Budget POS Build

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Since he wants upgradability, Intel is the only way to really go. 939 is going to die, but 775 will be around for a very long time, even with Conroe. If he goes with mine/Anoobis' ideas, even if he chooses not to overclock, he will have more than enough overhead to go out and buy a powerful processor/video card or 2gigs of ram down the road.
 
I run 2 gig on most of my machines, all of todays proc's can handle that no prob and same with vid cards, for a while at least. I agree about the socket type though, 775 will be around longer than 939 and it seems cellies are more overclockable for the dollar, though I still find it strange that a sempron 2800 I have sitting by me here is faster than a celeron d 3.06 (first I've had a chance to play with infact) that's also sitting by me (in office related tasks, no games). I need to benchmark these things......Seriously though, speed differences for this type of machine is almost irrelivant if he doesn't want to play DOOM 3 maxed out!
 
I run 2 gig on most of my machines, all of todays proc's can handle that no prob and same with vid cards, for a while at least. I agree about the socket type though, 775 will be around longer than 939 and it seems cellies are more overclockable for the dollar, though I still find it strange that a sempron 2800 I have sitting by me here is faster than a celeron d 3.06 (first I've had a chance to play with infact) that's also sitting by me (in office related tasks, no games). I need to benchmark these things......Seriously though, speed differences for this type of machine is almost irrelivant if he doesn't want to play DOOM 3 maxed out!
Click to expand...

Dare I point out that a Sempron 3400 runs Doom3 as fast as a Pentium EE840?

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=262&model2=200&chart=70
 
And yes, I know single-channel memory split between the CPU and the onboard GPU sucks. But that's why I'm getting a mobo with a 16x slot, so that I can ditch the onboard GPU once I can save up enough money for a decent video card.

But can someone point me to a definitive source that proves the much higher cost of going S939 is worth it? Or is this just all hype that you're working on? Because I find it hard to believe that single vs dual channel memory makes all that much of a difference for AMD. For Intel, sure. They were always so memory bandwidth crazy. But for the leaner designed AMD chips? I'd like some proof please. Because someone who's using onboard video and 1024x768 resolutions is not going to care all that much about a 3 FPS difference. It's easy to claim that it'll bottleneck the graphics card, but once I upgrade to a 16x card, just how much of a bottleneck will that be, really? Maybe it'll bottleneck the onboard graphics, sure, but I'm not going to stick with that forever anyway.

And just how much does S939 matter for future proofing anyway? I mean AMD is about to replace all the sockets, aren't they? So isn't S939 just as screwed as S754 in that respect? If I could wait that long I'd consider it, but my computer is driving me crazy and I really need to replace it now.
Click to expand...

The reason I suggest the Foxconn 6150K8MA-8EKRS is that even though it has onboard video, the onboard video has 6.4 G/sec available to it, shared with system, instead of only 3.2 GB/sec available to it, shared with system (as per most your Socket 754 suggestions). This means you'll have significantly better performance with the onboard video in the time you use it when compared to the Socket 754 onboard solutions.

It also means if you start with only 512 MB single-channel (3.2 GB/sec), and install a 2nd 512 MB, when dual-channel (6.4 GB/sec) is enabled your onboard video performance will also rise to far more 'acceptable' levels.

:arrow: http://www.foxconnchannel.com/products_motherboard_2.cfm?pName=6150K8MA-8EKRS

🙁 Socket 754 maxes out around the Athlon 64 3700+ single core.

8) Socket 939 maxes out at the Athlon 64 FX-60 (a dual core)

See: http://www.amdcompare.com ; to get a better feeling of why Socket 939 is a better choice, as dual-core machines will still be acceptable in 3 years time. Single-core machines may not be.

:idea: You can get Socket 939 Semprons btw, Fujitsu-Siemens and HP have been offering Socket 939 Sempron-based PCs since early 2005. Sometimes you can source the rare Socket 939 Sempron cheaply, and then upgrade the CPU later to a 'real' Socket 939 varient (eg: A dual-core one down the track). In 3 years you'll wish you went with S-939 for this very reason. 😛

:idea: If you want to compare the Athlon 64 3700+ (Clawhammer) at 2.4 GHz 1 MB L2 cache on 3.2 GB/sec to the Athlon 64 3700+ (San Diego) at 2.2 GHz also with 1 MB L2 cache on 6.4 GB/sec then go here: http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=255&model2=241&chart=62

I've preselected the two models, just change the benchmark variable and hit go.

