Building a comp for under $1000?

[Elvish Legion]

Lets see if I did this right:

Mother Board: ASUS P4P800SE Socket 478 Intel 865PE ATX Intel Motherboard
Max ram 4 gig (4 slots) ddr 400 (pc3200) (Price: 93.50)

Processor: Intel Pentium 4 3.2E Prescott 800MHz FSB 1MB L2 Cache Socket 478 Processor(Price: 232)

Case: XION Black XION II XON-103 SECC Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case 450W Power Supply (price: 64.99)

Hard Drive: SAMSUNG SpinPoint P Series SP2514N 250GB 7200 RPM 8MB Cache IDE Ultra ATA133 Hard Drive (Price: 98.99)

Optical Drive: LITE-ON Black 16X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 8X DVD+R DL 16X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-R 24X CD-RW 48X CD-ROM 2M Cache ATAPI/E-IDE DVD Burner (Price: 39.9)

Sound Card: Soundblaster live 24 bit (already have current comp can use onboard)

Video Card: XFX PVT42GUAD7 Geforce 6800GS 256MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card (Price: 195)

Power Supply: ASPIRE ATX-AS520W BLACK ATX 520W Power Supply 115/230 V CB IEC 950/ TUV EN 60950/ UL 1950/ CSA 950 (Price 59.9)

Keyboard: LITE-ON SK-1789/BS 2-Tone 104 Normal Keys 14 Function Keys PS/2 Wired Slim Keyboard (6.25)

Ram: CORSAIR ValueSelect 512MB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Unbuffered DDR 400 (PC 3200) System Memory (x4) (price 39)

Mouse: POWMAX MS42GF-BL 2-Tone 3 Buttons 1x Wheel USB + PS/2 Optical COOLING FAN MOUSE(price: 9.50)

Total Price: 956.21

Is that good? I tried to do a good mix of value and preformance and I think this one quailifies...and will I need like thermal paste?

Elvish

[Bandit]

EL,
Looks good except for the Intel part.. Your much better off with AMD ;)
I would also go with Seagate SATA150, 7200RPM hard drive. They are the faster drives unless you opt for a WesternDigital Raptor drive.
Cheers,
Joey

[morphodone]

That motherboard does not support pci express. You would need an agp video card.

[Leigh]

I assume you bought all the bits new and built it yourself? If so, I think you did well. I think you maybe hard pushed to find an equivalent PC in the local shops for that price. After my recent experience building a PC (read below) I think you get a better deal when doing it yourself.

I just finished building a second family PC and was driven entirely by price so my goal was to go for a mid-range PC and not spend $$ on a top-of-the-range system. I bought all the bits from eBay second-hand except the AMD 64 3400+ processor ($168 Canadian), an Nvidia FX5500 w/256MB ($45 Canadian) and 512MB Kingston RAM ($35 Canadian). I bought these items on eBay but they brand new. The whole PC cost me $300 CDN and I ended up with a very high spec system - higher than I had expected. Postage cost me about another $200 as most of the parts came from the States and the UK. I would certainly do this again. Would I recommend others to do this? No, not unless you know what to look for and are confident in putting everything together. Also remember, there's no warranty when buying second-hand parts. I was willing to take the risk for a low end PC. Friends have asked me to build them a PC but I have refused for the reasons above.

[mstlyevil]

At the moment AMD outperforms Intel. I would get a Asus socket 939 Nforce 4 mother board and then go with a Athlon 64 X2 processor that is in your price range. Also you will need to get DDR1 RAM instead of DDR2 but AMD outperforms Intel in memory management even using DDR1. That would be my suggestion.

[morphodone]

I'll have to agree that you'll get better performace for the money with AMD. A socket 939 cpu with an nVidia nforce 4 ultra motherboard is a great option.

