Please help me pick my new system hardware!

F

Frosteh

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
3,664
Ok building a new system, moving away from IDE, 32bit AMD, and AGP to SATA, 64bit AMD, and PCI Express

Im not looking at a top of the range performance PC the best money can buy, because to be quite frank I dont like spending 200-300% more for the last 10-20% power

System so far Im wanting to get is

- 64Bit 4000+ AMD (San Diego)
- 2x1Gb PC3200 Crucial RAM
- Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
- 2xW&D 36.7 Gb Raptor 10,000 RPM which will sit as RAID 0 for extra speed
- Possible IDE 2ndry drive (very large, in the order of 300GB)
- Possible Hiper HPU-4K580-MK Type R 580W Modular ATX2.2 PSU
- Nvidia 7800 Something or other, not sure yet, not getting 2 for SLI now

I have some questions about this to help me decide to stay with what I have or chose something else

1) With this kind of setup would moving over from Crucial standard RAM to performance RAM make any real difference? Theres lots of really expensive performance RAM around which is really expensive, but if its only for the sake of 1-2 extra FPS then I dont want it.

2) SATA RAID
2a) RAID 0 is where you double the speed of your drive read/write time?
2b) Does RAID 0 use up anymore space than normal? Will I still get my full 2x36.7 Gb of space?
2c) Can I boot of SATA RAID for windows while I also have an IDE drive plugged in used for storage?

3) Motherboard
3a) Motherboard SLI, i see from the specs page that in SLI mode you get 2 x8 speed PCI express ports rather than 1 x16 speed port, with the new 7800 Range of video cards would a future SLI setup be possible? Basically what im asking is do the 7800 cards need 2 x16 PCI express slots or are they equally as fast with 2 x8 speed.
3b)

4) Power supply
4a) Is the above power supply any good, im going to be running in future 2x raptor drives, 1x ide backup drive, 1x optical drive (or maybe 2 when new dvd is out) and 2 7800 cards at some stage (4 molex needed). Which is a lot in total, 2+2+2+2+1 molex connectors before case fans etc
4b) Would a dual PSU system be preferable, or that new 1kw PSU?

5) Video card - i want Nvidia SLI full stop (no offering ATI please)
5a) Whats a good buy from the 7800 Range, I dont think I want the fastest card I want just under it, in my previous experience the GT's have clocked to the Ultra speeds for a lot of cards, my 6800 GT reaches Ultra speeds easy.
5b) Is SLI in a years time going to be possible, is there likly to be no similar SLI cards around then?

6) CPU - again dont want to go for the best (fx) because the price to performance ratio is really silly, and i really dont have that kind of money
6a) How good overclocker is the 64bit 4000+, would a slower CPU be worth overclocking to 4000 speeds? Most high end cpu's are the same hardware as the slower ones in which case they're sorta pre overclocked and dont have much further headroom for overclocking - is this the case here?
6b) Why does dual core do so lame in benchmarks (single 64 bit seems almost as good for much cheaper)

Thats all for now, any help on any of the questions would be greatly apreciated, I hope to finalise what i want exactly and buy it all in about 1-2 weeks time, ready for chrimbo :)

Please feel free to suggest any alternate parts, I will update as I chose different ones and finalise my choices, going to pick a video card now :)
 
1) For the CPU I would go with an Opteron 165 or 170. The 4000s are great, but aren't dual core. And though dual core is not really a big deal now, I think it would help multitasking, especially when Vista comes out.
2) - 2xW&D 36.7 Gb Raptor 10,000 RPM which will sit as RAID 0 for extra speed >> Seem like a Waste of money
I would buy some 200 GB 16mb cache SATAII drives with NCQ...
Maybe a DiamondMax 16?

6b) Why does dual core do so lame in benchmarks (single 64 bit seems almost as good for much cheaper)
Becaue the benchmarking software isn't made to take advantage of the dual cores.
 
Thanks for the info, i've not heard of SATAII

either way i want a smaller faster sub 100 gb primary drive and a larger slower 2ndry stroage drive to keep my work safe in case my primary craps out

I will look into dual core but if theres no benchmarks out showing their true perofrmance increase im not likly to buy one, besides the power i really want is for games which dont really use that tech atm iirc.

Thanks for your input.
 
I think i want to stay with the 2xraptor drives, it gives me what I need a very fast but small primary hard drive which can run windows and my games, then get a larger 2ndy hdd which i can just use for storage, like movies etc, that doesnt need to be fast.
 
Pardon my bluntness, but I don't like your choices at all.

1. Switch the 4000+ out for an Opteron 170. I believe they cost roughly the same, but a 170 will outlast a 4000+ by miles. Dual-core is the only way to go.

2. 2x36GB? Don't even bother with a Raptor. Tests have proven that the Raptor is no faster than a Seagate SATA drive. I would recommend you get two (2) of their 160GB 7200.9 series. Those are SATAII and are great drives.

3. The A8N-SLI Deluxe is a bad idea. I can't tell you how many horror stories I've heard about it. The A8N-SLI Premium, however, is a good idea. But honestly, don't bother with SLI. It's not worth it unless you're immediately getting 2 cards. By the time you get the money for the next one, a better single card will be out. I would go with the DFI Ultra-D or the Abit AN8 Ultra.

4. Don't get that PSU. It's not very good, in short. I would go with an Enermax Liberty 500W PSU, or an Antec NeoHE 500W. Both are modular, and are much more stable and reliable than the Hiper.