The Socket 754 isn't that much faster/slower, but it has significantly more upgrade potential (Dual-core 2.6 GHz) than Socket 754 (Single-core 2.4 GHz). The dual-core processors needs 6.4 GB/sec available to them to scale well. 😛 - You also get double the video performance using onboard video if using Socket 939 over Socket 754. Onboard video for Socket AM2 will actually shock some people and they may consider not getting video cards come Q3/Q4 2006.

:!: Remeber you are comparing a Sempron (64 ?) 3000+ Socket 754 to an Athlon 64 3000+ if you go the lower end solution anyway, I've just selected the S-754 and S-939 counterparts in the CPU Charts to demonstrate S-939 doesn't have that much of a performance gain (when comparing equal CPUs, which if you build the Sempron 3000+ is an less valid comparison anyway, but interesting and related comparison none the less).

8) Comparing an Athlon 64 3200+ S939 vs a Sempron 3000+ S754 on average in the CPU Charts the Athlon 64 3200+ S939 performs a good +25% better, however the total cost of the system is not going to rise by +25%, thus it is better value. (You get more performance per dollar). When comparing for price/performance do it by TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) not by single part 'CPU vs CPU'. For a given configuration though the CPU might cost twice as much, the total price is not doubled, if TCO rises by +15% and performance by +25% for a given configuration it is clearly better value.
 
Even if the Intel i975X chipset supports the new Intel 'Core' (Conroe), the boards will be out of his price range.

Other boards, i945 based ones might be, but I don't see them supporting Conroe down the track.

Frankly I don't even see i975X supporting Conroe, but no point busting otherwise 'perfect' press releases.
 
Even if the Intel i975X chipset supports the new Intel 'Core' (Conroe), the boards will be out of his price range.

Other boards, i945 based ones might be, but I don't see them supporting Conroe down the track.

Frankly I don't even see i975X supporting Conroe, but no point busting otherwise 'perfect' press releases.
Click to expand...


I agree. I have heard / read too much contradictory information on the subject.

I do not believe Conroe will be a drop-in replacement.

I also suspect Conroe motherboards will be selling in the $200 - $350 range when they are released. The CPU itself may be in the $500 range so we're talking a LOT of $$$$ here way too much for a "budget build".
 
Is upgrability a valid concern. Really, how many folks just swap in a new CPU? By the time you want to upgrade then CPU, the graphics will also need an upgrade. I say get teh $80 3100+/ECS board combo at Outpost. You'll still eed a video card, but you can find aserviceable one for pretty cheap in the classifieds or at random sales at Best Buy, CompUSA, etc.
 
Before a fanboy war ensues, I think we need to take a step back into reality...

First, you're not going to be able to buy much upgradability for a full system (including monitor) for < $500. The Monitor is really what kills the deal. Scrap the monitor and you can prolly afford a decent mobo with PCI express (AGP will be dead by the time you want to upgrade).

Also, realistically gaming on a < $500 DIY pc is a bit of a pipe dream. You're probably looking at a GeForce 6200, or at MOST a 6600, which will put you on the lowest settings at 800x600 for most games out today (Aoe, Fear, etc). Forget future games. Integrated gfx will def be worse tho.

Not to keep defending dell (I never though I would ever be lol), but the $399 pre-fab system has 1/2 gig of ram (1/2 = half) and a 15" flat-panel monitor. They usually have free printers, too, but I guess that's a timing thing. Most games won't even work on the intel integrated chipsets, so gaming is out of the question, but it's not likely with a DIY system anyway. You'd get this system as a starter comp with a good cheap monitor you can carry over. OP said no integrated GFX, but just wanted to make point.

Again, just a reality check, both AMD and Intel are probably doing 'platform refreshes' this year for Conroe and AM2 (not difinitive), so unless you're getting the latest and greatest chipset, you're only going to be upgrading to obsolete hardware in a year or so anyway. You're not going to be buying any sort of real upgrade path at < $500.