[WildTangent]

Even if you must have Intel, thats a crappy motherboard/CPU choice. Socket 478 is obsolete, and the Prescott CPUs could be passed off as miniature space heaters. If I were you, I'd go with AMD. They're cheaper anyway :)

-Wild

[mips]

I'll also say AMD !

And while you are at it ditch the samsung HD and get 1. Seagate 2. Western Digital.

[Elvish Legion]

But could an amd act as a 3.0? I know they run faster than clocked...but 3.0+ fast? I ask because this is going to be my gaming rig (and fears steep requirments call for at least a 3.0 proc)

So change the mobo to an amd spec and go with what? An amd 64 4000+if possible for that price (and thankss for pointing no PCI in that mobo over looked it.)

Yes this is going to be hand built, just a matter of buying the parts (CPU and GPU first as they cost the most) then mobo, and ram....after that everything else is cheap (gotta admit thats a nice deal on ram)

[ember]

I'd say, go with an AMD 3000+, but upgrade your configuration to 1GB of RAM. Having too small RAM really sucks, not only in games but also image editing, programming and daily work.

[morphodone]

I always have a quick look at a guide by pcperspective.

You can find it here (http://www.pcper.com/hwlb.php).

[Elvish Legion]

I'd say, go with an AMD 3000+, but upgrade your configuration to 1GB of RAM. Having too small RAM really sucks, not only in games but also image editing, programming and daily work.

The setup lists 4 sticks of 512 (2 gigs of ram total) best bang for the buck I could find (120 US for 2 gigs) I'm trying to find a processor that canrival intels 3.0-3.2range

[ember]

Ah sorry - I overread the (x4) at the end of the line. So I correct myself and say:
Go with the AMD 3700+ (socket 939) - why? At least in Germany the 3700+ costs you about 230 Euros (boxed) while the 3800+ is at 300 Euros (boxed). And the performance of a 3700+ should surely outrun that of an Intel 3.2 GHz CPU.

[Elvish Legion]

Ok let me draw up the price/plans for an amd based with an nvidia4 set up, give me a few minutes

[xequence]

But could an amd act as a 3.0? I know they run faster than clocked...but 3.0+ fast? I ask because this is going to be my gaming rig (and fears steep requirments call for at least a 3.0 proc)

So change the mobo to an amd spec and go with what? An amd 64 4000+if possible for that price (and thankss for pointing no PCI in that mobo over looked it.)

The Ghz isnt a measure of how well it performs. Yes, it is sort of to some degree, but... I read somewhere it takes an intel P4 overclocked to 4.5Ghz to equal a 2.5Ghz AMD.

[Elvish Legion]

Mother Board: ASUS A8N5X Socket 939 NVIDIA nForce4 ATX AMD Motherboard
Max ram 4 gig (4 slots) ddr 400 (pc3200) (Price: 85.99)

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 3700+ San Diego 1GHz FSB 1MB L2 Cache Socket 939 Processor (Price 233)

Case: XION Black XION II XON-103 SECC Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case 450W Power Supply (price: 64.99)

Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 7200.8 ST3250823AS 250GB 7200 RPM 8MB Cache Serial ATA150 Hard Drive(price: 103)

Optical Drive: LITE-ON Black 16X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 8X DVD+R DL 16X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-R 24X CD-RW 48X CD-ROM 2M Cache ATAPI/E-IDE DVD Burner (Price: 39.9)

Sound Card: Soundblaster live 24 bit (already have current comp can use onboard)

Video Card: XFX PVT42GUAD7 Geforce 6800GS 256MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card (Price: 195)

Power Supply: ASPIRE ATX-AS520W BLACK ATX 520W Power Supply 115/230 V CB IEC 950/ TUV EN 60950/ UL 1950/ CSA 950 (Price 59.9)

Keyboard: LITE-ON SK-1789/BS 2-Tone 104 Normal Keys 14 Function Keys PS/2 Wired Slim Keyboard (6.25)

Ram: CORSAIR ValueSelect 512MB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Unbuffered DDR 400 (PC 3200) System Memory (x4) (price 39)

