- Status
Netherscourge
Distinguished
- May 26, 2009
- 390
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]megamanx00[/nom]Hah, that's funny. I still think it's crazy that the original XBOX is just so huge that you can fit a whole ATX board in there . Good stuff.[/citation]
The board he used is actually 3.5 cm narrower than a standard ATX board. I have a similar model to the one he used, the difference being his actually used DDR3 and mine uses DDR2, and they are 30.5cm x 21.0cm; I also have a Gigabyte EP43-DS3, and it is 30.5cm x 24.4c. So he chose wisely: right motherboard size, and yet is already uses DDR3, making it a better performer.
I owuld only advise him to get a Radeon HD 5770; since it's built on 40nm and from the reviews it doesn't draw to much power, I bet it would fit the envelope and definetely be a better performer. Aside from that, a very good and good looking system!
Congratulations for the build! A lot of hard work, but the end result is beautiful! Great video too, the guy also knows how to tell the story of the build in an interesting way.
If
The board he used is actually 3.5 cm narrower than a standard ATX board. I have a similar model to the one he used, the difference being his actually used DDR3 and mine uses DDR2, and they are 30.5cm x 21.0cm; I also have a Gigabyte EP43-DS3, and it is 30.5cm x 24.4c. So he chose wisely: right motherboard size, and yet is already uses DDR3, making it a better performer.
I owuld only advise him to get a Radeon HD 5770; since it's built on 40nm and from the reviews it doesn't draw to much power, I bet it would fit the envelope and definetely be a better performer. Aside from that, a very good and good looking system!
Congratulations for the build! A lot of hard work, but the end result is beautiful! Great video too, the guy also knows how to tell the story of the build in an interesting way.
If
chesterman86
Distinguished
- Oct 20, 2009
- 34
- 0
- 18,530
[citation][nom]megamanx00[/nom]Hah, that's funny. I still think it's crazy that the original XBOX is just so huge that you can fit a whole ATX board in there . Good stuff.[/citation]
I forgot to add sometinhg: the original Xbox is huge because it it mostly a PC. The processor is a Mobile Celeron from the Pentium III era, the OS is a custom build using Windows NT/XP kernel,it has a normal 5.25 DVD drive and a 3.5 hard drive, so it's necessarily big, but it also makes it fairly easy to source parts. The graphics chip is made by Nvidia, and since the OS is based on NT/XP it supports DirectX 8.1 and besides also OpenGL 1.4.
That said, it shouldn't bee too dificult to get the original XBox games to work, he's got the right hardware to do it, he just needs to get the software to make them run. (I have my doubts if it's legal to do it, but hey, if he's got the original games...)
I forgot to add sometinhg: the original Xbox is huge because it it mostly a PC. The processor is a Mobile Celeron from the Pentium III era, the OS is a custom build using Windows NT/XP kernel,it has a normal 5.25 DVD drive and a 3.5 hard drive, so it's necessarily big, but it also makes it fairly easy to source parts. The graphics chip is made by Nvidia, and since the OS is based on NT/XP it supports DirectX 8.1 and besides also OpenGL 1.4.
That said, it shouldn't bee too dificult to get the original XBox games to work, he's got the right hardware to do it, he just needs to get the software to make them run. (I have my doubts if it's legal to do it, but hey, if he's got the original games...)
Mac Pros use server parts, this doesn't. does it need server parts? maybe not? but lets not try and say that Apple are using the same parts and then just charging 3 times the price.
the main reason Apple gets blamed for overcharging is because they use laptop or server parts, not the best price/performance ratio desktop parts.
So while its still true that price/performance ratio on Macs SUCK!, its not just them taking massive amounts of profit (it is a bit of that of course) there are more subtle advantages to the Hardware they use, that can't be shown in your average benchmark.
P.S. Apple sucks.
the main reason Apple gets blamed for overcharging is because they use laptop or server parts, not the best price/performance ratio desktop parts.
So while its still true that price/performance ratio on Macs SUCK!, its not just them taking massive amounts of profit (it is a bit of that of course) there are more subtle advantages to the Hardware they use, that can't be shown in your average benchmark.
P.S. Apple sucks.
Wow!
