First build critique?

addylo

Junior Member
Jun 10, 2006
21
0
0
I'm about to pull the trigger on my first home-grown build. Trying to keep the total <$1K. This setup comes in at $967.93 on Newegg. I know the graphics card is middle-of-the-road. I'm looking for decent general performance (but not necessarily for gaming). I'm also aware of the 5000+'s odd multiplier. (How big a deal will that be?)

Is there anything blatantly wrong or incompatible with these components?

1) AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Windsor 2.6GHz Socket AM2 Processor Model ADA5000CSBOX - Retail
2) EPoX EP-MF570SLI Socket AM2 NVIDIA nForce 570 SLI MCP ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail
3) CORSAIR XMS2 1GB (2 x 512MB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X1024-6400C4 - Retail
4) XFX PVT73GUGD3 GeForce 7600GT 256MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card - Retail
5) Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3320620AS (Perpendicular Recording Technology) 320GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM
6) Rosewill RT550-135-SL 550W 135mm Fan SLI Ready - ATX V2.2/EPS12V Power Supply - Retail
7) LG 18X DVD±R Super-Multi DVD Burner With 12X DVD-RAM Write Black IDE Model GSAH22N-BK - OEM
8) Rosewill R5604-TBK 0.8mm SECC Screw-less Dual 120mm Fans ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - Retail
 

humanure

Senior member
Dec 28, 2005
441
0
0
looks ok except for the Rosewill PSU, I would suggest a better one. This enermax is about the same cost and much better quality. Also, the 5000+ is certainly not a bad CPU, but right now I would go with a core 2 duo, even an e6300 would outperform the 5000+ and save over $100.
 

91TTZ

Lifer
Jan 31, 2005
14,374
1
0
I would go with a Core 2 Duo 6400 instead of the Athlon. I'm an AMD fan, but I'll admit better performance when I see it.

Get cheaper RAM, since it doesn't affect the Core 2's performance as much as the AMD. Read the article that Anand posted.

Buy a less expensive motherboard, it won't affect performance much but you're spending 2x on it.

Spend the extra money that you saved on a better video card.


I've noticed that nowadays, companies spend a lot more money marketing than they did before. They market stuff to the "enthusiast" crowd for an inflated price, and people buy it. That's foolish. For most of the stuff, you're spending 1.5x to 2x as much for 5% more performance. It's not worth it.

I could build a system of comparable speed for about 50% less money by making wiser buying decisions.
 

Operandi

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,508
0
0
PSU: Rosewill is junk, thats the biggest problem, for it's replacement I would suggest the 380 watt Seasonic S12.

Video card: Gigabyte 7600GT It's a standard 7600GT but it's passively cooled so it's silent and far more reliable.

Case: InWin make very good basic cases, they use high quality steel and plastic and have very good air flow. They are my default choice unless the build calls for somethng higher-end in which case I usually go with AL Lian Li or CoolerMaster.

Core2 is probably a better choice right now but if you are set on AMD AM2 I would go with something other than Epox and something without SLI. This MSI nForce 550 board looks like a pretty good economical choice.

If you want to give Core2 a look I would start with the Gigabyte DS3 Intel 965 based board. CPU choice really comes down your budget but the 6400 and 6600 are good choices.
 

addylo

Junior Member
Jun 10, 2006
21
0
0
Thanks for the reply folks. I expected a few "go C2D" responses, but sheesh!

I've been driving an Intel all my life (currently in a 2.4 P4) but thought for once I'd look at AMD. From all I had read, it looked like AMD had better efficiency, memory management, and overall architecture. In a nutshell, hasn't Intel just souped up their old Netburst technology and beefed up cache to account for shortcomings in their architecture? I'm no tech guru, so I really don't know.

The day I posted this I noticed Anandtech's monthly CPU review recommending C2D over any of the Athlons. Guess I should at least consider it.
 

91TTZ

Lifer
Jan 31, 2005
14,374
1
0
Originally posted by: addylo
In a nutshell, hasn't Intel just souped up their old Netburst technology and beefed up cache to account for shortcomings in their architecture? I'm no tech guru, so I really don't know.

No, it's actually closer to their Pentium Pro/Pentium 3 architecture than the P4 architecture.
 

addylo

Junior Member
Jun 10, 2006
21
0
0
Originally posted by: 91TTZNo, it's actually closer to their Pentium Pro/Pentium 3 architecture than the P4 architecture.
That doesn't sound like a great leap forward in innovative technology as all the hype would lead you to think. So why is C2D so great?

 

Operandi

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,508
0
0
Originally posted by: addylo
Originally posted by: 91TTZNo, it's actually closer to their Pentium Pro/Pentium 3 architecture than the P4 architecture.
That doesn't sound like a great leap forward in innovative technology as all the hype would lead you to think. So why is C2D so great?

There is a wonderful site called Anandtech, maybe you've heard of it?

If you want a simple version try This .
 

addylo

Junior Member
Jun 10, 2006
21
0
0
Originally posted by: Operandi
There is a wonderful site called Anandtech, maybe you've heard of it?

If you want a simple version try This .
The social skills displayed on this site are impressive.