Mouse: POWMAX MS42GF-BL 2-Tone 3 Buttons 1x Wheel USB + PS/2 Optical COOLING FAN MOUSE(price: 9.50)

Total PRice: 953.71 not a lot cheaper, but higher quality CPU/Mobo (and likely a cooler system)

[TechSonic]

Better off with Maxtor as an HD though. Maxtor drives run very quiet and you never hear them when they are reading or writing to the drive. You know the grinding noise most drives make? Maxtor, only when the red drive led light, do you know it's working. I love my Maxtor drive, it's my Wester Digital that windows uses that is loud and it's new compaired to my Maxtor.

DO NOT GET SOUND BLASTER 24BIT!!! They are not fully compatible with LINUX!
Get Sound blaster Live 5.1 or the Digital for best performance or the C-Media 97 (AC97) Xear 5.1

[WildTangent]

Better off with Maxtor as an HD though. Maxtor drives run very quiet and you never hear them when they are reading or writing to the drive. You know the grinding noise most drives make? Maxtor, only when the red drive led light, do you know it's working.
What are you smoking man? I get the exact opposite with my maxtor drives. Seagate and WD are perfectly silent in my experience. Besides, if you search around the forums, you'll find a thread concerning Maxtor drives and their high failure rate, which many forum posters related their own experiences with.

Here it is: http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=51300&highlight=maxtor+failure

-Wild

[ember]

That looks better - I just noticed that I'd rather go with a Logitech MX 310 (about 30 Euros) and maybe a BenQ X500 or Microsoft Comfort Curve keyboard (about 20 Euros). I noticed that high quality input hardware is necessary for me (I'm working at this computer about 10 hours a day)

[Elvish Legion]

Better off with Maxtor as an HD though. Maxtor drives run very quiet and you never hear them when they are reading or writing to the drive. You know the grinding noise most drives make? Maxtor, only when the red drive led light, do you know it's working. I love my Maxtor drive, it's my Wester Digital that windows uses that is loud and it's new compaired to my Maxtor.

DO NOT GET SOUND BLASTER 24BIT!!! They are not fully compatible with LINUX!
Get Sound blaster Live 5.1 or the Digital for best performance or the C-Media 97 (AC97) Xear 5.1


I already have a sound blaster, would on board be better? I'd rather not buy a new sound card...

So over all the amd 64 looks better than the intel pentium 4?

And at WT and Tech: Everyone has there own personal horror story with each piece of hardware (much like everyone seems to know aperson maimed in a motorcycle accident but nobody mentions thosein car accidents)

[poofyhairguy]

But could an amd act as a 3.0? I know they run faster than clocked...but 3.0+ fast? I ask because this is going to be my gaming rig (and fears steep requirments call for at least a 3.0 proc)


Far better than a 3.0. Look at any benchmark- Intel procs suck for games. A LOT. Really. Go look on Tom's Hardware Guide. They are pro-Intel and even they can't hide it.....

I made a computer last month for myself:

$290 -AMD 64 3800 x2- it has the equivilent of two 3.2GHZ Pentium 4s on the inside
$85 - VIA motherboard (AGP for me because I recently bought a 6600 AGP but PCI is near same price).
$60 -case
$30 - dvd burner
$free -120GB hard disk (from dead uncle)
$150 -6600 GT (bought mid last year, would be cheaper now)
$40 -500W power supply
$80 - two 512mb RAM sticks
$5 -Arctic Silver
$free - old keyboard and mouse

$740

[mips]

What are you smoking man? I get the exact opposite with my maxtor drives. Seagate and WD are perfectly silent in my experience. Besides, if you search around the forums, you'll find a thread concerning Maxtor drives and their high failure rate, which many forum posters related their own experiences with.