He spent a lot of money and time on it, which he probably would be able to save, by just buying a HT pc!
He spent a lot of money and time on it, which he probably would be able to save, by just buying a HT pc!
MitchMeister-
Distinguished
- Feb 6, 2006
- 51
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]Kingssman[/nom]well... if ya added xenon processor support, liquid cooling, 8 fans, 2 16x PCI Expres and 2 4x PCI Expres, support for 32GB of RAM, TOSLINK audio ports, then it might amount to the mac pro[/citation]
It's a Xeon processor, not the element Xenon. And depending on the use a Xeon is usually overkill for a home system. Fans cost about ~$8, and there isn't any room for more, so your point is moot. I'm sure he could have picked a board with dual 16x PCI-E and 4x lanes, but what's the point when he is only putting a single GPU and no additional cards? Saying "Hey my pc can support 32GB of ram and yours can't" is stupid, since 32gb is also overkill unless you are running a server. 16gb is sufficient for a video editing system. And again, the board is out there, he chose not to get something that he wasn't using. The board does have S/PDIF using TOSLINK, input and outputs. Your only valid argument is the lack of liquid cooling, which is true, but it wouldn't fit in the case or it would be external and ruin the general idea. You seem to for the most part nitpick useless things that a mac pro could have that he chose not to integrate... like you had to prove that a mac pro is worth the extra $3000. It's like complaining that "this" car is better because "that" car can't tow another one, or doesn't have a cooled glove compartment...
Either way, the time and effort put into this was amazing. It looks awesome and I'd love to own one myself.
It's a Xeon processor, not the element Xenon. And depending on the use a Xeon is usually overkill for a home system. Fans cost about ~$8, and there isn't any room for more, so your point is moot. I'm sure he could have picked a board with dual 16x PCI-E and 4x lanes, but what's the point when he is only putting a single GPU and no additional cards? Saying "Hey my pc can support 32GB of ram and yours can't" is stupid, since 32gb is also overkill unless you are running a server. 16gb is sufficient for a video editing system. And again, the board is out there, he chose not to get something that he wasn't using. The board does have S/PDIF using TOSLINK, input and outputs. Your only valid argument is the lack of liquid cooling, which is true, but it wouldn't fit in the case or it would be external and ruin the general idea. You seem to for the most part nitpick useless things that a mac pro could have that he chose not to integrate... like you had to prove that a mac pro is worth the extra $3000. It's like complaining that "this" car is better because "that" car can't tow another one, or doesn't have a cooled glove compartment...
Either way, the time and effort put into this was amazing. It looks awesome and I'd love to own one myself.
wonderingwhatis
Distinguished
- Aug 16, 2008
- 161
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]matt87_50[/nom]Mac Pros use server parts, this doesn't. does it need server parts? maybe not? but lets not try and say that Apple are using the same parts and then just charging 3 times the price.the main reason Apple gets blamed for overcharging is because they use laptop or server parts, not the best price/performance ratio desktop parts.So while its still true that price/performance ratio on Macs SUCK!, its not just them taking massive amounts of profit (it is a bit of that of course) there are more subtle advantages to the Hardware they use, that can't be shown in your average benchmark.P.S. Apple sucks.[/citation]
LMAO @ Laptop servers..I cant tell if you are actually serious or if this is some form of sarcasm
LMAO @ Laptop servers..I cant tell if you are actually serious or if this is some form of sarcasm
wonderingwhatis
Distinguished
- Aug 16, 2008
- 161
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]wonderingwhatis[/nom]LMAO @ Laptop servers..I cant tell if you are actually serious or if this is some form of sarcasm[/citation]
The case is amazing, many hours must have been devoted to this.
However its not near the equivalent of a Mac Pro. TOSLINK, 2xPCIE16 slots blah blah that stuff doesnt really matter; but look at the CPU.
Its using what a Q9650? Everyone knows that isn't close to a nehelam based xenon, please.
I have no problem with the computer its awesome, but just to throw that statement in there with no real basis of actual comparison or anything is pretty weak.
The case is amazing, many hours must have been devoted to this.
However its not near the equivalent of a Mac Pro. TOSLINK, 2xPCIE16 slots blah blah that stuff doesnt really matter; but look at the CPU.
