX multi, Lightscribe, SATA app. THB 2,600

FDD: none, instead Cardreader app. THB 300

Monitor: Acer 22" WideScreen (Warranty exchange by 4 DOT) app THB 9,000

Case: a good case with 600 Watts PW app. THB 4,000

That's a total of: THB ~ 52,xxx

What you need more?

[AlexLah]

Processor Intel Core 2 Duo E6750

Motherboard Asus P5K, Intel P35

Cpu-cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro

Memory 2GB (1GB x 2) PC5300 CL5 Kingston

Video card Asus GeForce 8600 GTS DDR3 Silent

TV-card Hauppauge WinTV PVR 150MCE

Sound card Club3D Theatron DD

Networkcontroller Onboard

Hard disk Samsung SpinPoint T166 HD501LJ,

Dvd-burner NEC AD-7173S 18x

Flash-reader Apacer Embedded Card Reader 15 in 1

Case Antec LifeStyle Sonata III (500W)

Monitor Samsung SyncMaster 206BW 20"

Keyboard and mouse Logitech Cordless Desktop EX 110

[Firefoxx]

Going on a question by question basis:

1. Do want seperate Sound and Video cards?

Video yes, sound... the on-board HD audio of quality main boards is *really* good, and unless you're *really* into audio and can appreciate it, you don't need anything better.

2. Firewire, USB2, Dual monitor, Vista

Quality mainboards and VGA cards already come with these features. Any modern component will have Vista drivers (sometimes, it's vista-only).

3. Quiet and cool.

Depends on your case, VGA, and CPU cooling options.

4. DVD-RW, HD-DVD RW

A DVD-RW drive costs around 1000+ baht. A HD-DVD writer costs at least ten times that.

5. What would you buy if You were building this computer?

Lemme see:

A big tower case, since I need/want a lot of expansion, and good cooling.

A quad core CPU, since they're cheap now, and a big/quiet cooler for it.

2 GB of RAM (2x1GB)

A P35-based mainboard, but not too expensive.

A middling VGA card, around 8-12k baht. Less if you're not into gaming at all (and I stress "at all").

Two dvd writers. I often use two at a time, and they're cheap.

Lots of HDD space.

A quality PSU, a good mouse, and a LCD screen that's 22"+.

All in all, should fit easily in your budget.

I wouldn't buy Lian Li. They're pretty and they used to be the only deal in town, but now there are a lot of alternatives that work just as well or better for cheaper.

A quad core would certainly help in the multi-tasking deparment.

It used to be that the best "gb for the baht" hard drives were 250-320GB, but now there are 500GB drives that go for about the same (roughly 100 baht/GB). So if you want space, you can go for those.

Even saying that, hard drives are cheap. You can buy a couple of 500GB drives, and mirro them using the mainboard's RAID controller, and have continuous backup.

If you want your case to be cool yet quiet, it should use big (120mm) fans, which run at low RPM. Big fans running at low RPM will give the same airflow as smaller fans running at high RPM, but with less noise. Same goes for the CPU cooler. There are VGA cards that have completely passive (no fan) cooling, but they cost a bit more than the fan ones. However, if you're buying mid-range VGA cards, they normally aren't that loud... it's the high-end ones that scream.

[dave_boo]

First the hard drives: using separate drives is usually a good idea, but 320 is quite overkill for a OS/program partition. Als eventually, you WILL fill up that media drive and spill over onto your OS on, thus negating your intentions. Furthermore, Murphy's law says that the first drive to go will be your media drive. Thus getting the smallest drive with the best price to gigabyte ratio on it for your OS and spendng the balance on a larger media drive is a better idea. However, if you're set on getting two drives and want to ensure data safety, even really cheap motherboards do a good job creating RAID 1 arrays. This copies every little thing that you write to disk A onto disk B on the fly. So if either disk goes belly up, you still have all your data.

I am with everyone else on the P35 mobo. Intel boards are boringly solid, offering none of the hiccups that infuriate and enchant you at the same time. Actually going with an 'older' 975 motherboard wouldn't be a bad idea either, but the P35 is better tuned and should offer greater future-proofness.

A low end Core2 Duo would be a good fit for your requirements, probably even say an E6300.

I'm going to buck the trend and tell you to get 3 GB of RAM. Reason being that even though XP reaches a point of diminishing returns at that point, Vista is extremely greedy. 'So why not get 4?' you ask. Simply because the most compatible OS are the 32 bit ones. and they only support up to 4 GB anyways, but above 3.2 or there abouts, they start reserving memory so that it isn't seen by the running programs. Depending on the OS, opening task manager (or running tops) will show from 3.4-best case scenario 3.8. Do you like paying for RAM your programs can't use?