Here it is: http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=51300&highlight=maxtor+failure

-Wild

Just to add. If the Maxtor crashes you are going to have a harder time recoving data than a Seagate. Phone a few specialist data recovery companies for their opinion on 3.5" drives. Personally I would not even go near a Maxtor. I remeber the HP desktops at work used Maxtor drives and they died on a very regular basis and I'm talking relatively new hardware, replacements fortunally were WD.

[mstlyevil]

I already have a sound blaster, would on board be better? I'd rather not buy a new sound card...

So over all the amd 64 looks better than the intel pentium 4?

And at WT and Tech: Everyone has there own personal horror story with each piece of hardware (much like everyone seems to know aperson maimed in a motorcycle accident but nobody mentions thosein car accidents)

If you are not a audiophile the onboard sound will work great. I bet that mobo has realtek 97 sound like my DFI Infinity Nforce 4 board does. Ubuntu configures it right out of the box with no problem.

[greenpenguin]

My computer is new(ish) from scratch - cost about $400. Not exactly fast, but enough :D

[Elvish Legion]

My computer is new(ish) from scratch - cost about $400. Not exactly fast, but enough :D

If all I wanted was basic stuff I could get away with that :p but this is going to be a pretty nice gaming rig (its real test is fear...thats what it has to be able to play)

[mips]

Well you are already exceeding the recommend system specs, no sweat ;)

[Elvish Legion]

Yeah I'm aiming for a VERY nice gaming rig (and 2 gigs of ram just seems liek the natural choice for linux as it seems very ram hardy)

[ember]

I already have a sound blaster, would on board be better? I'd rather not buy a new sound card...


If you do not care about surround sound or professional audio editing, onboard is perfect. Otherwise you may look into getting an Soundblaster Live 5.1 - they are old, but they really work well and they have hardware mixing (you should be able to get one for around 10 Euros)

[Elvish Legion]

So the guy at fry's fully explained (and let me play with) dual core, I must say I'm impressed, I thought I'd need two procs...maybe I'll up the price and go dual?

[mstlyevil]

So the guy at fry's fully explained (and let me play with) dual core, I must say I'm impressed, I thought I'd need two procs...maybe I'll up the price and go dual?

AMD X2 dual core processors are the only way to go if going dual core. And they fit in the same socket as a Athon 64 processor. (939 socket) Every benchmark and review site shows that AMD blows Intel out of the water when it comes to dual core. I suggest you do a little online research and not take just my word on this.

[poofyhairguy]

So the guy at fry's fully explained (and let me play with) dual core, I must say I'm impressed, I thought I'd need two procs...maybe I'll up the price and go dual?


The AMD 64 3800 X2 is on sale at Newegg for $300.

Strike while the iron is hot.

[Elvish Legion]

The AMD 64 3800 X2 is on sale at Newegg for $300.

Strike while the iron is hot.


Or the 4200 for 358 :)

[drizek]

ya, get an X2 amd and maybe a better video card. 1 gig of ram is plenty for now if youre on a budget.

i have the logitech mx 310 mouse and it is pretty good. I would stay away from a MS keyboard though, they are loud. logitech ones are much nicer. Of course, it all depends on your taste so you should try both out.

[mips]

ya, get an X2 amd and maybe a better video card. 1 gig of ram is plenty for now if youre on a budget.

i have the logitech mx 310 mouse and it is pretty good. I would stay away from a MS keyboard though, they are loud. logitech ones are much nicer. Of course, it all depends on your taste so you should try both out.

Second the MX310 or higher mouse. Also Using a logitech UltraX keyboard with laptop style keys and does not take up as much space as some keyboards out there.

[ember]

Hmm ... I've bad experience with UltraX - not that it was not nice, I liked it very much, but I expect a keyboard to last longer than a year (keys were not responding sometimes and eventually the '.' did only work every third or fourth time I hit it).

[mips]

Hmm ... I've bad experience with UltraX - not that it was not nice, I liked it very much, but I expect a keyboard to last longer than a year (keys were not responding sometimes and eventually the '.' did only work every third or fourth time I hit it).

