$192 Dual Core Ubuntu 10.04 Desktop

[earthpigg]

I often suggest that people build their own desktops.

In that vein, here's an article that presents the case better than I ever have:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2366841,00.asp

Note the benchmarks - it consistently outperformed a contemporary $299 e-machines desktop.

The article doesn't go into to much detail about the physical assembly, but youtube should be able to cover that for aspiring self-assemblers and my fellow tight-fisted GNU/Linux users out there.

[CharlesA]

Nice.

[kerry_s]

mine came out to about $150 when i built mine.
i started with a newegg barebones nettop, $79 with shipping.
lcd from craigslist $20
200gb sata hd $24 (can't remember where from, i think comp usa closing sale)
ram from walmart $27
using keyboard & mouse i already had.

when i first got it though i used what had & just slowly upgraded.

it first started with 512mb ram
60gb hd
crt monitor
same keyboard & mouse

[TheNerdAL]

I just want the case and power supply. O.o

[juancarlospaco]

The problem: Not everybody are on US, NewEgg dont ship out of US.

Im not on US :(

[earthpigg]

NewEgg dont ship out of US.

No local equivalents? the question i would be asking in your shoes: where do mom-and-pop computer shops get their parts?

[rjbl]

Just done this in the UK. AMD64 3800+ motherboard bundle from Novatech + 1xSATA HD (260Gig) + 450W Powersupply + extra 2Gig DIMM + recycled e-machines case. Total cost about £150. Easy? Peasy!

In UK Novatech.co.uk have a very, very good on-line sales div.

ATB
rjbl

[rjbl]

NB Corrected typo

Just done this in the UK. AMD64 3800+ motherboard bundle from Novatech + 1xSATA HD (160Gig) + 450W Powersupply + extra 2Gig DIMM + recycled e-machines case. Total cost about £150. Easy? Peasy!

In UK Novatech.co.uk have a very, very good on-line sales div.

ATB
rjbl

[P4man]

Using new, off the shelve components I wouldnt be able to a lot better than they did. But when you think about it; this is still a silly computer.

Its got a HUGE case (considering whats in it), it has a ton of things that drive up the price that it shouldnt have. PS2 connectors, parallel ports, connectors and controllers for up to 6 internal drives etc etc. If you were to build a more compact PC and strip out all the unnecessary parts you should be able to build and sell something comparable for less than half that price in volume. And even then its a silly machine.

The future for these kind of lowend computers is probably more like these:
http://gizmodo.com/5440702/marvell-plug-computer-30-the-tiny-linux-brick

No large, complex motherboards and overpriced and overly powerhungry CPU, requiring a large and expensive (all relative of course) PSU and VRMs and capacitors on the MB and cooling fans and what not, but cheap low power (ARM based) SoCs. Today you can buy $200 ARM based machines and that price includes a (touch)screen, keyboard, battery (!) and these things are portable. Granted, they are really slow at that price point but give it another year and we should have 1-2 GHz dual core cortex A9s. Im guessing a bare "PC" based on such a soc wouldnt cost more than $30 in volume (without harddrive) and would rival the machine extremetech build in sheer CPU and GPU performance, soundly beating it in apps that take advantage of these SoCs special hardware for things like video encoding and decoding etc.

[earthpigg]

Using new, off the shelve components I wouldnt be able to a lot better than they did. But when you think about it; this is still a silly computer.

It's got a HUGE case (considering whats in it), it has a ton of things that drive up the price that it shouldnt have.

i'd agree with 'unconventional', but not with 'silly' considering what is available today in that price range.

$200, a used LCD from craigslist, and an old keyboard/mouse from the garage... and you are set computer-wise to get a bachelor degree in a humanities discipline.

i do not feel that is silly.

the huge case isn't because that is what is most 'idea' for a system such as this, the huge case is because that's what was cheap on the given day they went shopping and still gets the job done. can you find me a case and psu for $30 that is smaller?

and, in defense of the case: some folks only need one desktop computer. cases are not like meat, they do not go rotten. that $30 case could see a decade of use, including when the user's needs are such that they actually need the internal space. micro-atx is niche use. atx is universal use.

theory is great, but applications always have compromises to be made.



