Ok...pulling trigger today last minute changes?

R

Reagent

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
238
First off thanks for all the advice thusfar.

One last run through the boards before I press "order".

Here Is what I have ended up with so far.

$36=NEC 16xDVDR
$44=Cooler Master Centurion 5 case
$58=2x WD 250gb SATA II HD's
$99=OCZ Modstream 520w PSU
$190=Asus A8R32- MVP delux
$289=SAPP X1800XT
$326=Opteron 165 Retail CPU
$192=2x1gb sticks G.SKill Extreme PC4000 RAM
$140=Win XP pro 64bit______________________________
$1374


Missing anything? Need any cables? Can I get something for a better price or better value going with another manufacturer etc?

WIll order this afternoon.

Thanks again.
 
Why do you want 64-bit Windows? You've only got two gigs of memory.
 
mikeblas said:
Why do you want 64-bit Windows? You've only got two gigs of memory.
Click to expand...
yea wtf dose XP64 do that it needs more than 2gb???


-IMO, that PSU is a waste of money at 100$, get something better. refear to the powersupply buy guide sticky in the PSU baord.. find on that fits you

-If not going raptors, I strongly sugest getting HDDs that are 7200rpm with 16mb cache. The WD 16mb cache drive are damm good!


EDIT: Where the funk you getting 250gb ED SATA2 drive fore $58
 
there's no real advantage right now with using windows 64 bit. personally i'd pick up media center edition, you get all the media center stuff, pretty much xp pro (not xp home as many think), and oftentimes cheaper than xp pro.
 
o0akoni0o said:
there's no real advantage right now with using windows 64 bit.
Click to expand...
Well, there can be, depending on the application. It's hard to think of any advantage on a machine with only two gigs of memory, though.
 
mikeblas said:
Well, there can be, depending on the application. It's hard to think of any advantage on a machine with only two gigs of memory, though.
Click to expand...


That twice now that you have sugested than XP64 bit will preform better with more than 2gb or will not preforme as good as XPx86 unless more than 2gb is used... got somethign to back this up? XP and XP64 both at this point and time dont need and will not use anymroe that 2gb to any advantage. (unless the app calls for it)

please stop implying that he should not get 64-bit unless he gets mroe ram..


I run Xp64 bit simpley becasue day to day tasks (even 32bit apps) feel a bit faster that 32bit XP (as yes I ONLY have 2gb DDR)
 
Sorry had to do some yard work.

The reason I was getting XP pro 64 bit was..... because it is the same price as XP Pro.

I figure why not get the 64 bit, i will probably be switching out to vista in 1.5yrs or 2 anyhow.

Is there any drawbacks to getting the 64 bit vs the normal?

-IMO, that PSU is a waste of money at 100$, get something better. refear to the powersupply buy guide sticky in the PSU baord.. find on that fits you

-If not going raptors, I strongly sugest getting HDDs that are 7200rpm with 16mb cache. The WD 16mb cache drive are damm good!


EDIT: Where the funk you getting 250gb ED SATA2 drive fore $58
Click to expand...
Umm. The PSU IS one of the ones from the PSU guide...in fact the price they list for it is $120..granted the list is probably old.

Here is the exact quote from the PSU guide.

PSU guide said:
Let's make this official.

If you can afford the PC P&C 510SLI for $219 get it!

If not get the OCZ PowerStream 520W for around $120.

But at the very least get the Enermax 535W or Fortron 550W for $79!
Click to expand...
The hard drive I have listed above is the WD 250gb 16mb cache 7200RPM drive.

If you buy them with the ram I have listed it is a combo deal at the Egg. Buy the RAM for 192 get the HD for 58 bucks.

Any other advice?

No other wires, fans, Something I am forgetting?
 
I(illa Bee said:
That twice now that you have sugested than XP64 bit will preform better with more than 2gb or will not preforme as good as XPx86 unless more than 2gb is used... got somethign to back this up? XP and XP64 both at this point and time dont need and will not use anymroe that 2gb to any advantage. (unless the app calls for it)
Click to expand...

If you think I've said that XP64 won't perform as well as XP32 without the additional memory, I think you've misunderstood me.

You've answered your question yourself: there are apps that need the additional memory, that "call for it", and will get more usable memory under XP64.

Windows XP and XP64 can both use memory above two gigs to an advantage. See this post, and let me know if you have any questions.

I(illa Bee said:
please stop implying that he should not get 64-bit unless he gets mroe ram..
Click to expand...
I'm not implying it; I'm saying so outright. Win64 can be faster, we're not quite out of the woods for drivers. Depending on the application, maybe it's worth it and maybe it ain't. At this point, I think it's not worth dealing with the trouble for most applications until the extra memory is there, and is a necessity for the apps in question.
 