Hmm, mine is still fine after about 11months but then again I'm not the worlds most active typist...

Could it not be from dirt or something ?

[buster]

Just a thought - I was in the process of ordering parts from a supplier in Toronto a few years back, and I was going to assemble my own computer. Warranty 1 month on each part. If they assembled it, the price was exactly the same with a full year's warranty. Guess which option I chose. And as it turned out one stick of memory failed.

[SolidAndShade]

Just some more advice... don't get a Maxtor hard drive. The two Maxtor hard drives I've had personal experience with (one in my own computer, one in a friend's) both failed within a year.

AMD dual core processors are great for multitasking, and I've got one myself, but if you're more oriented toward high-performance gaming, you may want to get a single core since you can get a considerably faster one for less money. Dual core is great if you want to run lots of programs at once with no slowdown. And whatever you do, go with AMD, since Intel's chips run hotter, consume more power and are worse for gaming and graphics.

If you want to save some money and you don't care about super-advanced 3d graphics, you could get an nvidia 6150/430 motherboard with onboard nvidia graphics and just use that. That's what I have and I can run Enemy Territory very smoothly, albeit without the highest graphic settings.

[kakashi]

no no no...
intell is waste of good money.


get
amd opteron 165 (CAN BE OVERCLOCKED TO BEAT A $ 1300 PROC) $300
dfi infinity nf4
x800 gto (7800 gt is you got cash)
raptor 150
512 mb ram+

ps. i just built this comp... just as in this weakend i assembled it (only diff in i got the x800gt)...its so good.

[tekwarren]

I'm an intel builder myself and it irks me when someone asks for comments on a system they have layed out and people start up the amd vs intel crap. Just because I don't use something doesn't mean I will bash it or tell someone else they shouldn't use it just becasue I don't.

That said I still build socket 478 systems for lower/mid range home users whom I know who are not going to be basing its use on such things as gaming or graphics or cpu intensive applications. Sure they will game and the system will handle it no problem but my aim is usually to save the customer money while providing a system that can handle a broad range of functions. I just finished putting together a very cheap but good quality system this weekend: 2.4ghz 768mb ram 80gb hd (maxtor...another brand I stand by but don't push on people) 128mb nvidia vid card...this is even probably more than this particular customer needs but I had it so I used it. I didn't use top of the line components but I know what to buy and what of the cheaper brands are ok for me to build with. I only payed like $35 for the motherboard and it has sata raid capabilies and dual channel mem slots...what does this mean to a average user? not a whole lot. The total system build was maybe a couple hundred bucks and I will sell it for around $350 easily and that covers the parts and my time. If you want the extra performance squeeze definately put the money into it. You could spend a lifetime trying let other people deside for you what you "should" or "should not" build with.

[mips]

I dont think people are trying bash Intel here. They are merely trying to give the individual a better option. It is a fact that Intel is lagging AMD in desktop & server processors. If it was a mobile setup I would recommend Pentium M processor as that is the only place that Intel shines at the moment but probably not for to long either.

I also know people that swear by Intel simply because of older experiences with AMD many years ago but we are in the year 2005 now and things have changed.

As for Maxtor drives they are truely shite and I can use no other classification for them. If you are keen on a Intel platform thats fine but by please stay away from Maxtor.

The only reason why most manufacturers use Intel is because of corporate agreements and that does not mean it is a better product. We can always revive the VHS vs Betamax argument here and the same goes for other products out there.

[tekwarren]

Actually its 2006 now ;) As to not start a debate here in someone elses thread I will simply say that I dissagree about Intel "lagging" and comparisons can be made sure but they are different technologies and in the end if someone puts for the effort to truely decide between the two it comes down to what their applied use(s) will be.

I also still disagree on the Maxtor comments,I've been using maxtors primarily for nearly 10yrs (I'm 25 now) and while I will use other HD's depending on the situation they still make a solid product.


