• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Advice on Intel Build Plans?

H

hstearns4

n00b
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
23
I am looking to build a system that will be used mostly for 2D photo editing (Photoshop), with some video editing and movies, Windows XP Pro. It will not be used for gaming.

Here are my current thoughts based on available budget and the above:

Intel E8400 Core Duo CPU
Zalman 9700 CPU Fan
Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L Motherboard
XFX PVT84JUSD4 GeForce 8600GT 256MB Video Card
GSkill 4GB (2x2GB) DDR2 800
Seagate Barracuda ES.2 ST3250310NS 250GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA HD
2xWD Caviar SE16 WD6400AAKS 640GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA HD
CORSAIR CMPSU-550VX ATX12V V2.2 550W Power Supply

Am I overlooking anything, any suggestions?
 
Drop the Zalman 9700. There are much better HSF out there for lower prices:

Scythe SCNJ-1100P Ninja HSF - $36
Xigmatek HDT-S1283 120mm Rifle HSF - $37
Tuniq Tower 120 HSF - $45
ZEROtherm Nirvana NV120 120mm HSF - $50
Thermalright Ultima-90 HSF - $46 & Panaflo FBA09A12M 92mm Fan - $3

If you want to gamble a little bit, get this drive instead:
Western Digital WD3200AAKS 320GB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - $72

You might get the newer revision of that drive with a 320GB platter. If so, it'll be just as fast as the 640GB drives you chose. Even if you don't get the newer revision, you do get an extra 70GB of storage for $8 less.

For video and photoshop editing, I would recommend getting a quad-core Q6600 CPU. Those apps have been shown to benefit from quad-cores. Not a bad deal for $200:
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 CPU - $200

Though the E8400 should be fine if you don't want to jump (or don't believe) the quad-core bandwagon.
 
For the price...I would suggest

Xigmatek S1283 instead of Zalman 9700
any brand 8800GT can be had for about $145AR (your choice)
you have about 1 1/2 hr left to get in on the A-data 4GB (2x2GB) DDR2-800 for $55AR
ES series you probably know why but I am just curious as to why with the ES.2 series
maybe 2xSamsung F1 750GB instead for the same price (more storage)
you could probably power all that with a quality Antec 380W PSU
Remember to get XP Pro x64
 
SFaznSpEEdSTeR said:
any brand 8800GT can be had for about $145AR (your choice)
Click to expand...

:confused:
I never understand why people insist on upgrading video for machines that the OP always says are not going to be used for gaming. The 8600gt he has chosen is less expensive and fine.

For the OP, like other other poster said, I would consider a quad since you intend to be doing some video editing as well. Q6600 or Q9300
 
I'll change out the processor for the Q6600, CPU fan for the Xigmatek S1283, and take a gamble on the WD 320 as suggested. What advantages would I miss out on by going with the 32 bit version of XP pro vs the 64 bit version? I am not building this for myself so I'm a bit hesitant about going in that direction unless there are a lot of advantages and few issues with the x64 version. Thanks again for your replies.
 
There are some apps out there that cannot work in a 64bit OS environment. So double check that all of the apps that your "customer" plans to use with this system actually work in a 64bit environment.

The only major problem with going with 32bit XP is that you can only use up to 3.5GB of RAM. If you go with a 64bit XP, you'll be able to use all 4GB+ of RAM. However, IIRC, Windows XP 64bit isn't as well supported, driver and app wise, as 32bit XP or Vista 64bit.
 
As some others noted, it would be completely ridiculous for you to get an E8400 over a Q6600 for your usage, so good idea changing that.

Do not get XP Pro 64, its a bastardized version of Windows Server 2003, and you will run into issues sooner or later. When you do find those issues, no one will really care since so few people run that OS. Also, with that configuration you are speccing out, Vista 64 is faster. I've had Vista 64, XP Pro 64 SP2, and XP Pro 32 SP3 on the system in my sig, Vista definitely operates better than either version of XP when you have 4GB of RAM. With 2GB, XP is faster.
 
Support in Vista x64 is MUCH improved since its launch. To date, the only application that will not work for me in Vista x64 is the Cisco VPN client. There are no plans by Cisco to release a compatible version.



 
capreppy said:
Support in Vista x64 is MUCH improved since its launch. To date, the only application that will not work for me in Vista x64 is the Cisco VPN client. There are no plans by Cisco to release a compatible version.
Click to expand...

That is one of my problems. My work stays on XP x32 for many reasons.

Cisco is moving to a new SSL client which supports 64-bit Windows just fine, but it only works on their ASA firewalls with version 8.0, and the cost is now per client. :mad:

-Robert
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top