Building a new PC, need opinions...

Nov 11, 2004
10,855
0
0
6800NUs in SLI is a waste. AMD is the way to go now. I'm sure the Pentium Ds run fairly hot compared to their X2 counterparts over at AMD. I suggest you cross over to the AMD side.
And also get two 6800GTs instead of 6800NUs. A huge performance difference.
You'll want a better power supply too. Take a look at Enermax's SLI PSUs, affordable and powerful.
 

knothead34

Senior member
Apr 6, 2005
381
0
0
if gaming is your thing and it sounds like it is amd is the way to go however if amd is not your thing that still is a nice system you chose. i would go gts's also unless you planning on modding the nu's.
 

TankGuys

Golden Member
Jun 3, 2005
1,080
0
0
I'd have to agree with the AMD crowd on this one. Right now, in the dual core arena especially, I'd go AMD.

Also agree on the suggestion to go with the two 6800GT's.

 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Ok guys Im going with the 6800GTs instead. Thx for the tip. As for the AMD, well I have always been a huge Intel fan. It would take a lot to convince me to switch to AMD. I do play a lot of games though. Can you guys explain a littel why I should go with AMD?
 

mooojojojo

Senior member
Jul 15, 2002
774
0
0
Based on personal experience I'd recommend that if you want a quiet hard drive, perhaps there are better options than the Barracuda 7200.7. The idle noise is practically non-existant, but the writes are loud as hell :)
 

SrGuapo

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2004
1,035
0
0
Read some benchmarks. The Athlon 64s are superior to the Prescotts in almost every aspect (barring HEAVY multitasking and encoding) and the same is true for the X2s. The 4400+ is a great chip and is around $600 (US). It will definately destroy the smithfield in gaming.

Are you actually planning on multitasking or is the dual core more of a penis enlarger. Unless you really need to play HL2, run a virus scan, download a ton of porn, and defrag at the same time (a bit of an exageration), dual core won't help much... Maybe you could go with a 3000+ or something now and just upgrade to x2 when you actually need to.

I bet you could save enough money on the graphics cards*, mobo, RAM**, and case to make up for the extra $200 of the x2...

*Why buy $800 worth of graphics cards when the next gen cards will be around $500 and pwn any current SLI setup in a few months...

** Do you really need 2 GB? Seems excessive, especially for $500! You could get 2GB (2x1GB or 4x512) regular DDR for the AMD setup for much less. 4x512 OCZ value VX (2-2-2 timings at DDR500)
 

KoolDrew

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
10,226
7
81
If you want the best bang for your buck why are you going Intel, getting a motherboard over $200 and getting 2 6800's in SLI? Your also getting RAM that is way too expensive that you won't benefit from at all. You also chose an $85 burner.

Get something like this.

EPoX EP-9NPA+Ultra
AMD Athlon 64 3200 Venice
Corsair Value Select 1GB(2x512)
ATI Radeon X800XL
NEC ND-3520A

If you really need to 2GB get 2x1GB. Also will you be multitasking at all? If you are you could look into getting an X2.

Also about hardrive. I prefer Samsung just because of how quiet they are.
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: KoolDrew
If you want the best bang for your buck why are you going Intel, getting a motherboard over $200 and getting 2 6800's in SLI? Your also getting RAM that is way too expensive that you won't benefit from at all. You also chose an $85 burner.

Get something like this.

EPoX EP-9NPA+Ultra
AMD Athlon 64 3200 Venice
Corsair Value Select 1GB(2x512)
ATI Radeon X800XL
NEC ND-3520A

If you really need to 2GB get 2x1GB. Also will you be multitasking at all? If you are you could look into getting an X2.

Also about hardrive. I prefer Samsung just because of how quiet they are.

Well right now that system you suggested is what I have. I want something better I guess. My current machine Im going to use for a media center for TV. My new one will be mostly for gaming and work. I try to get a new machine every 2 years. I try to get the best but not the very best at the time. IE - the 3.4 Pentium D is $1,200.