My original point...now that I've allowed myself to think that I need to stick up for MY oppinions...was that the original poster was simply asking if he had all his bases covered for his new build. All of these comments about what he should or should not do and oppinions on his choices occomponied by negative comments against unpreffered brands/parts has nothing to do with the question at hand. I include my own comments/posts in that also.

Maybe I'm just feeling defensive today or maybe its because I feel "secure" in knowing that I DO build quality systems around the parts that others are saying are not of good enough quality to them. I don't mean to start an arguement so I'll stop here...differen't builders have different oppinions that's just the way it is. And to the original poster...good for you for stepping into the world of building.

;-)

[kakashi]

Actually its 2006 now ;) As to not start a debate here in someone elses thread I will simply say that I dissagree about Intel "lagging" and comparisons can be made sure but they are different technologies and in the end if someone puts for the effort to truely decide between the two it comes down to what their applied use(s) will be.

I also still disagree on the Maxtor comments,I've been using maxtors primarily for nearly 10yrs (I'm 25 now) and while I will use other HD's depending on the situation they still make a solid product.


My original point...now that I've allowed myself to think that I need to stick up for MY oppinions...was that the original poster was simply asking if he had all his bases covered for his new build. All of these comments about what he should or should not do and oppinions on his choices occomponied by negative comments against unpreffered brands/parts has nothing to do with the question at hand. I include my own comments/posts in that also.

Maybe I'm just feeling defensive today or maybe its because I feel "secure" in knowing that I DO build quality systems around the parts that others are saying are not of good enough quality to them. I don't mean to start an arguement so I'll stop here...differen't builders have different oppinions that's just the way it is. And to the original poster...good for you for stepping into the world of building.

;-)
have you seen/read any benchmark of prcs recently.
here's a link showing some nice info you and the op should know. (WARNING...don't open if you want to remain an intel fanboy)
mother of all cpu chrats.toms harware. (http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html)

i'd point out that that the athlon X2 2800 is $299 ad pentium EE 3.73 is $1000 (guess which is faster.) not too mention 64 bit support.. a big plus for the future.

[Bandit]

I'm an intel builder myself and it irks me when someone asks for comments on a system they have layed out and people start up the amd vs intel crap. Just because I don't use something doesn't mean I will bash it or tell someone else they shouldn't use it just becasue I don't.

That said I still build socket 478 systems for lower/mid range home users whom I know who are not going to be basing its use on such things as gaming or graphics or cpu intensive applications. Sure they will game and the system will handle it no problem but my aim is usually to save the customer money while providing a system that can handle a broad range of functions. I just finished putting together a very cheap but good quality system this weekend: 2.4ghz 768mb ram 80gb hd (maxtor...another brand I stand by but don't push on people) 128mb nvidia vid card...this is even probably more than this particular customer needs but I had it so I used it. I didn't use top of the line components but I know what to buy and what of the cheaper brands are ok for me to build with. I only payed like $35 for the motherboard and it has sata raid capabilies and dual channel mem slots...what does this mean to a average user? not a whole lot. The total system build was maybe a couple hundred bucks and I will sell it for around $350 easily and that covers the parts and my time. If you want the extra performance squeeze definately put the money into it. You could spend a lifetime trying let other people deside for you what you "should" or "should not" build with.
We are not trying to bash Intel. If having a personal preference is now considered bashing then were guilty. But the truth is I myself just hate to see someone spend money on something and not get as much performance out of it as they would another product.
To lie to him and say go with the Intel "good choice" would be lying to myself and to my friend who asked, and IMHO would be selfish.

See MIPS up there hates Maxtor. I myself, do I think he is bashing? No. Its his opinion and I think he has his right to it. I myself have not ever had a Maxtor issue, but hey. Times change. At one time I loved WD drives. Then they had a **** spell for a few years. But now I think they have pulled out of it and I have been drooling over the Raptor drives.