All of this being said: if i came across micro-atx cases with power supplies for a temporary price of $30 each set... i'd be tempted to purchase five of them.

similarly: if i came across a bunch of am3 motherboards with nothing but 3 usb ports, a vga port, support for one hard drive, one stick of ddr3... see above.

(reason for 3 usb ports: keyboard, mouse, thumb drive)

[P4man]

i'd agree with 'unconventional', but not with 'silly' considering what is available today in that price range.

I didnt mean to say what they did or tested was silly. The "silly" thing about it, is precisely that what they did, is probably the best thing you can do today (if you are buying new) at that price point. I just wish we had options available to us that make more sense (and Im hopeful those are just around the corner. If not based on ARM processors then at least AMD Bobcat socs).

[earthpigg]

Ah, ok. From a "Big Picture" point of view... yes, very silly, I agree.


I wish I could customize the specific features of a motherboard and have it be cost effective.

[cascade9]

Ohh, wow, an Athlon II X2 245 is faster than a Neo II? Quelle surprise!

It wouldnt be that hard to make the $200 build look worse. Well, if VDPAU works on the eMachines 9200 anyway, CPU use with video load would be a huge amount lower. Anything that would use more 1GB would benchmark better on the emachines computer as well.


it has a ton of things that drive up the price that it shouldnt have. PS2 connectors, parallel ports, connectors and controllers for up to 6 internal drives etc etc. If you were to build a more compact PC and strip out all the unnecessary parts you should be able to build and sell something comparable for less than half that price in volume. And even then its a silly machine.

PS/2 ports are stil useful. Not everybody is moving to USB. Even if it was 'useless', PS/2 ports probably cost in the order of 10c each in numbers, same with the parallel port. SATA connectors, far less than that.....maybe 2-3c each?



The future for these kind of lowend computers is probably more like these:
http://gizmodo.com/5440702/marvell-plug-computer-30-the-tiny-linux-brick

No large, complex motherboards and overpriced and overly powerhungry CPU, requiring a large and expensive (all relative of course) PSU and VRMs and capacitors on the MB and cooling fans and what not, but cheap low power (ARM based) SoCs. Today you can buy $200 ARM based machines and that price includes a (touch)screen, keyboard, battery (!) and these things are portable.

Nettop vs desktop, but with an even smaller, less upgradable version of a nettop.

Those 'plug' computers have a point, but desktop replcaements they arent. Not everybody wants to deal with somethign gutless, with no upgrade options, and cables everywhere (you cant even use an internal HDD with plug computers)

I wouldnt call a Athlon II X2 245 'overly powerhungry CPU'. Sure, it uses more than a 'low power' CPU, but it also has a huge amount more processing power. BTW, its amusing to see someone who called themsleves 'P4man' say that. ;)

ARM CPUs has even less processing power than low power x86, and then you've got to deal with the ARM architechture (which works OK, but puts huge limits on your choices as far as OS, etc goes).


Granted, they are really slow at that price point but give it another year and we should have 1-2 GHz dual core cortex A9s. Im guessing a bare "PC" based on such a soc wouldnt cost more than $30 in volume (without harddrive) and would rival the machine extremetech build in sheer CPU and GPU performance, soundly beating it in apps that take advantage of these SoCs special hardware for things like video encoding and decoding etc.

By the time that happens, there will be even lower powered x86 CPUs, and the 'normal' desktops processing power will have gone up as well.

So the $200 machine would be faster than as well.



the huge case isn't because that is what is most 'idea' for a system such as this, the huge case is because that's what was cheap on the given day they went shopping and still gets the job done. can you find me a case and psu for $30 that is smaller?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811325002

I'd trust the PSU in that even less than I would trust the rosewill PSU...which is saying something, I've seen more than few reviews on rosewill PSUs where there were major flaws.


similarly: if i came across a bunch of am3 motherboards with nothing but 3 usb ports, a vga port, support for one hard drive, one stick of ddr3... see above.