My advice is to look for rebates in weekly flyers and refurb computers online. A lot of times you can find a good deal on an HP Pavilion for < $500 for a full setup with expansion slots, with a mail-in rebate. If you can scrape up and extra $200 or so then you're going to be doing your new system a LOT of good. I'd also look into CRT monitors instead of flat-panel. They perform better and are much cheaper. No worry about refresh rates, dead pixels, dark regions, etc.

One more note on the Dell/HP/etc warranties: don't worry too much about having a 1 or 2 year warranty versus a 3 year one. I've never RMA'd hardware after 2 years, because then I'm out of my computer for X weeks waiting for parts I can get for < $100. When I get them they're refurb anyway.
 
Whizzard9992, I think you're right. We do need to step back into reality.

The reality is this:

I'm looking for as cheap of a backbone as I can find right now, with preferably a 3 year warranty or more on these parts.

The CPU, RAM, and GPU that are initially dropped into this backbone will suck. Yes. But my intent is to eventually REPLACE them, as money becomes available.

Will the socket become dead? Sure. Does that mean I won't have an upgrade path though? Hell no. When you start at the rock bottom of a good solid platform then there's still plenty of better products already out there to drop in later.

That is my reality.

So being stuck with an non-upgradable box on the basis that it's more of a value is NOT in my reality. I do not want this. That was how I got stuck on the system that's dying on me now. This time around I want to look a lot more towards the future, by putting in the cheapest standins that I can find at present to hold me over into an otherwise great backbone.

Now, in order of upgrade preference I'm putting graphics as the most important ugprade. Because I'd really like to play some new games. Let's face it, surfing the internet and running Word doesn't take much. Gaming does. Which is why I need a 16x slot. I'd even prefer an SLI future, but let's face it, I just can't afford that backbone. Even if I could, I doubt that I'd ever scrape together the money for TWO high-end graphics cards anyway. As it is, just one high-end graphics card will cost as much as, or more, than the rest of this system combined.

I think with only 512MB of RAM, I'll probably put that as the second most important upgrade. Honestly, I don't give one wit about DDR2. Its latency is worse than DDR, and I'll easily be able to find another 512MB stick of DDR1 for years to come. And in fact, because of it's price, it may even be something that gets upgraded before the graphics even though it's less of a priority. And then one day, if I get the money and the inspiration, maybe I'll replace the two CAS2.5 sticks of 512MB with two CAS2 low-latency sticks of 1024. Maybe.

Once I have a good graphics card and a GB of RAM, THEN I'll look at replacing the processor. Although I'm now pretty thoroughly confused on that though. Is a S754 A64 is really noticably worse than a S939 A64 or not? I know a Sempron will suck. I have no illusions there. (Though I didn't realize just how much a Sempron sucks for its rating.) But two years from now when I go to replace my crappy CPU with the best one that my mobo will support, how much of a difference will there be?

If Intel wasn't getting their butt kicked so badly at this top end I'd possibly consider them for a system and go with a Celeron right now. But let's face reality there while we're at it. Intel's P4s are weak and run hot. Conroe may change Intel's future, but given Intel's past, I highly doubt a Conroe will drop into any motherboard I buy right now. Besides, AMD's future will probably look as good as anything Intel comes up with anyway, and probably cost less. So I just don't see where going with Intel is a wise choice at the moment.

So again, the reality of what I'm looking for is not the best that I can get for my $500. What I'm looking for is the best future that I can build over two or three years from the $500 PoS that I start from.

And while it'd be nice if I could reuse components from my system, the floppy drive and CD ROM are about it. The hard drive is slowly gaining errors, is slow as hell, and is only 8GB anyway. Even the case is crap and has no place for intake or exhaust fans other than the PSU. The CD ROM is slow. And the floppy drive is only $12 bucks and not a color I want. I might as well just start over from scratch. There's nothing really worth saving that would save me any money to make it worth it. I can reuse the monitor for a little while, but I'll definately need a new one soon, as it's clearly on its last leg right now and the color changes are driving me crazy. If I reuse my monitor then replacing the monitor will have to be my first ugprade.
 
Thanks for the great explanation vrec_dawn: it clarifies things.