DejaWiz said:
I recommend this case instead. The side facing hdd bays will give your video card(s) plenty of room without the possibility of interference from wires and cables.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16811119094


Check out this psu as well:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16817103931


Other than that, you have a pretty decend selection of components.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the tip, Missed that case when shopping earlier.

Oh and BTW

I(illa Bee said:
-IMO, that PSU is a waste of money at 100$, get something better. refear to the powersupply buy guide sticky in the PSU baord.. find on that fits you
Click to expand...
You are correct. I wasn't paying attention. The PSU guide plainly states POWERSTREAM....the one I had picked out is a MODstream.

Sometimes it pays to be able to read properly.

Will probably grab the Antec one listed above.
 
I actually like my PowerStream. You just need to remember that it is a inch longer than a standard PSU. Might have some trouble with your cd drives going in all the way. I dont know how deep the Cent 5 case is.

As far as the Win XP 64 OS goes, there are some programs out there that don't support it and some drivers aswell. If it were me I would go the safe road and pick up the XP Pro but dont let that stop your from getting it.

Also was wondering about the memory. Do you plan on OC'n? Im guessing you are just because of the Opty 165 and the 4000 memory. But if your not, pick up some Corsair or OCZ DDR 400.

Plan on using the factory heatsink? The Opty HS's are pretty good I hear. Maybe some thermal paste, AS5? Have all the fans u need?

That about covers it. ;)
 
I took DejaWiz advice and grabbed the case and PSU he suggested.

I also added some AS5 like Voltron suggested, forgot completely that the supplied paste usually was sub par.

To answer the question I plan on running this system up and see what it can do with the stock HSF before purchasing anything aftermarket.

If I can turn something around 2.5 with the stock opty cooler I will probably be happy.

Total cost for the above system delivered to my door was only 1346.

I also downgraded the OS to XP home. I have a brandnew never installed Pro version sitting on my desk to put in the new machine, and will load XP home on the computer I am typing on now and give it to the wife.

BTW thanks for all the help.... building a computer is extremely fun....but IMO there is way too many options, makes my head hurt thinking about it.
 
Reagent said:
The hard drive I have listed above is the WD 250gb 16mb cache 7200RPM drive.

If you buy them with the ram I have listed it is a combo deal at the Egg. Buy the RAM for 192 get the HD for 58 bucks.
Click to expand...
All the items are from New egg.
 
I agree, I love building PC's but there are so many options it's hard what to choose. In most cases u really can't go wrong but it's still hard to choose. I think I researched my rig for atleat a month before I took the dive. Gotta love that feeling when everything comes together though. :D
 
mikeblas said:
If you think I've said that XP64 won't perform as well as XP32 without the additional memory, I think you've misunderstood me.

You've answered your question yourself: there are apps that need the additional memory, that "call for it", and will get more usable memory under XP64.

Windows XP and XP64 can both use memory above two gigs to an advantage. See this post, and let me know if you have any questions.


I'm not implying it; I'm saying so outright. Win64 can be faster, we're not quite out of the woods for drivers. Depending on the application, maybe it's worth it and maybe it ain't. At this point, I think it's not worth dealing with the trouble for most applications until the extra memory is there, and is a necessity for the apps in question.
Click to expand...
Mike, I'm goona have to agree with I(illa Bee on this one. >2GB is only useful if you run server apps or if you HEAVILY multitask (read: several high end programs at once). 2GB won't force loaded files to the PF; 2x1GB typically has slower timings than 2x512 (or in your case 4x1GB vs. 4x512); many AMD boards run 333 and/or 2T with 4 sticks of RAM. So why is >2GB Required?

And your link doesn't say anything about performance advantages with >2GB, only that windowsXP supports 1GB+ with PAE.

Yes, XP64 can be faster - the proof is even shown in WOW64 - the 64-bit WinXP x86 emulator + application run about the same speed as the x86 app alone in x86 WinXP. But what does this have to do with >2GB of memory?
 
Vette5885 said:
>2GB is only useful if you run server apps or if you HEAVILY multitask (read: several high end programs at once).
Click to expand...
There are lots of workstation apps that are memory-intensive. Content creation applications, as a broad category, fall into that classification.

Vette5885 said:
So why is >2GB Required?
Click to expand...
Win64 is harder to setup (because finding drivers isn't always easy). The vast majoirty of apps aren't available in 64-bit native versions, so you've capped the inherent benefit from the processor. So what benefit do you think you win on Win64 aside from memory address space? What memory address space benefit do you gain if you're not pushing the limit of physical memory in the first place?

Why would someone deal with a harder setup, less available hardware, and have fewer available applications if they're not getting some substantial gain in return for it?

Vette5885 said:
And your link doesn't say anything about performance advantages with >2GB, only that windowsXP supports 1GB+ with PAE.
Click to expand...
Actually, it doesn't say that WindowsXP supports 1GB+ with PAE. It says that WindowsXP supports 4GB even without PAE.