(reason for 3 usb ports: keyboard, mouse, thumb drive)

I'd be VERY wary of that Foxconn 'AM3' motherboard. Its using a very old chipset (690G+ SB600), foxconn has no CPU support list up, and I would be suprised it it didnt have some major limits on the CPUs you can use (eg 95watts max, no Phenom IIs, etc).


and, in defense of the case: some folks only need one desktop computer. cases are not like meat, they do not go rotten. that $30 case could see a decade of use, including when the user's needs are such that they actually need the internal space. micro-atx is niche use. atx is universal use.

+1.

[P4man]

PS/2 ports are stil useful. Not everybody is moving to USB. Even if it was 'useless', PS/2 ports probably cost in the order of 10c each in numbers, same with the parallel port. SATA connectors, far less than that.....maybe 2-3c each?

Its not just the cost of the ports. It increases the board size and complexity, PCBs arent free; it adds costs to the development; testing; bios; .. Each of those may seem minute but they all add up and there is a reason a standard x86 motherboard costs ~$60 whereas an embedded ARM board with CPU (SoC actually) memory and basically everything besides display and and battery costs.. $15

http://nexus404.com/Blog/2010/06/26/allgo-unveils-ultra-cheap-computer-for-only-15-allgo-systems-unveils-a-cheap-android-computer-to-enable-tablets/

Sure that CPU is too slow, but you get the point.


Nettop vs desktop, but with an even smaller, less upgradable version of a nettop.

Sure; if you want upgrade-ability. But that costs you money. In this case, a *lot* of money (all relative of course). If you can cut costs by a factor 3 or 4 then suddenly it makes no sense to want to have upgradability. Just replace the device, its cheaper than your upgade. For many users PCs are becoming appliances, its about time PCs were offered that are built as such. When was the last time you upgraded the CPU or GPU of your mobile phone?


I wouldnt call a Athlon II X2 245 'overly powerhungry CPU'. Sure, it uses more than a 'low power' CPU, but it also has a huge amount more processing power.


Its still a what, 65W CPU? That is almost 2 orders of magnitude more power hungry than ARM chips.

Now you may not care about the heat or electricity cost, but it does mean you need a powersupply able to handle that (and in this case it handles a LOT more), it means you need VRMs on the motherboard able to supply that 60A of current, it means a heatsink and fan capable of dissipating all that heat etc etc etc. Those things costs money.


ARM CPUs has even less processing power than low power x86, and then you've got to deal with the ARM architechture (which works OK, but puts huge limits on your choices as far as OS, etc goes).


Cortex A9s are roughly on par with Atom performance wise. That might not be enough for everyone but it should be plenty for a lot of people that would be interested in sub $200 PCs. Especially if you bundle it with an efficient software stack like android or linux.



By the time that happens, there will be even lower powered x86 CPUs, and the 'normal' desktops processing power will have gone up as well.

So the $200 machine would be faster than as well.

For many things; once its fast enough, performance (and especially CPU performance) becomes irrelevant. How many ipad users are complaining their cpus are too slow? Those are single core A8 based cpu's, roughly 3x slower than a cortex A9 like tegra2.

[earthpigg]

you have many great theories, p4man.

i'm not sure i see how any of them have any effect whatsoever on a consumer in 2010, however.

It's nice that a single niche-use motherboard could theoretically be made cheaper than a general purpose one with the same performance....

...But can a single niche-use motherboard as part of a batch of 5 be made cheaper than a single general purpose one made as part of a batch of 200,000?

Technology isn't the issue here. Supply/demand and price equilibrium are the issue.

I don't care if I have 20 extra devices on my motherboard that I never use, if it is still cheaper than one with identical performance, the exact devices I need, and nothing else.