I'm an Intel fan personally, so I'll chime in on the Intel upgrade path and let an AMD fan speak to an AMD upgrade path:

If you're looking for maximum upgradability, you definately want to go with the 975X chipset. With the 975X board, you can start with a celeron (which can be OC'd well) and drop-in a 950 presler down the line. It has dual PCI Express capabilities, but only supports ATI crossfire. The new presler chips (950) are more efficient and very overclockable with air-cooling. In April, Intel plans on slashing thier prices. You should be able to get a good presler for < $250 in a year. An OC'd presler should compete well against AMD in terms of performance, but you'll definately still suck more juice from the wall. It's also possible that you'll be able to use Conroe with the 975X, but that's purely speculative at this point. We DO know that you'll need 775 and possibly a VRM update, depending on the mobo mfr and release version.

In short, the 975X allows you to support DDR2 with integrated SATA-II, sound, PCIe, ethernet, and gives you a processor range from Celeron to Presler. In a year, an SLI/crossfire solution may end up giving you the best bang for the buck over single-card, so definately go for dual PCI 8x if possible.

As for DDR1 versus DDR2, it's really a fanboy debate. Everything is going DDR2, so investing in a DDR2 system will help ensure upgradablity. DDR2 has loose latencies and higher bandwidth, BUT as many tests show, the latencies usually have very little direct impact on performance. DDR2 is the better RAM. In 6 months when AM2 goes DDR2, AMD and Intel fanboys will be singing the same DDR2 tune.

The hard drive is one of the biggest performance bottlenecks, so if at all possible, drop your old HDD. Hard drives have diverged a bit into two categories: size and performance. Decide which is more important to you, do your reasearch, and then buy.

As for optical, Developers are still hesitant to distribute DVDs, so I wouldn't worry about a DVD right now unless it's REALLY important to you.

To conclude, if you're looking for upgradability, invest in a good mobo with a chipset/socket that matches your upgrade path. Don't neglect your hard drive, and don't dwell on memory latencies. Let ATI and nVidia battle it out for a little while and drive prices down before investing in a good vid card. Use your old CD ROM and floppy. Even if the floppy dies, a memory key is still a better buy at the same price. CRT is a better buy for gaming unless you can afford a low-latency LCD.
 
vrec_dawn, the only reason I spec'd the Cely option right now is that it has the features in that can transfer to a new system regardless if it is AMD or Intel. With the solution I offered you get:

A PCI-E Slot, meaning the graphic card you eventually buy can transfer to your newer AMD/Intel option

DDR2 memory, meaning the memory you buy can transfer to your newer AMD/Intel option

SATA II, meaning the hard drive you buy can transfer to your newer AMD/Intel option

I'm not advocating for sticking with the Intel route. I just wanted to "set you up" with as many newer technology features available compared to the technology available if you went S754 route. Have you run a Prescott??? A year down the road you might find one on the real cheap, throw it in and immediately notice a world of difference. However, you don't have to stick with it, you can scrap the setup and use your components in either a new AMD/Intel option. You buy a Dell for less than $500, you get 256MB DDR1 (unless it's changed since yesterday), an ATA 100 drive, and a crappy 15" LCD (you'd be better odd with a nice 17" CRT in this price range).

I could care less what future route you take (AMD/Intel), I just wanted to get you ready for either one. A 939 solution would be great, but you don't have the budget for it.
 
Anoobis has a good point: hard drive and RAM will probably be a bigger factor than processor speed/type, and with so many new procs coming out in 6 months, you're might be better off investing in good memory/hard drive before mobo/proc, especially if you want to go AMD down the road.

PCIe, DDR2, and SATA-II will carry over to newer systems for a couple years, at least. If you go AMD now (DDR1), you'll probably need new RAM for your next upgrade.
 
"If you go AMD now (DDR1), you'll probably need new RAM for your next upgrade."

If I replace the motherboard. I don't plan on doing that for years. And by the time that I do replace the motherboard I'm sure that I'll need faster RAM than what I'd be buying right now anyway.
 
Wow this has turned into quite a thread and I'll admit some of the Cele proponents make some good points - I had forgotten that Intel moved into the value space.

Whatever you choose, I would not spend extra now with the idea of avoiding a motherboard upgrade later. If history is to be believed a new processor often requires a new motherboard.

If you go the cele route, you will most likely get to reuse the memory and the graphics card if you get one. You MAY get to reuse the MB, but don't bet the farm on it.

