Upgrade Or New Pc?

[Firefoxx]

Never heard of Kingston making HDDs... thought they only made RAM. The reason I say Seagate and Maxtor is because they have good distributor warranties.

[thomie]

just some of my thoughts ... does anyone really utilise 160 gig of harddisk ... personally i will take 2 X 80 gig and partition it to 40 .. 40 .. do a full installion of all the OS and driver and programs and then clone it over to the other harddisk ... then i have a full proof againest harddisk crashes ...

[Jockstar]

Was gonna go for the Athlon 64/3000 but after looking at the link provided by Monty regarding the running of Half Life 2. The 3000 has only 1.8GHz. If the price isn't too much more. Would it not be better to go for the 3200, 3400 , 3500 or even the 3700. As these seem to have more GHZ. Any ideas?

[slimdog]

Hi Jockstar

Just for ref:

http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=2058

[Jockstar]

Was gonna go for the Athlon 64/3000 but after looking at the link provided by Monty regarding the running of Half Life 2. The 3000 has only 1.8GHz. If the price isn't too much more. Would it not be better to go for the 3200, 3400 , 3500 or even the 3700. As these seem to have more GHZ. Any ideas?

Firefox. What do you think?

[monty]

Hi Jock,

Have been away on a trip for a few days...

Re your question about Ghz versus the numbering system AMD uses.

This looks a bit confusing but in general is clearer compared to how intel is naming its processors at the moment.

Ghz is not always a direct indication of the speed at which a CPU will perform. The overall speed is dependant on several things. The most important probably being the amount of cache memory mounted on the CPU.

Main reason why AMD processors run at much lower Ghz compared with Intel's CPU's is the design of AMD's chips. They are able to give higher performance per Ghz.

AMD's numbering is easy to understand for most people. The higher the number, the faster the processor will perform.

An Athlon 64/3500 will perform faster then a 64/3400.

The 3500 might run at a slower Ghz then the 3400, but outperform it by virtue of more cache or other design futures.

So don't be fooled by Ghz alone, it's the whole design and futures of a cpu which dictates its performance, the Ghz is only a small part of this package!

AMD started this system because otherwise people might think the 64/3000 at 1.8Ghz might be slower the a P4 at 2Ghz. Which it isn't, the performance will be at least on par with a P4 running at 3.2Ghz!

The fastest CPU's will be extremely expensive though. Go for the one which you can afford!

[Jockstar]

Hi Jock,

Have been away on a trip for a few days...

Re your question about Ghz versus the numbering system AMD uses.

This looks a bit confusing but in general is clearer compared to how intel is naming its processors at the moment.

Ghz is not always a direct indication of the speed at which a CPU will perform. The overall speed is dependant on several things. The most important probably being the amount of cache memory mounted on the CPU.

Main reason why AMD processors run at much lower Ghz compared with Intel's CPU's is the design of AMD's chips. They are able to give higher performance per Ghz.

AMD's numbering is easy to understand for most people. The higher the number, the faster the processor will perform.

An Athlon 64/3500 will perform faster then a 64/3400.

The 3500 might run at a slower Ghz then the 3400, but outperform it by virtue of more cache or other design futures.

So don't be fooled by Ghz alone, it's the whole design and futures of a cpu which dictates its performance, the Ghz is only a small part of this package!

AMD started this system because otherwise people might think the 64/3000 at 1.8Ghz might be slower the a P4 at 2Ghz. Which it isn't, the performance will be at least on par with a P4 running at 3.2Ghz!

The fastest CPU's will be extremely expensive though. Go for the one which you can afford!

Thanks Monty. So lets say the 64/3000 is 2K cheaper than the 3200. Should i just spend the extra? Would i notice much diference?

[Firefoxx]

As monty says, don't be fooled by the Ghz numbers. Even Intel's own PentiumM outperforms it's P4's, Ghz wise.

Again, as monty says, you don't need to go for the fastest processor. The AMD 64 3500 is nearly twice as much as the 3000, but it's not nearly twice as fast... maybe about 10% as fast. If you want to go for AMD, I suggest getting the 3000, and then overclocking it. You'll get at least 3200 speeds. My own processor is a P4 2.4Ghz, but I've overclocked it using stock cooling to 3.2Ghz.

In response to thomie's question on partitioning, I'm one person who uses a lot of space. I have a 200GB drive, not partitioned, since I do a lot of DV editing. A single one hour DV file takes 12GB. If you're interested, there are two other threads that debate partitioning and file systems in this forum.