My keyboard has that little 'menu picture' button next to the right control button that i never use, which is theoretically a complete waste... In fact, theoretically, it could get in the way of my typing.

So what? It would have been ridiculously expensive to order a run of this keyboard consisting of one keyboard just for me. So, ill take the theoretical waist in exchange for real world cost-effectiveness.


What is theoretically possible is completely irrelevant unless we work for a hardware manufacturer manufacture.

What matters to us is what is possible for a hardware firm to produce 100,000 of and actually sell... Because nothing else will be offered to us.



Stripping the PS/2 connector off of a general purpose motherboard and painting it pink makes that motherboard more expensive, not less.

[P4man]

Stripping the PS/2 connector off of a general purpose motherboard and painting it pink makes that motherboard more expensive, not less.

Only if you sell a lot less of them.

You may have noticed many recent motherboards come without legacy ports (PS2, serial, parallel). Thats not done to make them more expensive. Why are mATX boards generally a lot cheaper than full size boards? Maybe those PCI-E slots and the PCB they require arent free after all?

If you sell such things by the millions, yes that PS2 connector and that unused PCI-E slot is going to cost you money and countless such features make for a $200 PC that could have been a far more practical (and ecological) $50 one. But dont take my word on it, check back in 12 months.

[earthpigg]

But dont take my word on it, check back in 12 months.

I'd love to be proven wrong, to be honest.

(With abundant $50 computers, however, mother nature might prefer otherwise :P ... unless that $50 computer also has 1/4 the eco-footprint of a $200 one?)

[MooPi]

I've had a budget build wishlist on NewEgg for years now. Seems my budget build keeps getting cheaper as more tech rolls out. My wishlist was a bit more than 200 but on par with the system reviewed. I'm actually using one of my budget systems now and it's not a wimp. Dual core AMD 2 gig ram recycled from a rig that was doa, LiteOn DVD, 320 gig HD, intergrated Nvidia, Geforce 7025. I have multiple quad cores and for some reason this little machine is my favorite. Ripped and encoded Terminator 3 last night in less than hour. Thats fast enough for me and I'm sure fast enough for grandma & grandpa or any simple computer user. Of course it's running Lucid.

[P4man]

I'd love to be proven wrong, to be honest.

Have a look here:
http://hothardware.com/News/Marvells-99-Moby-Tablet-Might-Just-Change-The-World/

$99 and unlike the tested $200 PC that includes a GPS, Wifi, not too mention.. a touchscreen and battery which probably account for 2/3 the cost.

Performance wise; no, its not in the same league as that AMD X2 box, we will have to wait 6 months at least for systems based on "high performance" (relative to mobile phones) SoCs based on Cortex A9 or even AMD Bobcat and possibly intel moorestown.


(With abundant $50 computers, however, mother nature might prefer otherwise :P ... unless that $50 computer also has 1/4 the eco-footprint of a $200 one?)

Well yeah, if lower price means much higher volume then it might be a net loss for nature in many aspects. OTOH I cant see how a device that uses maybe 20% of the raw materials and less than 10% of the electricity, that used a lot less wafer space (much smaller chip dies) during fabrication could end up having a higher ecological footprint. Assuming you leave out the battery. But then the eco side of this is not even my major gripe. I just want a tiny, cheap zero noise PC.

[cascade9]

Its not just the cost of the ports. It increases the board size and complexity, PCBs arent free; it adds costs to the development; testing; bios; .. Each of those may seem minute but they all add up and there is a reason a standard x86 motherboard costs ~$60 whereas an embedded ARM board with CPU (SoC actually) memory and basically everything besides display and and battery costs.. $15

http://nexus404.com/Blog/2010/06/26/allgo-unveils-ultra-cheap-computer-for-only-15-allgo-systems-unveils-a-cheap-android-computer-to-enable-tablets/

Sure that CPU is too slow, but you get the point.

You've still got testing, development, BIOS, etc with ARM.