Cheers,
Joey

[mips]

I just dont understand why anyone would consider a cpu that uses more power (more MHz), more heat instead of something that performs better using less power at lower Mhz, generating less heat and the benchmarks have proved it...?
And intel is is copying the the 64bit architure from AMD with their EMT64?

I will not sway on the Maxtor issue though, never. I feel I have to warn people about it.

[poofyhairguy]

Actually its 2006 now ;) As to not start a debate here in someone elses thread I will simply say that I dissagree about Intel "lagging" and comparisons can be made sure but they are different technologies and in the end if someone puts for the effort to truely decide between the two it comes down to what their applied use(s) will be.


That used to be the case. It used to be (2004) AMD for games and Intel for content creation. Then the X2 series came out. A 3800 X2 beats every Intel chip in its price range at everything. Media content creation, games, everything. Look up any benchmark of the X2 series and it will show that. It even beats the new Yonahs!

Unless you are on the very low end (Celeron) Intel currently offers no advantage in the desktop space. On the laptop they rule, but in server and on the desktop they are a waste of money.

I would hate it if we did not tell the original poster such things. No bias at all, unless its a bias against the Prescotts (aka the chips in most Pentium 4's and Pentium D's).

I actually like Intel more and I was originally going to buy and Intel dual core. But they are so far behind I had to bite the bullet and get an AMD. Intel WILL stay in my laptops (so the fanboy inside me can be happy) but until they come out with a COMPLETELY different desktop chipset (aka let the Pentium 4 design die) then they will lag behind.

[kakashi]

That used to be the case. It used to be (2004) AMD for games and Intel for content creation. Then the X2 series came out. A 3800 X2 beats every Intel chip in its price range at everything. Media content creation, games, everything. Look up any benchmark of the X2 series and it will show that. It even beats the new Yonahs!

Unless you are on the very low end (Celeron) Intel currently offers no advantage in the desktop space. On the laptop they rule, but in server and on the desktop they are a waste of money.

I would hate it if we did not tell the original poster such things. No bias at all, unless its a bias against the Prescotts (aka the chips in most Pentium 4's and Pentium D's).

I actually like Intel more and I was originally going to buy and Intel dual core. But they are so far behind I had to bite the bullet and get an AMD. Intel WILL stay in my laptops (so the fanboy inside me can be happy) but until they come out with a COMPLETELY different desktop chipset (aka let the Pentium 4 design die) then they will lag behind.
very true. except that i ever liked intel anyway......so i guess i am an amd fanboy.

these days getting amd is the best thing to do. also if you can get the opteron 165. its about the same price as the X2 3800+ but can be overclocked by about 1000 MHz on air alone (with stoick heat sink) hows that for cooooool

[mstlyevil]

No one was saying that Intel does not put out a quality product. Intel over the years has been the innovator until 2003 when AMD introduced a new way to increase performance without increasing power consumption and clock cycles. The integrated memory controller and the 64 bit extention brought AMD into the future and left Intel behind. Intel is now trying to play catch up and they do not even plan to introduce hypertransport until 2008. The problem with Intel is the not invented here attitude they have embraced over the years. AMD and Intel have a cross licensing agreement and Intel could have introduced HT and EMT 64 two years ago. Instead they continued with the Netburst architecture and kept increasing the caches and the clock speed until they hit a brick wall on heat and power consumption.

Intel makes a quality product but it is yesterdays technology. Intel has conceded this by adopting AMD innovations in it's future cores. The problem with Intel is their culture. That is they started thinking like a large corporation instead of a small company. Until Intel embraces the future and puts out a product that compares to the Opteron/Athlon 64/X2, I can not recommend Intel except for the Pentium M for laptops. If Intel catches up or surpasses AMD in performance then I will recommend Intel over AMD.