If you're going to do hd-dvd/blu-ray in the future, you'll want at least a Radeon2400 or Geforce8600 or greater. The acceleration offered by these cards for HD playback makes them no brainers. Plus they offer dual head support.

Some would say not to bother with an add in audio card, but I would beg to differ. An onboard chip sits in a veritable hurricane of electrical noise, and the simple fact that you get it up on a card really helps. I'm not an audiophile, but even I can hear the differences. Granted, a more expensive mobo should have a better design, but I worry that it's just another tick mark that the manufacturers use to advertise their boards.

2 dvd writers is an excellent idea, however, spending extra on Lightscribe is foolish IMHO. With two, it makes disc to disc copying so much easier. Also, if you want to rip your dvds to xvid/divx, being able to do two at a time is way better than one. Be sure that the motherboard you get has at least one IDE channel, otherwise you're going to be stuck buying SATA dvd writers.

I've bought really nice cases in the past. You know what happened? It would have been better to have bought an equivalent cheap case and spend the rest on booze. I'm not one to clutter my work space, so why should something that's going to be hidden look really fancy? That's kinda like buying $60 boxers...... But as long as you find a case that has the space you need and a front and rear 120mm blow hole, you should be ok.

I would definitely recommend going with dual monitors. once you have, you'l wonder how you ever got along without them. Also, if you can control the lighting (read prevent glare) get the glossy screenswhich offer greater color reproduction.

To keep things nice and fresh, don't even think about hooking it up to the internet before doing these steps:

1) download antivirus and adware blocker onto another computer. copy that to a pen drive or other portable media

2) install but don't activate.

3) install your stuff from step 1 and make sure that real time protection is enabled.

4) set your pagefile to the proper size.

5) restrict the size that your restore points can take up.

6) install drivers from the motherboard cd.

7) connect the ethernet cable.

8) start the microsoft updates and while that's plugging away find the latest drivers for your various components. download them to your desktop.

9) after the windows updates are completed, activate, assuming it didn't have you do that before hand.

10) install your latest drivers.

11) install any programs you need.

12) run your virus/adware programs to be sure.

13) create a restore point

Now, I personally use Acronis True Image, so like step 11 would see that installed and step 14 would see me creating a restore patition. If you follow these steps and run defrag frequently, your system will be snappy for a lot longer. and if you do create a resore patition, it's real easy to get stuff up and running if you get some nasties.

That may seem like a lot of work, but it takes an unprotected XP box all of 6 minutes to get infected after getting on the internet.

[Firefoxx]

Why I don't buy the 1000 baht cases:

1. They're really small and cramped.

2. The front panel ports are limited.

3. The cooling is usually lousy. Example: Gview cases, which are really popular cheapos, have their fans blowing air in the wrong direction.

4. The cooling is usually loud, and the included fans will typically fail within a year. Usually no filters, too, so your case needs regular cleaning.

5. You tend to cut your fingers if you stick them into the case.

6. They're heavy.

7. They're not easy to get into (I prefer tool-less).

8. They come with really lousy PSUs.

I don't care about looks. Actually, I steer clear of the fancy looking ones (like the Asus ones which looks like a Transformer's face). The ones which have faceplates that close over the drive bays are also stupid, since anyone wanting to write/read discs would have to keep opening the annoying bay door.

Ram is cheap, around 1,500 baht/GB, so getting 3GB or 4GB isn't going to be much different. If you do get 3GB, you'll need to have 2x1GB and 2x512MB, which means you'll have to throw away the 512mb's if you ever need to upgrade. Get 2GB now, and if you ever find the need for more, then get more.

Vista has a strange "2GB problem", in which programs which go beyond 2GB (like 3D games) will crash mysteriously.

[Guest Reimar]

Why I don't buy the 1000 baht cases:

1. They're really small and cramped.

2. The front panel ports are limited.

3. The cooling is usually lousy. Example: Gview cases, which are really popular cheapos, have their fans blowing air in the wrong direction.

4. The cooling is usually loud, and the included fans will typically fail within a year. Usually no filters, too, so your case needs regular cleaning.

5. You tend to cut your fingers if you stick them into the case.

6. They're heavy.

7. They're not easy to get into (I prefer tool-less).

8. They come with really lousy PSUs.

I don't care about looks. Actually, I steer clear of the fancy looking ones (like the Asus ones which looks like a Transformer's face). The ones which have faceplates that close over the drive bays are also stupid, since anyone wanting to write/read discs would have to keep opening the annoying bay door.