I'm really not a fan of embedded CPUs- the amount that it saves the consumer isnt passed on (IMO), and then if anythign happens to the CPU or motherboard, you've got to place (at least) them, and possibly more.

Considering that a socket takes just as many traces as embedding, and only cost in the oder of a 10-25c to impliment, its better to hav a socket IMO.



Sure; if you want upgrade-ability. But that costs you money. In this case, a *lot* of money (all relative of course). If you can cut costs by a factor 3 or 4 then suddenly it makes no sense to want to have upgradability. Just replace the device, its cheaper than your upgade. For many users PCs are becoming appliances, its about time PCs were offered that are built as such. When was the last time you upgraded the CPU or GPU of your mobile phone?

If you want to replace the computer with a gutless ARM, then it might be cheaper. But that is like peplacing a sedan with a moped. Cheaper to run, far less usefull.

If a moped/low power CPU suits you, its just fine though.

Like embedded CPUs, I'm not a fan of 'computers as devices'. Having to throw out the whole thing ue to any problems has lots of problems- enviromental in particular.

BTW, the cheapest Atom barebones system I could find at newegg was $120, so at the moment its actually cheaper to build a system like the one in the article. ;) Maybe in the future cost might be 3-4 times lower, but right now, its not.


Its still a what, 65W CPU? That is almost 2 orders of magnitude more power hungry than ARM chips.

Now you may not care about the heat or electricity cost, but it does mean you need a powersupply able to handle that (and in this case it handles a LOT more), it means you need VRMs on the motherboard able to supply that 60A of current, it means a heatsink and fan capable of dissipating all that heat etc etc etc. Those things costs money.

65watts TDP. Real consumption will be higher (I forget exactly how much). There are 245e CPUs (45watts TDP) with the same perfromance, and if you want to go even low, the Athlon II X2 260u (daul core, 2x1MB L2, 1.8GHz, 25watts TDP) and 160u (single core, 1MB, 1.8GHz, 20watts).

VRMs are cheap, very cheap. As for the heatsink/fan, in manufacturing, a lot of the costs are labour/machinery. Material costs have less on an impact than most people think.


For many things; once its fast enough, performance (and especially CPU performance) becomes irrelevant. How many ipad users are complaining their cpus are too slow? Those are single core A8 based cpu's, roughly 3x slower than a cortex A9 like tegra2.

iPad....I wont go into them at all. For everybodys sake ;)

I can see you points, I just dont think that we are quite there yet. Given a few more years, its going to be a lot more attractive.

[P4man]

You've still got testing, development, BIOS, etc with ARM.

Im not forgetting that. I think you may be forgetting the over 1 billion ARM based mobile phones sold each year. Many of which are, or will be running linux or some linux variant (like meego, webos, android, chromeos etc) that could power lowend desktops as well. By comparison x86 is almost a niche market.



I'm really not a fan of embedded CPUs- the amount that it saves the consumer isnt passed on (IMO),

Thats true for now; and will remain true until these things really take off. The first "smartbooks" and tablets are priced ridiculously high if you look at the BoM, but you cant blame the manufacturers for trying to pocket a nice margin on a novelty product for a change. You will see them market those things in netbooks first and possibly even ask premium prices because they are so thin and light and long lasting battery lives. Look at the Toshiba smartbook:

http://armdevices.net/2010/07/12/newgadgets-de-toshiba-dynabook-az-ac100-is-tegra-2-powered/

€350-€450. Thats actually more than some cheap x86 netbooks. But on those OEMs only make a few € per device, on these ones, several dozen at the very least. But once the novelty wares off and competition starts playing these prices will plummet.


and then if anythign happens to the CPU or motherboard, you've got to place (at least) them, and possibly more.

Considering that a socket takes just as many traces as embedding, and only cost in the oder of a 10-25c to impliment, its better to hav a socket IMO.

Not necessarily and you seem to be confusing SoC with a soldered chip vs socket. A SoC (system on a chip) is just a chip that contains CPU as well as most other functionality (chipset, IO, GPU, USB, networking etc). In the ARM world its usually soldered (because, hey, it saves money and space) but thats not a must. The advantage of the SoC lies in the fact the motherboard can be made a whole smaller and cheaper, less layers, easier to design and build with much less components. here check this out:
http://www.tgdaily.com/hardware-features/50775-toradex-fits-dual-core-tegra-2-on-ram-sized-board

Dual core tegra 2 with pretty much everything you need (although you probably want more than 256 Mb ram for a desktop) fitted on a SODIMM module. Is anyone going to tell me a full scale ATX board costs about the same to produce?


As for repairs, as these things get more and more integrated into a single chip, there really is not much left to repair or replace. Think of your router/access point. Chances are its really just a low power ARM computer running some linux flavour. If it breaks, are you inclined to replace the memory modules in it? Or do you just buy a new one for $25? Besides these devices ought to break a lot less often as they are much simpler and lower power.


Lastly, some x86 cpus are also soldered on to motherboards. eg in notebooks, Ill let you guess why ;).


If you want to replace the computer with a gutless ARM, then it might be cheaper. But that is like peplacing a sedan with a moped. Cheaper to run, far less usefull.


I disagree somewhat. Its more like replacing GM trucks with a wide range of Japanese cars to chose from. All of them cheaper; more efficient and highly customizable. ARM chips are not just lower power, due to the fact the core and instruction set is licensable, anyone can build them. As a result you have dozens of companies making them and competing through innovation. More choice, lower prices, better products. You get stuff like hardware Java acceleration, onchip realtime HD h264 encoding and decoding, audio playback and stuff that sometimes isnt even available on the highest end x86 chips.

Performance isnt quite on par with x86 yet, but thats only a matter of time. Until now all those ARM chips were designed for handheld or industial applications, with a key emphasis on VERY low power consumption and low cost. But thats changing. Cortex A9 is the first ARM design that concentrates on performance and its already catching Atom at a much lower power consumption and smaller die (no x86 decode tax) Several companies are also working on ARM server cpu's.


VRMs are cheap, very cheap. As for the heatsink/fan, in manufacturing, a lot of the costs are labour/machinery. Material costs have less on an impact than most people think.


Its all cheap. But in the end, it adds up and companies need to add a margin on each "cheap" component and what you get is something that isnt quite so cheap anymore. $200 only seems cheap to us because we are still used to $1500 PCs, but really its a "lot" of money for something that will in a few years be less capable than your mobile phone or the chip that powers your TV.


I can see you points, I just dont think that we are quite there yet. Given a few more years, its going to be a lot more attractive.

I agree.

[cascade9]

Im not forgetting that. I think you may be forgetting the over 1 billion ARM based mobile phones sold each year. Many of which are, or will be running linux or some linux variant (like meego, webos, android, chromeos etc) that could power lowend desktops as well. By comparison x86 is almost a niche market.

Point ;)

Abotu all I can really say is that of those 1 billion chips (which I think is an exageration, and if its not....I find the idea of 1/6th of the world changign mobiles every years horrid) most will be used for mobile phones, gettign HDD access, etc etc will eb extra development.




Not necessarily and you seem to be confusing SoC with a soldered chip vs socket. A SoC (system on a chip) is just a chip that contains CPU as well as most other functionality (chipset, IO, GPU, USB, networking etc). In the ARM world its usually soldered (because, hey, it saves money and space) but thats not a must. The advantage of the SoC lies in the fact the motherboard can be made a whole smaller and cheaper, less layers, easier to design and build with much less components. here check this out:
http://www.tgdaily.com/hardware-features/50775-toradex-fits-dual-core-tegra-2-on-ram-sized-board

Nah, I know what SoC is. Just, IMO, its a better option, even in that case, to have a socket for upgrades/replacement in case of chip death.