Current PC is :

P4 2.66
2gb ram
200gb hdd
Nvidia Quadro 4 750xgl
21" Trinitron

 

Hurricane Andrew

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2004
1,613
0
76
Seriously, unless you're going to be doing HUGE amounts of video encoding and are really impatient, AMD is the way to go, especially in the "bang for the buck" arena.

Also, there's no reason to spend more than $50 on a burner. Not now. Not ever. Well, unless you're running a recording studio on the side and looking to press numerous discs per day, and then you should be looking at standalone hardware, not a PC.

As for hard drives, I've yet to take the SATA plunge, but on the PATA side, Maxtor and Seagate have been very reliable (and quiet...shhhh...) for me.

If you really want a quiet PS (and who doesn't), take a look at Coolmax. Frankly, I can't speak for durability, but they have been very stable, very cool, and VERY quiet in my experience. Did I mention that they were darn cheap too? Last one I got was a 400W for $40.86 at buy.com. The 450W is $46.87 (I have one of these too). BTW, that includes shipping (in the US). Turned my PC's from 747's to stealth bombers. And if you've ever had a B2 fly about 500 feet overhead, you know what I mean....
 

The Pentium Guy

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2005
4,327
1
0
Originally posted by: KoolDrew
For a quiet PSU I would suggest a Seasonic.
:thumbsup:

I agree.

In this case I'd recommend AMD. 1 prescott is not enough (I have one idling at 45C, with expensive cooling - zalman 7700AlCu), but TWO is insane. AMD is perhaps the 'Bang for the Buck' here.

Edit: You should also take note of the upcoming Presler core (from Intel) next year. Maybe then I'll give them a chance (if it does well). But for now, my advice is to consider AMD
 

t3h l337 n3wb

Platinum Member
Apr 22, 2005
2,698
0
76
Best bang for your buck rofl... No offense, but that setup is probably the WORST bang for your buck. AMD > Intel in ANYTHING except huge multitasking, it's cheaper, dual-core isn't necessary, SLI is a waste of money, etc... I would go on, but I think everyon else has already covered everything else.
 

kitkat22

Golden Member
Feb 10, 2005
1,464
1,332
136
OK, adding everything up you have a budget of approx. $2500. Boy, I wish I had that! Anyway let's get started. Since you like newegg I'll stick with them.

Processor:
A64 4000+ $473
MOBO:
ASUS A8N-SLI $176
Memory:
Corsair XMS 1GB $143 x 2
Hard Drive:
Maxtor Diamondmax 10 $149 x 2
Case:
Don't Change $126
PSU:
Don't Change $69
VC:
XFX 6800GT $353 x 2

Add everything up and it comes to about $2200. (includes shipping) Granted it isn't dual core, however, if you want all that just wait another week, or go to a website that offers dual core. Anyway, what I've given is really a quick 5 min. summation of what a AMD based system is like. In other words, I wasn't even trying. The HD, video card and memory are better than your intel specs and still about $200 cheaper. If you wanted to bump in a dual-core AMD processor you still have about $150-200 of leg room to work with.
 

xTYBALTx

Senior member
May 10, 2005
394
0
0
Original poster stated that he wants to use the PC for gaming and work - that his current PC will become a media-center-ish PC. Assuming that "work" entails e-mails, spreadsheets, PowerPoint presentations, etc, I think a single core Athlon 64 chip is best suited to your needs.

It also appears that the OP is looking for a mid-high end machine; he wants excellent performance without spending $600 on a video card only marginally better than a $360 video card, for example. With this in mind, it comes down, simply, to what you want to spend. cscpianoman's recommendation was excellent - you won't find a better system for what you want to do for under $2200.

However, you should consider cutting the second 6800GT and saving yourself about $355. That money could be saved up and put into a next generation video card in about 4 months. With either one 6800GT or two 6800GT's, you will notice an extreme difference from your current setup. And the $1,200 Pentium D 3.2 chip you mentioned? For games, it currently performs worse than the $260 A64 3500+