Ram is cheap, around 1,500 baht/GB, so getting 3GB or 4GB isn't going to be much different. If you do get 3GB, you'll need to have 2x1GB and 2x512MB, which means you'll have to throw away the 512mb's if you ever need to upgrade. Get 2GB now, and if you ever find the need for more, then get more.

Vista has a strange "2GB problem", in which programs which go beyond 2GB (like 3D games) will crash mysteriously.

The problem is the limitation of the 32 Bit version which is limited to 3 GB but actually limits at around 2.2 GB! Use the 64 Bit version instead, sure if you have a 64 Bit CPU and you out of that problem.

That's why I suggest the AMD CPU instead of the Intel. The AMD has one more advantage against the Intel: downward compatibility! I run Vista Ultimate 64 Bit on one Computer with 8 GB (4 x 2 GB) and that's lightning speed against the 32 Bit!

[CosmicSurfer]

The problem is the limitation of the 32 Bit version which is limited to 3 GB but actually limits at around 2.2 GB! Use the 64 Bit version instead, sure if you have a 64 Bit CPU and you out of that problem.

That's why I suggest the AMD CPU instead of the Intel. The AMD has one more advantage against the Intel: downward compatibility! I run Vista Ultimate 64 Bit on one Computer with 8 GB (4 x 2 GB) and that's lightning speed against the 32 Bit!

I Can always Upgrade 2GB Ram if I need more.. but 3 GB does sound interesting.. like you point out.. Ram is cheap.. so Throwing out 512 chips is no biggy if I upgrade to 4GB

But what about 64 bit vs 32 bit.. I've heard about lots of comaptability issues.. plus availablility of software for 64 bit.

Thanks Guys... All your contributions have been great for my education.. Keep the suggestions coming.

CS

[dave_boo]

The problem is the limitation of the 32 Bit version which is limited to 3 GB but actually limits at around 2.2 GB! Use the 64 Bit version instead, sure if you have a 64 Bit CPU and you out of that problem.

That's why I suggest the AMD CPU instead of the Intel. The AMD has one more advantage against the Intel: downward compatibility! I run Vista Ultimate 64 Bit on one Computer with 8 GB (4 x 2 GB) and that's lightning speed against the 32 Bit!

I Can always Upgrade 2GB Ram if I need more.. but 3 GB does sound interesting.. like you point out.. Ram is cheap.. so Throwing out 512 chips is no biggy if I upgrade to 4GB

But what about 64 bit vs 32 bit.. I've heard about lots of comaptability issues.. plus availablility of software for 64 bit.

Thanks Guys... All your contributions have been great for my education.. Keep the suggestions coming.

CS

I don't want to come across as argumentitive, but a 32 bit processor/OS can in theory adresss 2^32 bytes or a bit over 4.2 GiB. A 64 bit processor/OS can adress 2^64= 1.84467441 × 10^19 or 18 PiB (about 4 billion times as much!) As stated earlier, I've never seen a system, even XP-32 show below 3.4GiB. I was able to get my workstation under SuSE-32 to show 3.8, but it was after some quality time in the bios and tweaking kernel parameters.

The big thing to remember is there are no true 64 bit chips on the consumer market. Both Intel and AMD have 64 bit extensions to the old x86-32 code, but they are not true 64 bit chips anymore than fitting SLK wheels on a Honda makes it a Mercedes.

I also don't understand his comment about AMD having better "downward compatibility" than Intel. Is he saying Intel doesn't support x86-64 (AMD64 OR EMT64)? Or is he saying that Intel's x86-32 instruction set isn't as good?

The no x86-64 can be disproved simply by pointing out that Intel has had 64 bit extension chips since late '05; the 6*0 models. Plus any Core2 model supports 64 bit extensions.

If it's the x86-32 that he's talking about, numerous tests have proven that Intel's chips trounce AMD's taken at either price point or clock speed.

A lot of software, at least on the Linux side, that's run on a 64 bit system actually looks for 32 bit libraries. Since these are sometimes replicated in the 64 bit libraries, not exactly understand, there's quite a bit of overhead. Also for the longest, Java was a cast iron ***** to ge running on a 64 bit system,as were a few other things.

Don't let this talk deter you from going Vista-64 when SP2 rolls out though. That release date is quite a bit in the future, possibly even later than the 32 bit version, if XP-64 is aything to go on.

[Guest Reimar]

Some time ago some users complained that the technical details I posted was confusing the other members! You go far beyond that!

Please keep in mind that the most of the user will not be able to understand what you talking about!

Theoretical measure didn't applies for the reality! Try to add to and 32 BIT Laptop like Toshiba or Acer 4 GB memory and check with Vista Ultimate, you'll see just 3 GB and if you use Benchmark software for to to measure the working memory in Vista it's same: 3 GB! That's the reality! Not Theory!

Just for some very simple clarification:

Windows 98 work with 64 MB physical; memory for the system;

Windows ME was working wioth 256 MB;

Windows 2000 (not the server version) with 1 GB;

Windows XP 2 GB;

Windows Vista 32 bit with 3 GB;

Windows Vista 64 Bit 32 GB.

For Hard disk:

FAT 16 max 2.1 GB

FAT 32 depend on Bios but max Filesize 4.2 GB

NTFS beyong all

The downward compatibility I talked from is simple that youre abel to run even 16 Bit software (many but not all) on an AMD 64 Bit but no choice on an Intel 64Bit!

I didn't say that Intel didn't support 64 Bit or that the Intel's x86-32 instruction set isn't as good.

Fact is that the first Intel 64 Bit Processors from Intel was able to work with 64 Bit Software only and even not with all of them but AMD does! I was even abel to run a very old 8 Bit Program on AMD 64 Bit (Athlon 3200-64)!

May if I search my old Database I'll find the install instruction where it was clearly stated that the software will not run on Intel 64 Bit but AMD 64 Bit!

If it's the x86-32 that he's talking about, numerous tests have proven that Intel's chips trounce AMD's taken at either price point or clock speed.

That's happens just about the last 1 - 1 1/2 year after Intel was starting to go in direct competition with AMD! And for many Games the AMD is still ages better than the Intel! Counting together the question of Compatibility, Price and Speed I think until today the AMD is minimum on the same level as Intel and I personally think is better!

[dave_boo]

Wow tiger, I didn't mean to start a war. Don't get me as an Intel zealot, as a matter of fact my personal workstation has 2x 280 Opterons, 12 GiB RAM, blah-blah. However, I just built the wife an Intel platform, thus demonstrating my shifting loyalties. I would like to see current benchmarks putting AMD ahead though, since I haven't come across any....although it pretty clear their power now! is the bee's knees for saving on the old electric bill.

I have been known to overwhelm people with information, and I apologise for that. I was simply trying to point out one of the few benefits that are offered by 64 bit extensions. In fact, I forgot to point out that ~20 years ago, most 'computers' were chugging away on only 32 K of ram, which means that we've only increased some 131,000 times the amount of RAM being used, and that part of the 64 bit extensions should last quite a bit longer.

Concise advice is good, but making broad sweeping statements as fact can lead to confusion. For instance, I would bet that there's a blurb in the owner manual about the moherboard reserving 500 MiB for itself once the magical 4 GiB is reached (there was in the Clevo D900T manual). Now, considering that laptops' bioses are notoriously locked down , there isn't much you can do about it. Add in the fact that on top of that the bios will then cause the OS to reserve another bunch of RAM doesn't help. However, a desktop mobo has many more options, and you can avoid that part of the problem. A post install tinkering with the boot.ini file, amongst a few other things, will help reclaim more.

Basically, I'm trying to point out that it's not theory, but rather fact that 32 bit chips can in fact access 4 GiB of memory. The mere fact that in the case you've seen there has been ~1 GiB reserved attests to that.

Thank you for clarifing what you meant about 'downward compatability'. Different countries, different lingo (in the States it's referred to as backward compatability).

I think that you are getting the Itanium, which is not a consumer chip, confused with the releases of chips that have 64 bit extensions. The Itanium was built from the ground up as a 100% 64 bit chip that has to do 32 bit operations in emulation. So compared to similar clock speed chips from Intel/AMD, it got it's bell cleaned when benchmarked running those. It is my understanding that it doesn't emulate 32 bit even that well, since regular x86 processors have a history that stretches back to the original 8086. Everything done since has been in x86 development has built on this ancient code. So the clean break the Itanium made was hard on that older code.

But note that modern consumer chips from Intel and AMD are called x86-64 for a reason. It is because they were built on the old x86 code but had 64 bit instructions 'tacked' on. Thus any current AMD or Intel processor (with the exception of the aforementioned Itanium) will run even old 8 bit code equally well. Granted, one might run it ever so slightly faster, but considering the capability of code that age, do you think you'd notice? The biggest question is the OS support, which like the memory issue isn't always there as it should be.

[Guest Reimar]

I don't see it as war, just as an kind of clarification.

Anyway, I talked about the amount of Memory used by the OS, here Win Vista 32 and 64 Bit, and not about the CPU! Clear enough?

Fact: the CPU's can even use more than 4 GB memory both Intel and AMD!

Fact: the OS windows Vista 32 Bit is limited to 3 GB Memory!

Fact: the OS Windows Vista 64 Bit is limited to 32 GB Memory!

Fact: with CPU AMD 64 Bit I can use 8 Bit software, all my old software I've since 1979!

Fact: with CPU Intel 86x-64 I can not use the old 8 Bit software at all!

Fine that you use a Server Mainboard wit 2 Opteron CPU's and 12 GB Memory, which should be ECC buffered registred Memory, as Workstation! Memory musdt be ECC buffered registered because Opteron CPU's are Server CPU's which need ECC Memory to work correctly same as the Mainboard because until right now only Server Mainboards able to use 12 GB Memory as far as I know.

But could you please try to post simple Topic's and Replys please because not only we two here, there alot other user which want to know what we talking about. If you need to use technical languages you can also send me tha answers by e-mail which I will answer as well!

Thanks.

[Mozikillah]

Intel Quad Core Q6600

ASUS P5K DELUXE

Corsair XMS2 2GB (2x 1GB) DDR2 800

Nvidia G92 Series

Thermaltake Eureka Case

Thats my 'Dream Upgrade 2008'

[dave_boo]

My apologies to those who have been watching the exchange between Reimar and I and have been totally confused. After all these posts back and forth, it's apparent that we're approaching the same issue on different levels; he from a software down point (specifically a Windows POV) and I from a hardware down point (operating system agnostic).

I've decided to go ahead and explain in simple terms what the fuss was about. Even though the hardware uses base2 calculations, modern operating systems are use base8 calcualtions. Thus, even though 2^32 will allow the processor to address 4.2 GiB of space, the operating system is thinking in base8, so it sees 8^4 amount of address space (4.096 GB). That's why when I refer to RAM, I use the GiB(GigiBytes), which is a specification that follows the SI convention, and GB(Gigabytes) for the OS access paterns.

You will also notice my careful use of the word "address". The reason for that is while most people only think of the processor writing to memory, it actually address things. It will address your memory controller, your pci devices, video cards, etc. Each of these aren't written to directly, but have their controller chips addressed by the CPU, which tells them what to write.

Now all of these devices need to have space reserved in the 32 bit scheme for the processor to know where to address them. I am including a graphic from Intel to illustrate.

You'll see at the top that it says 'Upper 4 GB..". We'll ignore that since we're concentrating on only 4 GB total. Continuing down, you'll see that 20 MB of address space is saved for FLASH, APIC, etc. Than you have a big block of 750 MB saved for PCI items. DOS compatability is kept at the bottom of the range, since that is where DOS will look if you were to boot it. So as you see, approximately 770 MB is reserved for your various devices.

While this would seem to vindicate what Reimar says, that Vista will only see 3.2 GB, there's always more to the story. You can use memory remapping in your motherboard's bios, assuming it supports it. What this does is moves the PCI address space above where it's shown in the graphic above and into the upper 8 GB range. This requires chipsets that are Intel 955 and greater, or AMD socket 939 or greater. It also requires a processor that supports PAE (which allows the processor to use 36 bit addresses rather than the normal 32).

Also, for Windows you need to enable either AWE or PAE. Note that regular old stupid Windows will not actually allow you to have any one program exceed that 2 GB that Reimar listed, since it tries to keep 2 GB for the kernel and 2 GB for the processes. However, once again passing passing along /3GB to Windows helps alleviate that. There's much more to get into, but I promised to KISS, and this is a, at least IMHO, a pretty good primer.

[mokwit]

My understanding is that memory addressing only works when the software is specifically written to take advantage of it and very few are, eg database programs like SQL, some graphics programs, not much else. I'd LOVE to hear I am wrong on this.

On components PC Gallery 2nd floor round the back corridor (pcgallery.co.th) has some high end stuff and used to have some dual port video cards. Persoft also on second floor has some oldish looking Matrox video cards.

I had a computer built to my spec, but I have heard many people say that if you want to be sure it all works toigether you are better off buying a box from a big name as they test for performance/compatibilty of components - your homebuilt dream machine could have a bunch of components that are working sub optimally together.