If you go the Sempron route, you would need to replace MB to upgrade the cpu but the MB is often the least expensive major component. You may be able to delay the CPU upgrade longer than that of the Cele since a 3100 or 3400 with a good graphics card works better than the cele would. If you waited long enough you would have to upgrade memory to ddr2.

If you spend the extra money to go the 939 route, you'll be able to upgrade the processor without a new MB if you do it soon enough. Just don't spend more to avoid a future MB purchase than MB's actually cost.
 
"If you go AMD now (DDR1), you'll probably need new RAM for your next upgrade."

If I replace the motherboard. I don't plan on doing that for years. And by the time that I do replace the motherboard I'm sure that I'll need faster RAM than what I'd be buying right now anyway.
Click to expand...
Again, this is why you ough to the decent motherboard I recommended now and that good Aeneon ram that is uber cheap.
 
I don't consider myself a computer guru but an average user with an above average knowledge of computer hardware. My first computer was a 200 Mhz MMX and ever since then I have been cannibalizing parts as I upgrade new mobo's-etc.
I thought that THG wrote an excellent article on how to build a budget gaming machine for less than $500. I read the article and did further research on other websites. Looking at reviews both editorial and actual users, I got real strong idea of which way to go in getting the best bang for my buck. Within the last 6 months I upgraded my AMD 2800 XP CPU and Nvidia 2 250Giga(?) mobo to an AMD 3100 64 (can o'c) and a Nvidia 3 250Giga(?) with APG slot.
If you shop around you can find some great deals on mobo and cpu combos. I ended up buying my mobo for $75 with the CPU for $119 (on sale). I did not want to upgrade to Pci express yet since I am not a gamer per se and I didnot have the money to buy a whole new video card.

There is a mobo that has both APG slot and PCi Express slot for an AMD cpu that costs $69.

If you are looking for a budget gaming machine, you will definately want to invest in a CPU that you can overclock safely and be able to utilise dual channel memory. Dual channnel memory will allow your computer to run multiple applications faster and easier. You will eventually want 1-2 Gigs of RAM. I eventually put 1.5 Gigs in my machine and it runs so happily now. (2 X 512 Mb Dual + 2 X 256 Mbytes Dual) My machine was not so happy with only 2 X 256 Dual. It usually needs about 440 Mb to start up all my apps. Eventually I upgraded from a ATI 9550 to Nvidia GeForce 6600 GT (Evga brand). Upgraded my hd from 60 Gigs to 80 Gigs to 250 Gigs so now I have 3 hd's but I am getting rid of the 60 gig since it starting to make weird noises at times.

For mobo's, look at those that offer the most versitality and best bang for the buck. First figure out which CPU you want to use then decide on the MOBO chipset you wish to pair you CPU with. Then decide on how much RAM you are willing to start out with (min. 512 Mb)(one stick or two). Then get the best bang for the buck hard drive. Don't forget the all important power supply, get the most cost efficient one you can afford. A power supply that supplies enough power and yet will last a few years. Get a case that will assist in dispensing the heat from the cpu and graphics card. To small and the combined heat from the CPU and GPU will cause periodic shutdowns (UGGH :evil: ) (personal experience). If you get a mobo with integrated video though it is not the best, you can hold off on getting a video card until you can afford the best bang for the buck card. Go CRT, you can get a 19 inch CRT for anywhere from <$100-$250 depending upon brand and where you shop.


Once you figured out what you want SHOP AROUND check various web sites, stores see who is having special deals. Do you have to pay shipping and sales tax or nothing extra just the price of the item.
I regularly check newegg, zipzoomfly, and outpost.com (Fry's Electronics), Best Buy and Circuit City websites. Sometimes one website will have a cheaper price but then you have to cough up sales tax and shipping which doesn't make it as cheap. I also check pricegrabber.com and pricewatch.com to compare prices. I also read the reviews and prices at www.cnet.com.

I hope this helps a little, I myself am on a tight budget so I upgrade whenever I have a little spare money.
 
Sorry, my previous message was so long.

By the time I got the AMD XP cpu it was about on its last legs and when I wanted to upgrade to a faster CPU, I ended up having to upgrade my mobo and cpu to have a faster CPU. If you go for the sempron, you might not be able to upgrade to a faster cpu in the future. That is one thing to consider.
The best thing to do is research, research and then shop around for the best deals. Before you buy a monitor go to local stores and check out prices and quality of pictures. I personally would love to get a 19 inch flat screen monitor but I can't afford it but I can afford to buy a $100-150 19 inch CRT monitor. I love watching Japanese anime on my computer.