Dual core tegra 2 with pretty much everything you need (although you probably want more than 256 Mb ram for a desktop) fitted on a SODIMM module. Is anyone going to tell me a full scale ATX board costs about the same to produce?

Of course its going to be cheaper. But how much more expensive would a x86 chip (and socket IMO, but not really an engineering need), combined northbridge+southbridge, and a few ports cost? Not much more. Its not like we really need full ATX these days. When desktop computers needed a network card, video card, sound card and a hdd controller card, having 5+ ISA or PCI+ISA slots made a lot of sense. These days, with everything onboard (well, I try to avoid onboard video) if you actually 'needed' more than 2 slots you are probably using a video card (I always try to) and a rare user who wants a hardware RAID card (or sound card, etc), or somebody who should have bought a different motherboard.

Even with a PCIe slot its not going to impact a huge amount on the resources needs, manufacturing costs, etc.


As for repairs, as these things get more and more integrated into a single chip, there really is not much left to repair or replace. Think of your router/access point. Chances are its really just a low power ARM computer running some linux flavour. If it breaks, are you inclined to replace the memory modules in it? Or do you just buy a new one for $25? Besides these devices ought to break a lot less often as they are much simpler and lower power.

Yeah, again, I see your point. You $%&#$ :lolflag:

From somebody who has working a lot in manufacturing, I perfer to replace as little as possible. If it was treated as a 'throwaway device' then you are going to need a new board (ammited small), power supply (unless you use an external power brick..and in that case with the way things are you would have to look long and hard to find a new 'system' that came without the brick), new case (made of plastic, and those plastic factories are nasty places, I've worked in a few).

IMO, better to have a standard, like ATX, Mini-ITX, so we could create a new standard- lets call it 'P4TFF' (P4mans Tiny Form Factor), etc. With a way to open the case, a standard layout, etc, its going to make the market more open, give more options to consumers. Besides meaning that people who blow parts only need to replace the actual parts they blew, not a whole system.

I know, we are only talking a few hundern grams of wasted plastic/resin/mask/lead/copper/gold/etc, but the less we throw away, the better off the whole world will be.



Lastly, some x86 cpus are also soldered on to motherboards. eg in notebooks, Ill let you guess why ;).

I'm so temped to have a go at the #%^#$%&#$ who made embedded CPU with desktops. I can see reasons why the laptops/netbooks did it, but I'm still not a fan.

Doh, I was going to reply to the rest of this, but time is out, gotta go.

BTW, I really can see your point, and I also would like a nice, silent computer system. Its more when its a good idea, what chips to use, and how exactly the best way to make that computer we might not agree on :)

[P4man]

Point ;)

Abotu all I can really say is that of those 1 billion chips (which I think is an exageration, and if its not....I find the idea of 1/6th of the world changign mobiles every years horrid)

AFAIK its an understatement actually; IIRC the 1 billion phones / year was in 2007, I imagine it has gone up since then, not down. But that number does include lowend feature phones. But ARM is more than just phones. ARM chips sell on the order of 5 billion per year.



most will be used for mobile phones, gettign HDD access, etc etc will eb extra development.

Sure there is still work to be done but the line between smartphones and tablets and netbooks is blurring rapidly. Not just in terms of performance but also software wise. All the innovation is happening there now, with many new and exciting OSs and TONS of new software development. Its not ubuntu like linuxes that will rid the world of windows, its iOS, Android, ChromeOS, WebOS, Meego,.. All of them heavily rooted in ARM architecture. "Nettops" will be next.



Of course its going to be cheaper. But how much more expensive would a x86 chip (and socket IMO, but not really an engineering need), combined northbridge+southbridge, and a few ports cost?


Well, I used ARM soc's to prove my point, but indeed x86 socs could come rather close, certainly for anything connected to mains.

My point was just that computers could be build a whole lot more economically than they are now like in that article. Decent x86 SoCs could be a good step in that direction - though I dont think they will go quite as low as ARM for both technical and marketing reasons; technical in the sense that complex x86 instruction decoding will never be free, and marketing wise because x86 is effectively a duopoly and intel wouldnt want to cannibalize its higher end markets. So even if intel could build an x86 SoC that competes well with ARM offerings for, say, $10, how is it going to prevent people from buying machines based on those $10 chips instead of its $50+ atoms celerons and pentiums that plug in $50 motherboards (with intel chipsets) ?



Its not like we really need full ATX these days. When desktop computers needed a network card, video card, sound card and a hdd controller card, having 5+ ISA or PCI+ISA slots made a lot of sense. These days, with everything onboard (well, I try to avoid onboard video) if you actually 'needed' more than 2 slots you are probably using a video card (I always try to) and a rare user who wants a hardware RAID card (or sound card, etc), or somebody who should have bought a different motherboard.

Indeed. But why put it separate chips on the motherboard when its cheaper to put it in all in the same single chip? ARM chips have it all. northbridge, southbridge, audio, video (encoding and decoding), various coprocessors for things like Java or SIMD (jazelle and thumb), various 3D accelerators, Wifi, HDMI, GPS, camera controller, IO, even RAM (package on package). You name it.

x86 is slowly heading in that same direction; we have the memory controller there now, PCI-E and in some cases video. Still a HUGE difference. In fact we have been closer over a decade ago with Cyrix MediaGX, but back then CPU peformance was still a major bottleneck and CPU size a more limiting factor in performance. Todays, not so much. We have "too much" space on our chips and stuff them with multiple cores and more cache than logic.


From somebody who has working a lot in manufacturing, I perfer to replace as little as possible. If it was treated as a 'throwaway device' then you are going to need a new board (ammited small), power supply (unless you use an external power brick..and in that case with the way things are you would have to look long and hard to find a new 'system' that came without the brick), new case (made of plastic, and those plastic factories are nasty places, I've worked in a few).


Sure, fine by me. And lets plug in "sodimms" like the one I linked to upgrade or replace faulty parts. Or move between x86 and ARM and the next big ISA. I got nothing against that :)


I know, we are only talking a few hundern grams of wasted plastic/resin/mask/lead/copper/gold/etc, but the less we throw away, the better off the whole world will be.


And yet you are defending the concept of PC that weighs.. 5kg? doing something a 250gr luchbox sized machine could do :)


BTW, I really can see your point, and I also would like a nice, silent computer system. Its more when its a good idea, what chips to use, and how exactly the best way to make that computer we might not agree on :)

As I see it, desktops like we have today wont go away anytime soon (if ever). But they will become like RISC workstation 10 or 20 years ago. Big, comparatively hugely expensive and only worth it for very few people. That goes for windows too.

For the vast majority simple cheap low power applicance-like computers running an opensource OS that are connected to the cloud will better fit our needs. Even for heavy duty apps and highend gaming (see OnLive and Otoy for a sneak peak in to the future).

[RabbitWho]

i'd agree with 'unconventional', but not with 'silly' considering what is available today in that price range.

$200, a used LCD from craigslist, and an old keyboard/mouse from the garage... and you are set computer-wise to get a bachelor degree in a humanities discipline.

i do not feel that is silly.



Or you could order something for the same price off dell, have a one year guarantee, and save yourself the hassle?

If all you're doing is using a word processor and internet browser then why bother?

I guess it would be a lot of fun :) I'd like to try it, but not to get a cheap computer out of it, because I can get that anyway, just to get fun out of it.

[mamamia88]

looks like a fun project. never built a pc always wanted to try. might consider this.

[sataris]

Nice. I'm shocked they pulled that off for 200 but more power to em.

I never buy pre-built systems.

My current build (due for an upgrade to quad core soon) is
AMD 7750 BE Dual Core
Asus Mother Board
4x GB DDR2 Gskill Ram
GTX 260 core 216
Generic Computer case
750w

Ubuntu 10.04 w/ Wine to get my Warcraft fix.
Altogether 500 bucks at the time of the build. For what I use it for, definately not bad.