5. The 7800GT is a perfect choice, in my opinion. The GTX is too fast to be useful unless you crave frames like a heroin addict. I would go with eVGA or Leadtek. eVGA's warranty and Customer Service is unparalleled, and Leadtek's bundles are always nice to have. Or, if you want to risk non-existent tech support, go for the XFX 7800GT, and you'll get Call of Duty 2 for free. :)
 
Wesley1357 said:
what monitor are you getting? get a dell 20.1" not the wide-screen one.
Click to expand...

After seeing both, I really prefer the widescreen. Movies and games both look phenomenal on it.

2005FPW > 2001FP
 
i think a 4:3 screen looks bigger. did you choose the w.s. because of the resolution?
 
Bona Fide said:
Pardon my bluntness, but I don't like your choices at all.

1. Switch the 4000+ out for an Opteron 170. I believe they cost roughly the same, but a 170 will outlast a 4000+ by miles. Dual-core is the only way to go.

2. 2x36GB? Don't even bother with a Raptor. Tests have proven that the Raptor is no faster than a Seagate SATA drive. I would recommend you get two (2) of their 160GB 7200.9 series. Those are SATAII and are great drives.

3. The A8N-SLI Deluxe is a bad idea. I can't tell you how many horror stories I've heard about it. The A8N-SLI Premium, however, is a good idea. But honestly, don't bother with SLI. It's not worth it unless you're immediately getting 2 cards. By the time you get the money for the next one, a better single card will be out. I would go with the DFI Ultra-D or the Abit AN8 Ultra.

4. Don't get that PSU. It's not very good, in short. I would go with an Enermax Liberty 500W PSU, or an Antec NeoHE 500W. Both are modular, and are much more stable and reliable than the Hiper.

5. The 7800GT is a perfect choice, in my opinion. The GTX is too fast to be useful unless you crave frames like a heroin addict. I would go with eVGA or Leadtek. eVGA's warranty and Customer Service is unparalleled, and Leadtek's bundles are always nice to have. Or, if you want to risk non-existent tech support, go for the XFX 7800GT, and you'll get Call of Duty 2 for free. :)
Click to expand...


I will probably go with the 7800 GT, i have a funny feeling that in about a years time you wont be able to get the exact card i need to make SLI so it might not be worth it, i may drop the SLI mobo for a normal PCI one.

The PSU was just a guess, I will probably go for an antec one since i hear they're reliable.

I don't want to have a large set of hard drives for my primary I want to keep that small and fast so when i rebuild my system (reinstall windows etc) i dont have to backup my stuff. The Raptors arent too expensive, and 2x small fast drive in raid should really make a good boot drive. I'd really like to stick with the Raptors unless theres another faster drive out there for SATA which comes in small sizes.

As for the CPU, i will look at dual core but i see no real performance benefits now and I dont think games that really take advantage of this will be out for a while, plus from what i've seen they're a fair bit more expensive! I will continue to look into this.
 
Bona Fide said:
After seeing both, I really prefer the widescreen. Movies and games both look phenomenal on it.

2005FPW > 2001FP
Click to expand...
Not to start a flame or anything BUT..what about the whole HDCP thing? I don't like HDCP or the whole idea of it, BUT <b>if</b> HDCP compliant monitors are going to be required to play HD movies next year, or in the near future, then buying the 2005 would be sort of a waste of money?
 
Dual core sounds good but i've seen some of the benchmarks, for most games the 64 4000+ beats the X2 3800 and the X2 4200 in pretty much all the game benchmarks, and the X2 costs about £40 more ontop of the £230 for 64 4000+

I think its too much to ask for that games all start taking advantage of dual core fast enough so that I will get good use out of it before I upgrade again in say 18-24 months time.

I just dont think i can justify spending that much extra on a cpu which plays games equally or slower :/

*edit*

Also how about the Asus A8N-E mobo? A non SLI PCI-E solution, i really like Asus because everything of theirs in the past has been so damn good.
 
Frosteh said:
Dual core sounds good but i've seen some of the benchmarks, for most games the 64 4000+ beats the X2 3800 and the X2 4200 in pretty much all the game benchmarks, and the X2 costs about £40 more ontop of the £230 for 64 4000+

I think its too much to ask for that games all start taking advantage of dual core fast enough so that I will get good use out of it before I upgrade again in say 18-24 months time.

I just dont think i can justify spending that much extra on a cpu which plays games equally or slower :/
Click to expand...

If you've got your mind set on going single core, I think the 3700+ is a better choice than the 4000+. I don't think the 4000+ is worth the extra $100. Although i would take another look at the Opterons and x2's before i made my final decision. a 3800+ X2 can be had for less than a 4000+.
 
Can someone link me to some benchmarks for the X2's which use benchmarks capable of taking advantage of dual core.

So far I have seen only the X2 4800 really compete against the 64 4000+ and its a LOT more expensive.

Most of the power im going to want is for gaming pure and simple, im not one of those people that like to encode mp3's and encode dvd's and run 500 apps at the same time, I just don''t use my desktop like that, all my spare applications are cut down so only what I need runs at any one time.

I know dual core is probably more future proof but I think jumping straight into that tech so early isn't such a smart idea, for starters price per performance right now is a lot worse than single core.

And this bad boy seems to pull the same kind of frame rate as a FX53 which isn't half bad considering its price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top