Its using what a Q9650? Everyone knows that isn't close to a nehelam based xenon, please.
I have no problem with the computer its awesome, but just to throw that statement in there with no real basis of actual comparison or anything is pretty weak.
nitto555rchallenger
Distinguished
- Mar 25, 2009
- 112
- 0
- 18,680
if your gonna claim that a $1500 system amounts to a $4500 though you cut out every special feature in the more expensive product. It is like saying that your home built Lancer with a turbo kit getting 415hp with a custom body kit and cost only $20,000 compared to a $58,000 lexus of similar performance, but you are still missing the leather covered seats, LED lighting, paddle shifts, mirror defoggers, and of course the glove compartment cooler that comes standard.
seriously not to nitpick, but to compare apples to oranges? Should call it a better performance/budget ratio of any comparable HTPC or any other non tower computer out there.
seriously not to nitpick, but to compare apples to oranges? Should call it a better performance/budget ratio of any comparable HTPC or any other non tower computer out there.
[citation][nom]tpi2007[/nom]The board he used is actually 3.5 cm narrower than a standard ATX board. I have a similar model to the one he used, the difference being his actually used DDR3 and mine uses DDR2, and they are 30.5cm x 21.0cm; I also have a Gigabyte EP43-DS3, and it is 30.5cm x 24.4c. So he chose wisely: right motherboard size, and yet is already uses DDR3, making it a better performer.I owuld only advise him to get a Radeon HD 5770; since it's built on 40nm and from the reviews it doesn't draw to much power, I bet it would fit the envelope and definetely be a better performer. Aside from that, a very good and good looking system!Congratulations for the build! A lot of hard work, but the end result is beautiful! Great video too, the guy also knows how to tell the story of the build in an interesting way.If[/citation]
Hmmm.. I've been looking at the video again and there might be a very good reason he went with a 9800GT.. it's a low profile model with an hdmi and DVI out, nothing else.. doubt there is a Radeon HD 5770 of that size yet, and it would lose the eyefinity feature almost for sure unless they used mini displayports or 2 mini displayports+hdmi.
And as for wonderingwhatis mentioning the CPU model, it's actually the Q9550s at 2.83Ghz (and not 2.93 as the article mistakenly says), not the Q9650 at 3 Ghz, the "s" means it's a 65w TDP part, and given the low profile heatsink, small case, and presumably low wattage power supply, it's the best processor he could get; the i5 is still a 95w TDP part.
Hmmm.. I've been looking at the video again and there might be a very good reason he went with a 9800GT.. it's a low profile model with an hdmi and DVI out, nothing else.. doubt there is a Radeon HD 5770 of that size yet, and it would lose the eyefinity feature almost for sure unless they used mini displayports or 2 mini displayports+hdmi.
And as for wonderingwhatis mentioning the CPU model, it's actually the Q9550s at 2.83Ghz (and not 2.93 as the article mistakenly says), not the Q9650 at 3 Ghz, the "s" means it's a 65w TDP part, and given the low profile heatsink, small case, and presumably low wattage power supply, it's the best processor he could get; the i5 is still a 95w TDP part.
hakesterman
Distinguished
- Oct 6, 2008
- 563
- 0
- 18,980
Very cool video and an inspiration to PC builders everywhere. Having said that, one must consider the what the hourly cost of your time as a builder to redesign and create this machine. Sure the parts cost $1,500 but the man hours it takes to for to efficiently build one, let alone have the fully stocked shop to pull it off doesn't make this as affordable as it sounds. I fully acknowledge the great work done on this project but I think the true cost of building it surpasses that of a Mac Pro in terms of man-hours and planning. Either way great video and even better PC.
jaymoney61
Distinguished
- Jul 21, 2009
- 45
- 0
- 18,540
pale paladin
Distinguished
- Jul 27, 2009
- 196
- 0
- 18,690
well. I commend this guy for being creative in building and filming this video. The music was a little lame but I can't even imagine doing something so unique. Also the triple boot is omfg awesome. This is a tri-platform computer we should all be appeased at his ingenuity.
kidaquarius
Distinguished
- Oct 27, 2009
- 44
- 0
- 18,530
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram