| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 83476 | 2007-10-03 10:19:00 | Building new computer - may questions >_< | Pourhommenz (104) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 597574 | 2007-10-03 10:19:00 | Hey all - I haven't looked at computer hardware for about 3 or 4 years now, I use a computer every day of every week but my knowledge of hardware has slipped somewhat and some questions have come to mind. The system I am looking at putting together is: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, 2.4GHz, 1066MHz FSB, Socket 775, 32/64-Bit, Kentsfield Core P5K Premium/WiFi-AP, Socket 775, Intel P35 Express Chipset, 1333MHz FSB, 4xDIMM DDR2, 2xPCIe-16, 3xPCI, 2xPCIe-1, 10xUSB2, Firewire, Audio, ATA, RAID, ATX MSI nVidia GeForce 8800Ultra 768MB 2DVI/HDCP PCI-Express Video Card Kingston KHX8500D2K2/2G D2-1066 2GB HyperX Memory Kit Enermax ELT620AWT-DXX Liberty DXX 620W Power Supply And a 250GB SATA hard drive and a 200gb SATA hard drive IDE DVD burner and IDE CD Burner Firstly - I notice the difference in price between the the Q6600 and the Q6700 is vast, for very little power increase. With the Q6600 - it doesn't mean it's not going to be as good because it's cheaper does it? I mean, obviously it won't run AS fast as the 6700 but will I see a noticeable difference between the two or are the 6600's just a really good deal at the moment? I know that Enermax do make good PSU's but back when I built my last computer 350W was plenty of power (when dinosaurs roamed the land lol) and I don't know how to tell how much power I will need for this machine? Is the 620W going to be enough power to run this machine? OR can I get away with a smaller wattage? (Keeping in mind I may run STI or crossfire later on) In terms of the graphics card - again I am noticing a huge price difference between the nVidia cards and the ATI cards. From what I can gather (and yes, I KNOW there is always the debate like between Intel & AMD of whos best) nVidia seem to have the putter hand at the moment but I could be wrong. Considering I am wanting to do this right, am I taking the right path by putting in a nVidia card? Also with the graphics card - I know that nVidia do STI and ATI do Crossfire but is it really necessary for games these days or is this only for extremely hardcore people looking for THE BEST benchmark scores? If it is something to consider for me, then again am I better off staying with nVidia and the STI or going with ATI and Crossfire. Also with that - I have noticed that Asus seem to mainly support Crossfire, does that mean I should look at another motherbaord brand if I am wanting to do STI? Also I have noticed that some of the motherboards have 1 x PCIe x 16 and 1 x PCI x 4 for graphics cards, does this mean that only one card will be run at 1/4 its power??? Sorry, slightly confused around this one. I have also read and heard something about physics card for computers now? Is this again needed and will all applications / games use this or is it only for software that can take advantage of the card and hardcore people? And finally - I know VERY little about memory - have never understood it really - and am wondering if the one I have selected is going to be suitable? And if I decide to run Vista on the computer - will I notice a difference between having 2gb and 4gb of ram in the computer? Sorry for all the questions but hope you guys can help me out :D |
Pourhommenz (104) | ||
| 597575 | 2007-10-03 10:31:00 | ok. well the gear is very nice. and that power supply is nice. if you are going to be running all 10 USB slots,. and adding more HDD's later and more ram its good future proofing. SLI is for people who want awesome results with gaming. the PhysX card by Aegia is awesome too, but not required at this point, what it does as far as i can tell. is take away the object interation from the CPU / GPU so you can get more objects on the screen, last i heard it was 32,000 individual object on screen at one time with no slow down, with out this card you can probably have 500-1000 depending on the power of your CPU. The Q660 is an really good chip. no need to pay the huge excess for the Q6700. If you want a to go SLI, get the board that supports it, otherwise just grab a random one if using a single Video card. um 32bit OS can use 4GB ram, but can also cause problems, well in XP it can make it run slower. not enough memory addresses in the OS to manage all the ram. i think probably wrong. you may need upwards of 3GB ram if you plan on running Vista Ultimate and be able to play games. also no advantage of having 4GB over 3GB atm unless you work with making videos or doing a lot with high res pics in photoshop. With the PCI-E speeds. if you want to run Nvidia cards in SLI mode get one with 2x16 speed slots. its pointless otherwise. i think that was all :D hope i got some of the answers right. ima learning from these wise ppl here too. |
Cho (12330) | ||
| 597576 | 2007-10-03 10:48:00 | For the Q6600 vs Q6700, I've seen in benchmarks the Q6700 beat the Q6600 noticeably in results, but I don't think an extra 270MHz merits a $400 premium. The Q6600 has recently dropped its price by around 50%, and although no programs are coded to use 4 cores at the moment, for $420 it is a good deal. To me anyway, although for now I'd settle for a cheaper $300 E6750 and overclock it to 3.2GHz - easily. Enermax was and still is an excellent PSU manufacturer - I personally have never heard complaints from anyone about Enermax - other than maybe their price. Their high price is always reflected in quality and warranty anyway. At 620W, your Enermax PSU should handle that system just fine, but I'm having doubts that it will handle 2x 8800 Ultras well. I would go for a higher wattage, still from Enermax or another brand of similar quality such as SilverStone. I think a 700-750W should suffice for 2x 8800 Ultras and a quad core. nVidia is taking the lead over ATi with the 8800 Ultra right now, and both giants are going to release new cards from what I've heard, and I think you of their rivalry - in one term, nVidia wins - next term, ATi does....and so on. Right now 8800 Ultra is the best gaming card you can buy. And as for SLI and Crossfire - you don't need it for games, really. A single 8800 Ultra will kick ass in any games released today and even later. So there's really no point forking out another $1000+ for a second 8800 Ultra unless you are genuinely rich. Many motherboards have more than one PCIe slots, although they are rated differently, as you say, x1, x4 , x16. If you notice, a x4 PCIe slot is much shorter than a x16 PCIe slot. You can't fit a PCIe card in any PCIe slot other than a PCIe x16 slot. It's physically impossible. Although, I believe you can run your x16 PCIe card at a lower speed, but why would you want to do that? Physics card? You mean PhysX? Don't bother. Your CPU is more than adequate to handle all games today and even tomorrow. I think there are only a few games that use these PhysX cards anyway. And lastly, your choice of RAM is good - 2GB is a plentiful amount of memory for most systems today and at 1066MHz it is fast too. You probably will notice a bit of difference between 2GB and 4GB of RAM, but unless you have a x64 OS, you only use around 3.25-3.5GBs of RAM, I think. Oh, and also - you may want to change your optical drive selections to SATA instead of IDEs. And ditch the CD-Writer. Just buy 2x SATA LightScribe DVD-Writers. They're only $46 at www.nzoczone.co.nz. SATA cables are much thinner than those fat IDE cables - less clutter and better airflow in your case. you may need upwards of 3GB ram if you plan on running Vista Ultimate and be able to play games. Not true. I used to have 1GB, running Vista Ultimate and played B&W2 and STALKER. Both games runs smoothly. Although 2GB and upwards does increase the performance quite noticeably, you certainly don't need more than 2GB. |
qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 597577 | 2007-10-03 11:09:00 | on the lightscribe drives. i hear they die rather fast. ive never used any just a tech i know said he replaces them quite often as they laser dies or needs recalibration. + scribing onto disks may take a while. never used one though. Hmm how i would love to have $6k to spend on a system :D Ah ok on the RAM there, i have to estimate a lot as i dont have the best gear atm. 2.5Ghz celeron old school with crap hardware :) also dont really read up alot on the new technology :D sorry im spamming and thread thieving |
Cho (12330) | ||
| 597578 | 2007-10-03 11:31:00 | Buy "7950 GX2 Sli" thats all you need XD | tamatama14 (12747) | ||
| 597579 | 2007-10-03 20:16:00 | MSI nVidia GeForce 8800Ultra 768MB 2DVI/HDCP PCI-Express Video Card nVidia seem to have the putter hand at the moment but I could be wrong. Considering I am wanting to do this right, am I taking the right path by putting in a nVidia card? Also with the graphics card - I know that nVidia do STI and ATI do Crossfire but is it really necessary for games these days or is this only for extremely hardcore people looking for THE BEST benchmark scores? And finally - I know VERY little about memory - have never understood it really - and am wondering if the one I have selected is going to be suitable? And if I decide to run Vista on the computer - will I notice a difference between having 2gb and 4gb of ram in the computer? Don't buy MSI, get ASUS or Gigabyte. Nvidia rules at present. Yes Crossfire or SLI is for people with lots of money and who obsess over their performance. Forget it unless rich. HyperX is Kingstons overclocking RAM, the ValueRAM is fine if you don't want to overclock. 32bit Windows can't use 4GB properly. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 597580 | 2007-10-03 20:27:00 | All that gear (minus the 200gb hdd and cd / dvd drives) is costing me under 2k, coming from an over-sea site (and I've used it before, so it's ligit), incl. postage. I'm wanting to run Windows XP with this machine - not going to touch Vista until I HAVE to lol. So keeping that in mind, stay with the 2gb ram? And whats wrong with MSI? I know that Asus and Gbyt make reallyt good stuff but at the end of the day don't all the cards come out of the same factory, with the same chips, their just marketed/packaged differently?!?! Also I have never over clocked a computer, I have no idea how to but it is something I may like to do, so might stay with the overclock-able memeory. Might have to post once I have all the gear on how to get that done ;) |
Pourhommenz (104) | ||
| 597581 | 2007-10-03 21:03:00 | And finally - I know VERY little about memory - have never understood it really - and am wondering if the one I have selected is going to be suitable? And if I decide to run Vista on the computer - will I notice a difference between having 2gb and 4gb of ram in the computer? Not much point in going over 3Gb RAM as Vista won't see much more than 3.5 any way. As pointed out - Vista runs quite happy at 2Gb, if gaming then sure pump it up, but going over 3Gb will usually be wasting money. Quoted form another MS site [Quote] If a PC is installed with 4GB of system memory, the computer itself will register 4GB but Windows Vista/XP will not be able to recognize it all. It's nothing to fret over, this is a normal limitation with 32 bit operating systems. The operating system will report 3.5GB or so, but the "missing memory" (varies between 500MB-750MB) is there, reserved for hardware devices.[End] From the other post [Quote] Also I have never over clocked a computer, I have no idea how to but it is something I may like to do, so might stay with the overclock-able memeory. Might have to post once I have all the gear on how to get that done [end] If you overclock be VERY careful - most manufactures will state that overclocking WILL void you warranty on the parts. If you overclock and something fries - don't expect the warranty to be upheld. |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 597582 | 2007-10-03 21:10:00 | I’d rather either wait for Penryn – which should be out soon shouldn’t it? Or I’d actually rather get one of the Core 2 Duo 1333 MHz CPU’s – Quad still seems overkill to me at this stage, obviously it isn’t a bad thing if you are futureproofing. | Enigmur (10547) | ||
| 1 | |||||