Newbie Building PC


Jan 9, 2005
I'm building my first PC.
I have been getting some help from friends and people on the forum, but just want to make sure everything is compatible and that Im not missing anything and that these are good options.

Budget is right at $1000 or close

All help is greatly appreciated.

Processor - AMD Athlon 64 3500+, 512K, L2 Cache, Socket 939 Windows Compatible 64-bit Processor - Retail $271.00

Motherboard - ASUS "A8V Deluxe" VIA K8T800 Pro Chipset Motherboard For AMD Socket 939 CPU -RETAIL

RAM - Corsair Value Select 184 Pin 512MB DDR PC-3200 - Retail X 2

Video Card - MSI nVIDIA GeForce 6600GT Video Card, 128MB GDDR3, 128-Bit, DVI/VIVO, AGP 8X, Model "NX6600GT-VTD128" -RETAIL

Dvd Burner - Lite-On 16X DVD Dual Drive, Model SOHW-1633S Black, Retail

CD/DVD Rom - Lite-On 16X DVD-ROM, Model SOHD-167T Black, RETAIL

Floppy - Samsung Black 1.44MB 3.5inch Floppy Disk Drive, Model SFD321B/LBL1, OEM Drive Only

HD - Seagate 200GB Ultra ATA/100 7200 RPM 8MB CACHE
Stuck with

Case - Rosewill ATX Case with 400W Power Supply and Side Window (Black), Model "TU-155" -RETAIL

Cooling - Thermaltake Venus 12 CPU Cooler For AMD Opteron and Athlon 64, Model "A1744" - RETAIL

Total $1,008.00


Make sure you get the 90 nano version of that chip, it runs very cool.
With the 90 nano chip, you can probably use stock hsf, unless you plan on serious OCing. Try it first anyhow. Why spend $40 if you get zip from it?
Have you looked at nforce chipset boards? They are a full notch better than via boards in cooling, because of the single chip chipset. Nvidia also has a good reputation for solid, stable chipsets.
I would check with the graphics forum on they best P/P of the 6600gt. I'm not that fond of msi video cards.


Jan 9, 2005
so you suggest getting:

AMD Socket 939 Athlon 64 3500+, 90nm, 2.2 GHz, 512KB L2 Cache 64-bit Processor - OEM


Yes, that would be the chip.
AS to mobo, there are a few makers using the Nforce3 ultra chipset for s939. The best one,IMNSHO is the gigabyte <A HREF="" target="_new"></A>. It would also save you a few bucks.


Jan 15, 2002
You could save a couple hundread of dollars by getting a <A HREF="" target="_new">3000+</A> for 156$ or a <A HREF="" target="_new">3200+</A> for 215$ instead of getting a 3500+

Chances are that all 3 CPU will overclock more or less the same since they are all based on the same core and manufacturing process, making the 3000+ the best deal. Is 400 more stock MHz really worth 160$ when you can easely 2.4GHz on stock cooling with a 3000+ ?

Watercooled Mobile Barton 2500+ @ 2.6GHz (200MHz x 13)
Abit NF7-S V2.0
2x 512MB of Samsung TCC4
Sapphire Radeon 9700 128MB @ 360/310
2x Maxtor 40GB 7200RPM RAID-0


Yup, I agree that saving some money on the CPU would be a good deal. And although it's true that the 3000+, 3200+, and 3500+ 90nm chips are all capable of a possible 2.4-2.6GHz, there is an advantage for the overclocker to having the one with the higher multiplier. It stems from the on-die mem controller and limiting bandwidth by having to lower the LDT (5X, 4X, 3X, etc.) A64's are multiplier locked can't raise the multiplier beyond it's stock. Unlike P4's and AXP's things are trickier with overclocking A64's and tweaking for max performance. You can however lower it though. Anyway, I totally agree that a 3200+ for $100 cheaper is a better deal than the 3500+. But when OC'in A64's, things aren't as simple as it seems. yet thankfully it's fun and the rewards are great. More OC info on A64's can be found <A HREF="" target="_new">here</A>.

<A HREF="" target="_new"> My</A>
<A HREF="" target="_new">Gamer</A>


Jun 3, 2004
Yep, couldn't agree more... I went with the 3200+ just this month and I am more than happy with it. You gotta think of performance vs. cost, and I just don't think the 3500+ is a good tradeoff when you only have $1000 dollars to spend. It could be put to better use on the video card in my opinion.