[monty]

Jock,

Go for the 64/3000 or 64/3200

the performance difference with the faster ones won't be to big if you're just playing HL2, likely only a couple of frames per second on the resolutions you will be using... your eye wouldn't notice.

The top performing cpu's are needed if you want to play the game on 23" monitors at the highest possible resolutions and detail settings and still want to have high frame rates(meaning no stuttering images). You really need to be a hardcore gaming freak to need this performance (and expenditure)

The prices in high end CPU's tend to come down fast when newer and faster units hit the markets, giving opportunity to us mere working mortals to upgrade when the price gets right

What you've put together from the advice garnered on the board will give you a very decent gaming computer, for a reasonable price, with options to upgrade to faster CPU's later on. Just go for it without breaking the bank...

[Jockstar]

Jock,

Go for the 64/3000 or 64/3200

the performance difference with the faster ones won't be to big if you're just playing HL2, likely only a couple of frames per second on the resolutions you will be using... your eye wouldn't notice.

The top performing cpu's are needed if you want to play the game on 23" monitors at the highest possible resolutions and detail settings and still want to have high frame rates(meaning no stuttering images). You really need to be a hardcore gaming freak to need this performance (and expenditure)

The prices in high end CPU's tend to come down fast when newer and faster units hit the markets, giving opportunity to us mere working mortals to upgrade when the price gets right 

What you've put together from the advice garnered on the board will give you a very decent gaming computer, for a reasonable price, with options to upgrade to faster CPU's later on. Just go for it without  breaking the bank...

Thanks Monty and Firefox. I think i'll just go for the 3000. Cant wait to get a new PC. But i do have to wait till the end of the month. Cheers.

[Jockstar]

Athlon 64/3000 Socket 939 CPU...................7490

Mainboard with 939 socket with VGA slot

NEO 2 .......................................... 5990

2x 512 Ram(400)......................................... 5520

160GB HD (MT).......................... 3540

DVD writer Samsung...........................3100

CASE 350 watts .............................1100

Speakers 100 watts..............................750

Total.................................................. 27100

So my question is. Will This box come with a power supply or wil have to buy a new one? 350 Watt power supply. Will this be enough?

[terdsak_12]

I just dropped 16K upgrading from a 1.3MHz Celeron thing to a Pentium 4, 2.8MHz and 120GB with 512 Ram in a new box, all I saved was the 2 CD drives and the floppy as they were all working, sound ok to you experts???

[Jockstar]

Athlon 64/3000 Socket 939 CPU...................7490

Mainboard with 939 socket with VGA slot

NEO 2 .......................................... 5990

2x 512 Ram(400)......................................... 5520

160GB HD (MT).......................... 3540

DVD writer Samsung...........................3100

CASE 350 watts .............................1100

Speakers 100 watts..............................750

Total.................................................. 27100

So my question is. Will This box come with a power supply or wil have to buy a new one? 350 Watt power supply. Will this be enough?

That should be 1000 watts for the speakers.. Monty or Firefox what do ya think about the wattage? Will it come with power supply or what?

[britmaveric]

If it doesnt come with the case (barebones kit) then you will normally need a power supply.

[peterzxr]

Ok. If you have read my previous threeads regarding my PC problems. ie It freezes up. So i was gonna upgrade my PC. I currently have a Pentium 3 256Mb with disk size 40GB. I was gonna upgrade. But it have been thinking again. Just to buy a whole new PC at the specs that i want. I can then try and sell mine to a PC shop or just anyone in general.

I would like Pentium 4 with 1Gb Ram and the same Hardrive space. I have been quoted a few prices from people on here regarding upgrading. But i'm seriously thinking just to buy a totally new PC. The current one i have was 2nd hand when i bought it and has many things on the Pc that i dont need. I have deleted many of these. But i think it would be cool to have a nice fresh Pc with no <deleted> on it. So what would you recommend and how much am i looking at roughly for the specs i want?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Take a trip to Singapore and fill ya boots. You'll actually get something less than six months behind the rest of the world and probably get a better price too

[Firefoxx]

A 1100 baht case means one of those "a dime a dozen" jobs. In other words, not very good quality, poor ventilation, and a lousy PSU (included). But you can't argue the fact that it's cheap.

If you want good ventilation and a good PSU, go for the one I suggested in the other thread, an aluminum case (2,200 baht) and an enermax PSU (1,800 baht). As you can see it's around 3,000 more expensive.