Just keep in mind what you want to do with your system and allocate money for each item. And as you pay down you CC balance you then can invest in more pricey items.

I hope this helps.
 
I think the tomshardware $500 budget article is worthless and outdated now. Let's face it, not only is the 3000 outclassed by cheaper CPU's or better overclockers for the dollar, but the 6600gt isn't the best you can get for $150 anymore and I just don't agree with their cheap motherboard.
 
The Socket 754 range is:

Processor AMD Athlon™ 64
Model 3700+
Ordering P/N (Tray) ADA3700AEP5AR
Ordering P/N (PIB) ADA3700BOX
Operating Mode 32/64
Stepping CG
Frequency 2400Mhz
HT Speed 1600
Voltage 1.50V
Max Temp 70°C
Thermal Power 89W
L1 Cache 128KB
L2 Cache 1MB
CMOS Technology 130nm SOI
Socket Socket 754

to:

Processor AMD Sempron™
Model 2500+
Ordering P/N (Tray) SDA2500AIO3BX
Ordering P/N (PIB) SDA2500BXBOX
Operating Mode 32/64
Stepping E6
Frequency 1400Mhz
HT Speed 1600
Voltage 1.40V
Max Temp 69°C
Thermal Power 62W
L1 Cache 128KB
L2 Cache 256KB
CMOS Technology 90nm SOI
Socket Socket 754


The Socket 939 range is:

Processor AMD Athlon™ 64 FX
Model FX-60 (Which is as dual core as the AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 Dual-Core)
Ordering P/N (Tray) ADAFX60DAA6CD
Ordering P/N (PIB) ADAFX60CDBOX
Operating Mode 32/64
Stepping E6
Frequency 2600Mhz
HT Speed 2000
Voltage 1.30-1.35V
Max Temp 49-65°C
Thermal Power 110W
L1 Cache 128KB + 128KB
L2 Cache 1MB x2
CMOS Technology 90nm SOI
Socket Socket 939

to:

Processor AMD Athlon™ 64
Model 3000+
Ordering P/N (Tray) ADA3000DAA4BW
Ordering P/N (PIB) ADA3000BPBOX
Operating Mode 32/64
Stepping E6
Frequency 1800Mhz
HT Speed 2000
Voltage 1.35-1.40 V
Max Temp 49-65°C
Thermal Power 67W
L1 Cache 128KB
L2 Cache 512KB
CMOS Technology 90nm SOI
Socket Socket 939

You should also notice that the high end Socket 939 processors are 90nm SOI, vs high end S-754 which is 130nm SOI, and thus S939 will (over)clock far better and/or use less power than their 'equals' on Socket 754. As Socket 939 has 6.4 GB/sec available it will scale better, and still be 'decent' come 2008.

There are also unoffically AMD Athlon™ 64 2800+ for Socket 939, aswell as a special AMD Sempron line for S-939 (HP + Fujitsu have supplies).

It is for these reasons why I pushed Socket 939 so much, in 3 years a dual-core Athlon 64 X2 / FX-60 (depending on availability, make sure to upgrade before they get harder to find) will not be such a bad system.

In 3 years a single core Athlon 64 3700+ will not feel so quick IMHO.

You could've just checked here: http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop ; filtered by socket type and checked the highest and lowest models to get the range. 😛

However, DDR2 (albeit DDR2-533 most likely for you) on an Intel Socket 775 platform, with upgradability to Pentium 4 Cedar Mill die (PreScott at 65nm, with lower thermals and power usage) will also be a decent upgrade. Of course the AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 4800+ (Dual-Core) would still give any Socket 775 system a run for its money, even when using DDR1 / PC3200.

It is a tough choice, as DDR2 means you can swap the board and likely keep the same RAM in a future upgrade. But depending what you want by that time you may be trying for two PCs, and more than happy just having a PCIe x16 slot + decent PSU in your 'older' system. In 3 years time what sort of money do you expect to have ?, Will you need to scrounge, butcher & salvage parts still ?, or will you have enough money for 2 decent PCs, one using whatever RAM / Socket is 'hot' come 2008 - 2010 ?