All that aside, I'm not sure what it is you're specifically agreeing with (or disagreeing with).
 
mikeblas said:
There are lots of workstation apps that are memory-intensive. Content creation applications, as a broad category, fall into that classification.
Click to expand...
Most people aren't into content creation beyond HTML and simple programming. This question has to go back to the OP to see if 4GB is neccessary.

mikeblas said:
Win64 is harder to setup (because finding drivers isn't always easy). The vast majoirty of apps aren't available in 64-bit native versions, so you've capped the inherent benefit from the processor. So what benefit do you think you win on Win64 aside from memory address space? What memory address space benefit do you gain if you're not pushing the limit of physical memory in the first place?

Why would someone deal with a harder setup, less available hardware, and have fewer available applications if they're not getting some substantial gain in return for it?
Click to expand...
You said it three times now. What performance advatage? I am asking you, so please answer, what performance gain is there with 4GB over 2GB when moving from XP x86 to XP64? Apps in XP64 use the same memory as XP x86. So what benefit?

mikeblas said:
Actually, it doesn't say that WindowsXP supports 1GB+ with PAE. It says that WindowsXP supports 4GB even without PAE.
Click to expand...
Ok, fine. But the link didn't say anything about better performance with 4GB over 2GB - it only spoke of memory addressing.

mikeblas said:
All that aside, I'm not sure what it is you're specifically agreeing with (or disagreeing with).
Click to expand...
I'm disagreeing that XP64 requires more than 2GB of ram. You said that XP64 requires >2GB. You haven't stated why, besides 'some content creation'.

And I apologize to OP for threadcrapping. I'm just trying to figure out why Mike says that >2GB is required for your XP64 system, and if its really necessary.
 
Vette5885 said:
I'm disagreeing that XP64 requires more than 2GB of ram. You said that XP64 requires >2GB. You haven't stated why, besides 'some content creation'.
Click to expand...
I haven't said that XP64 requires more than 2GB of RAM. It'll probably run with less than 512 megs.

What I did say was that I don't see the value of using Win64 over WinXP on a machine that doesn't have two gigabytes or more of physical memory.
 
mikeblas said:
Why do you want 64-bit Windows? You've only got two gigs of memory.
Click to expand...
mikeblas said:
Well, there can be, depending on the application. It's hard to think of any advantage on a machine with only two gigs of memory, though.
Click to expand...
But you haven't given any reason as to why more than 2GB would be beneficial to the OP.
 
Vette5885 said:
But you haven't given any reason as to why more than 2GB would be beneficial to the OP.
Click to expand...
You're turning my questions to the OP inside out.

If the OP doesn't need more than two gigs of memory, I don't think the OP needs WinXP64. If the OP does need more than 2 gigs of memory, maybe the OP can use WinXP64 to benefit.
 
mikeblas said:
You're turning my questions to the OP inside out.

If the OP doesn't need more than two gigs of memory, I don't think the OP needs WinXP64. If the OP does need more than 2 gigs of memory, maybe the OP can use WinXP64 to benefit.
Click to expand...
Well then your questions were not very clear.

Plus this comment:
mikeblas said:
It's hard to think of any advantage on a machine with only two gigs of memory, though.
Click to expand...
Pretty much says that you should have more than 2GB of memory if you want to use XP64, as there is no advantage to XP64 if you 'only' have 2GB. I.E. you need to get more than 2GB of memory to have an advantage in using XP64.

Yet you haven't said why there is an advantage and you haven't said what the advantage is. You've simply said 'you only have 2GB of ram, so why use XP64?'. You would use XP64 because of the speed advatage that comes with 64-bit Windows (and specifically the newer XP64 Kernel that is optimized for XP64). As I said in this post...

Yes, XP64 can be faster - the proof is even shown in WOW64 - the 64-bit WinXP x86 emulator + application run about the same speed as the x86 app alone in x86 WinXP. But what does this have to do with >2GB of memory?
Click to expand...
Yet you haven't stated anything as to why there is an advantage to having >2GB of memory in XP64...i.e. the disadvantage of using 'only' 2GB in XP64.
 
Being told what I did say and what I didn't say, plus how I said it on top of all that, is becoming pretty tiring. I'll give it one last shot, though; I'm a gamer.

Let's stipulate that the OP doesn't do anything that requires lots of memory. He builds the machine he spec'ed, with a gig of memory. Should he get WinXP64? I'd say no; WinXP64 doesn't provide an advantage here. The disadvantages caused by WinXP64 aren't worth any win that I'd expect it to bring to the table.

On the other hand, let's imagine that the OP does do memory-intensive stuff, whatever it is. He decides to build a rig with four gigs of memory. Should he get WinXP64? He could, and I think he would benefit from it. The reason that he would benefit is that WinXP64 offers more address space to spread the memory around. Holes in the address space for devices don't come out of the usable physical memory. That leaves more memory for the system and its applications, and that's a good benefit.

Does that clear it up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top