[kakashi]

No one was saying that Intel does not put out a quality product. Intel over the years has been the innovator until 2003 when AMD introduced a new way to increase performance without increasing power consumption and clock cycles. The integrated memory controller and the 64 bit extention brought AMD into the future and left Intel behind. Intel is now trying to play catch up and they do not even plan to introduce hypertransport until 2008. The problem with Intel is the not invented here attitude they have embraced over the years. AMD and Intel have a cross licensing agreement and Intel could have introduced HT and EMT 64 two years ago. Instead they continued with the Netburst architecture and kept increasing the caches and the clock speed until they hit a brick wall on heat and power consumption.

Intel makes a quality product but it is yesterdays technology. Intel has conceded this by adopting AMD innovations in it's future cores. The problem with Intel is their culture. That is they started thinking like a large corporation instead of a small company. Until Intel embraces the future and puts out a product that compares to the Opteron/Athlon 64/X2, I can not recommend Intel except for the Pentium M for laptops. If Intel catches up or surpasses AMD in performance then I will recommend Intel over AMD.

good explanation.. also nice info. i never knew intel and amd have a cross licensing agreement. is'nt that counter productive. since no company has to develop its own techs instead can simply copy the other ones.??

[mstlyevil]

good explanation.. also nice info. i never knew intel and amd have a cross licensing agreement. is'nt that counter productive. since no company has to develop its own techs instead can simply copy the other ones.??

It works in both of their favor. Since both companies are developing different technologies at the same time it actually is great for the consumer. The cross licensing agreement was made after the settlement of AMD's first law suit with Intel back in the 90's. Intel was afraid it would be labeled another Microsoft so it was in their best interest at the time to settle that suit. In fact AMD used to make x 86 clones of Intel CPU's under license from Intel when Intel could not produce enough of their own. The two companies had a working partnership for many years before the PC explosion of the 90's.

[obx-jdt]

I'd say, go with an AMD 3000+, but upgrade your configuration to 1GB of RAM. Having too small RAM really sucks, not only in games but also image editing, programming and daily work.
heck, I just buoght a 1gig stick of DDR for $52 (corsair). If you're going to spend $1000 on a system, please don't cheat yourself on ram. Besides, if the game needs a 3gig cpu, 512 of ram in probably the min it will run on if at all, Do yourself the favor and get at leas a gig of ram.....You already know your going to add it in a month or two anyways.... ;)

[Iandefor]

Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound is pretty good thermal paste.

[Bandit]

heck, I just buoght a 1gig stick of DDR for $52 (corsair). If you're going to spend $1000 on a system, please don't cheat yourself on ram. Besides, if the game needs a 3gig cpu, 512 of ram in probably the min it will run on if at all, Do yourself the favor and get at leas a gig of ram.....You already know your going to add it in a month or two anyways.... ;)
I totally agree. 1GB of RAM min please.. It will make more of a diference then 500Mhz slower CPU would.
I got the Athlon64 3000+ with 2GB for that reason. Your CPU plays a large roll in the system performance, but its not the only attributing factor. If you RAM and your Hard Drive are cheated. Then the rest of the system will be ****.
Take for example my wifes HP. 2.93GHz Cely. 512MB RAM, and a 5400RPM ATA100 Hard Drive. Its slower then molasses on a cold winter day. I am upgrading her system to my current Maxtor 7200RPM ATA133 drive this week.
Also I am upgrading my system to a 10,000RPM WesternDigital Raptor SATA150 drive.
Cheers,
Joey

[mstlyevil]

1 gig of RAM is a good base line now days. My only suggestion would be if you decide to get 1 gig get 2x512 sticks since most motherboards are dual channel. You will thank yourself later for this. Also do not use generic RAM. The name brand RAM is very cheap now days so if you do decide on value Ram get a name brand. I personally recommend a good mid range RAM that has a price vs performance value. I use Patriot ddr 3200 with timings of 2-3-2-5. Just shop around and look for a good bargain on your RAM.