However, Having DDR2 would be good for the Intel Conroe upgrade, that is true, but they are due out in 6 months (Q3/Q4 2006), not 2 to 4 years. 😛 - We may all be on XDR RAMBUS by then for all we know :?:


(Even with shrink font that was long, too bad can't do two columns w/o using screenshots 😛)

As above, we may be on XDR by apx~ 2009, and you've mentioned 'new board and RAM' for a future upgrade / system (further off):

Refer my previous post:
http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=1003247#1003247
It might end up +10-15% over your desired TCO with said parts, but with GeForce 6800 GS/GT you'll get +85% (or more) performance over a lesser video card (eg: GeForce 6600 GT) when paired with those parts.

Not to mention: You don't need a video card with that board to start with, just save the 'little bit over total cost' it will be to get a __800 GS/XL series card, or GeForce 7600 GT if you can, and in the mean time 'settle' for the GeForce 6150 with 6.4 GB/sec. It isn't the greatest 3D video performance, but it isn't half bad either, esp as a temporary makeshift GPU while saving a little extra. (+15%, or so, extra cash 'all up' for double the gaming performance is well worth it IMHO).

Sure card for card the GeForce 6600 GT looks nice, but when you compare total system cost w/ 6600 GT (and not upgrading to _800 GS/XL series) vs total system cost w/ 6800 GS, and then compare their respective performance differences... well you'll see what I mean when you do it. 8)

PS: My pick for case + PSU combo is the Antec TX640B, it will last, and has damn good ventilation + enough of a PSU to get you into 1 x GeForce 7900 GT / 1 x Radeon 1900 XT territory - If you ever get a chance to do that: http://www.antec.com/us/productDetails.php?ProdID=61640
 
I thought the $500 Gaming Machine article was interesting since it gave me a starting point and what to look for in buying parts. At the time I read it was more current. I think the article is ok as a basic reference material as long as you consider when it was written and what the current prices are for the parts mentioned in the article.
I realize the 6600 GT is not the greatest video card but it goes for around $100 or less depending where you go.
I just thought since this person is using his CC to buy parts and he is on a tight budget. That more should be spent initially on the Mobo and CPU combo and memory so that this person would not be to disappointed in the performance of his system when running cpu/memory intensive programs/applications. Video cards become outdated within 6 months it seems and there is always a better and faster card coming out which in turn causes the price for the previous latest and greatest to come down. I just thought if this person wanted to get a good inexpensive video card that can run most games and not take such a big bite out of his initial budget. As I said research, get various opinions and reviews and prices for the parts he wants and go from there. Just keep in mind when what you read was published since hardware becomes rather quickly outdated and the price goes down unless the part becomes rare.
Also when buying some of the higher end video cards also requires a more expensive power supply which can burden the budget.

As one researches the parts one must also look at the pro's and con's of buying one part over another. And remember investing in a computer is also a lifelong spending habit since the technology is always going to get better, faster and more capable of doing more with less. As technology improves the initial cost seems to be more in the stratosphere rather then affordable. 8O

Good luck and let us know how your system build went.
 
A decent power supply is something you should never go half-ass on, whether or not you "need" it. Saving $20 on a PSU might cost you the price of your entire build in damages down the road...
The 6600gt really shows its age nowadays. It just can't keep up with other cards now, even in the same priceranged. For a few dollars more, you can get an x850 or a 6800gs and totally blow it away. It just isn't viable to recommend the 6600gt to people anymore. The cheapest one is still ~$120...the cheapest GS is 170, and the cheapest x850 is ~170 as well, both of which are totally out of that cards performance. I think the 6600gt also has less bang for the buck when compared to the 6600 ddr2 model which hits gt speeds for about 30 bucks less. I just don't see the point in recommending a video card that will have to soon be replaced and is still somewhat expensive.
 
I forgot to mention that with the mobo, cpu, memory, case, and power supply together can easily take up to half your allocated budget if not more depending upon the cost/quality of the parts you buy.
You want your foundation to be of good quality and performance, the last thing you want is a cheap power supply that ends up frying your mobo which in turn toasts your cpu.
As I said I am not a hard core gamer nor a guru but my focus was on your budget--price vs quality vs performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom