First Build, Finalized list....Buying this week.

[Boyo]

Making the plunge into my first build. Have all the parts and I am ready to make the purchase by the end of the week. Before I list my hardware I will give a brief description of what I use my computer for: Heavy multi-tasking. Usual day involves Photoshop, streaming music from the web, multiple web page windows open, MS Office, & downloading from the net. In my spare time, I like to use the PC for gaming. I want a fast, crisp PC. At some point I will OC, but I need to wait and learn more about it before rushing.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+
Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe
WD Raptor 150GB
Corsair XMS 2GB (2x 1GB) 3500LLPRO
eVGA 2x Geforce 7900GT 256MB
Lite-On CD/DVD burner with Lightscribe
Mitsumi 7-in-1 card reader with FDD
Enermax Liberty 620W

 

[Bobthelost]

4200, the extra cache isn't worth the extra cash (god what an awful pun)
Think about some PC 4000 RAM with the saved money, it'll make more difference there when you do OC.

Otherwise it's hard to beat, enjoy it.

 

[pkme2]

Good thinking on PSU. Prepared already for future addons, huh!

 

[imported_fx]

I dont think you'll want to have SLI but I would suggest to get X1900XTX (The GPU King).

 

[Boyo]

Originally posted by: Bobthelost
4200, the extra cache isn't worth the extra cash (god what an awful pun)
Think about some PC 4000 RAM with the saved money, it'll make more difference there when you do OC.

Otherwise it's hard to beat, enjoy it.

So a drop to a 4200+ with 512MB on the L2, but an upgrade to PC4000 would make a notable difference? Up until now I never even considered anything but PC3200. I find that interessting. I am going to do a little reasearch on PC4000.....Thanks for the tip.


FX, I know ATI is king of the GPU hill with the X1900XTX. That card is almost dangerous it's so fast, but I have been using nVIDIA for a few years now so I think I will stay with what I am used to. But thanks for the suggestion

 

[Boyo]

Does anyone else want to weigh in on the argument of the 4400+ having minimal performance gains over the 4200+ due to the 512MB on the L2???

I am buying my parts tomorrow, so I want to make sure it's right. The last thing I need is buyer's remorse...

 

[wwswimming]

hi

i just bought an opteron 175, dual core 2.2 GHz with 2 x 1 MB cache, so comparable i think to the 4400.

it works great !

so far i've been using it to backup some CAD training work over a network. amazing, easiest (knock-on-wood) backup i've ever done.

i can't answer the 4200 vs 4400 question, but, just like it was worth waiting a week for the most recent huge Intel price cuts, AMD has got to answer back with some price cuts of their own.

one idea is to wait a week for news about possible AMD price cuts to hit the tech news media.

 

[Chris2wire]

I definately agree DO NOT get SLi. Get a top end card like the X1900XT and only one card.

Vid cards are outdated so quickly that you don't want to have to buy 2 each time.... The X1900XT will last a long time with its performance level.

 

[Howard]

I'm not sure that you'll notice the performance increase of the 4200+ over the 3800+ (given your usage), so if you plan on OCing later on, you may as well go for the cheaper CPU.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Boyo
Does anyone else want to weigh in on the argument of the 4400+ having minimal performance gains over the 4200+ due to the 512MB on the L2???

I am buying my parts tomorrow, so I want to make sure it's right. The last thing I need is buyer's remorse...

I dont buy into the argument less cache on the CPU and a higher bandwidth ram are equal. Unless you are going to overclock the memory bus to take advantage of the increased bandwidth what do you gain? And even if you did I dont see how increasing the bandwidth on memory will compete with a larger L2 cache. If that were the case why does Intel keep adding MBs of cache to their chips instead of simply upping the FSB?

Now that doesnt mean you shouldnt evaluate if you should get the 4400 or 4200. But I wouldnt trade in a 4400 for a 4200 and get DDR4000 ram expecting it to be as fast.

 

[Boyo]

Originally posted by: Chris2wire
I definately agree DO NOT get SLi. Get a top end card like the X1900XT and only one card.

Vid cards are outdated so quickly that you don't want to have to buy 2 each time.... The X1900XT will last a long time with its performance level.

Well, I'm definitely not going with ATI. But, would buying 1 card like the XFX GeForce 7900GTX Extreme (690MHz) 512MB be a better solution than 2 7900GT's in SLI?

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Boyo
Does anyone else want to weigh in on the argument of the 4400+ having minimal performance gains over the 4200+ due to the 512MB on the L2???

I am buying my parts tomorrow, so I want to make sure it's right. The last thing I need is buyer's remorse...

I dont buy into the argument less cache on the CPU and a higher bandwidth ram are equal. Unless you are going to overclock the memory bus to take advantage of the increased bandwidth what do you gain? And even if you did I dont see how increasing the bandwidth on memory will compete with a larger L2 cache. If that were the case why does Intel keep adding MBs of cache to their chips instead of simply upping the FSB?

Because they can. Seriously.

 

[Rotax]

I'd suggest 3800+ or 165 opty . . and oc to 2.2gs EASY . . most will do 2.4g . .

I'd suggest the X1900XT as well . . for "photoshop and some gaming" i don't see you needing SLI . .
And if your going to blow the kind of $ for a 7900 GTX . . Get the *better* card (X1900XT) instead, and overclock for even more as$kickingness . . or XTX . .

 

[SparkyJJO]

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont buy into the argument less cache on the CPU and a higher bandwidth ram are equal. Unless you are going to overclock the memory bus to take advantage of the increased bandwidth what do you gain? And even if you did I dont see how increasing the bandwidth on memory will compete with a larger L2 cache. If that were the case why does Intel keep adding MBs of cache to their chips instead of simply upping the FSB?

Because they can. Seriously.

agreed. Intel seems to like the big numbers over the actual performance difference, which is why even though Intel's chips run at faster speeds AMD's "slower" chips can keep up with out any trouble because AMD's focus isn't on raw MHz but rather overall performance.

 

[Geomagick]

Either the 4200+ or 4400+ will be fine. I have a 4400+ and 7800gtx SLI which would be similar in performance to 7900gt SLI.

I would recommend getting the fastest single card you can now, and then if need be add a second further down the line, this is what I did and I think its worked out rather well.

A 7900gtx will chomp its way through almost all games with ease, the notable exception being Oblivion, but then no card(s) really do it justice yet.

Also going for a single card will save you a bit of money now.

 

[Chris2wire]

I realize you dont WANT to go with Ati... But maybe you should reconsider.

I've always hated ati since I had probs with an old ati rage card back in the day... Used Nvidia ever since... But recently, due to the sheer performance of the X1800xt, x1900xt and x1900xtx, I had to go to Ati, for now at least.

And I am so impressed...

Ill stick with nvidia for motherboard chipsets, but for vid cards Im glad I gave ati a try.

You should try it...

 

[Boyo]

Okay. You guys have to help me out here. Sorry if I sound dumb, but it is my first build. I am taking everyone's advice seriously. I still have a few questions though.

It sounds like the consensus for my build is to scrap the 7900GT SLI, and instead buy a single card, preferably the fastest on the market, the X1900XTX. Would it be true that the 1x ATI X1900XTX would be faster than the 2x 7900GT SLI?

Would an X1900XTX be much faster than a single eVGA 7900GTX Superclocked @690MHz?

Also, would I need to change out my mobo for ATI?

 

[LOUISSSSS]

i agree with getting the XTX it IS the fastest single card on the market and i'd take it anyday over the 7900gt sli. and i'm sure its faster than a gtx oced. you dont have to, but a great motherboard would be the asus a8r32-mvp deluxe. good stability, reliability, oc-ability and everything works with it

 

[Rotax]

i thought i heard/read of some 'issues' w/ the overclocked nvidia's...and them getting to hot and needing to back off to lower speeds?? yes? no? not sure WHICH card it was exactly, but i know i read something of that nature.

u would not need to change your mobo, i'm running an nforce4 ultra chipset w/ my x1800xt, no problem.

i think comparing a single card to a sli set up, the sli WILL win at higher resolutions for sure . . SLI is for max resolutions (can your monitor support it??) and MAX effects AA/FAA/ quality etc . . and just by reading your first post on 'usage' it doesn't sound like you'd be that *hardcore* into it to fully utilize it . . but then i guess there are ppl w/ $$$$ and it just needs to be burned, in that case, get the biggest and the best . .

my opinion would be..start w/ whichever card it may be you want, and if its not fast enough, add another...

 

[Chris2wire]

If youre not using SLi then get an Nforce 4 Ultra board... Cheaper since theres no SLi or CrossFire, and its a great chipset. I favor MSI and DFI, but asus makes great boards too

Trust me, you won't regret the x1900xtx... For a long time to come.

 

[Gagan]

Shut up abou tthe X1900XT. I've told everyone they have sh1tty warranties and they do, saphhire and powercolor suck. Stop pressuring her into getting an x1900xt.

I agree getting a 7900GTX XXX XFX edition Miss, ti's a great card and the FASTEST ON THE MARKET.

Do not touch an ati card, people lieabout how well they overclock and how quiet they are. They are actually very loud and overclocking them is russian roulette.

TO make things worse, Sapphire the major backer of it is the WORST RMA companyin the world. I talked to mylocal shop even about the returns and they will hassle you to no end, STAY AWAY.

If you're worreid about video card longevity get a superclock EVGA 7900 GTX card, and keep the receipt/box, so that when you buy the powerswap you can get the latest card for the difference PAID on the receipt(NOT ITS WORTH) BY SENDIN the old one to evga....

Great stuff.

 

[Gagan]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
i agree with getting the XTX it IS the fastest single card on the market and i'd take it anyday over the 7900gt sli. and i'm sure its faster than a gtx oced. you dont have to, but a great motherboard would be the asus a8r32-mvp deluxe. good stability, reliability, oc-ability and everything works with it

Ignore this idiot. Look at his posts, Icall him out on alot of his stupid fallacious information and he flees until some people reply that agree with someone else then he uses it as reinforcement to convey something he did not intend to initially.

Loiussss is an idiot you cannot win with him, he will advocate the a8rmvp32 and the x1900xt to no end when in essence the a8n32 sli is a much better board with more longevity(SLI is the future PERIOD) and the x1900xt being toatlly overrated (Claims it's awesome because it's 375 for an OEM, YEOUCH too bad you dont wanna risk it with sapphire)

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont buy into the argument less cache on the CPU and a higher bandwidth ram are equal. Unless you are going to overclock the memory bus to take advantage of the increased bandwidth what do you gain? And even if you did I dont see how increasing the bandwidth on memory will compete with a larger L2 cache. If that were the case why does Intel keep adding MBs of cache to their chips instead of simply upping the FSB?

Because they can. Seriously.

agreed. Intel seems to like the big numbers over the actual performance difference, which is why even though Intel's chips run at faster speeds AMD's "slower" chips can keep up with out any trouble because AMD's focus isn't on raw MHz but rather overall performance.

well... the P4 design really takes a performance hit when it goes to the *comparatively* higher latency memory subsystem that the A64s don't have (on-die memory controller ftw). iirc, the p4 also has much higher bandwidth to the L2. and, iirc, not only is the L1 smaller than the A64, but the caches are inclusive rather than exclusive, meaning the same data is carried in both. so, in effect, a 512 K L2 cache A64 can store 640 K of data on the chip, while a 1 MB P4 stores 1 MH of data on chip

 

[tjpark1111]

mobo is serious overkill, 16x independent gives NO performance increase.

 

[tjpark1111]

Originally posted by: Gagan

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
i agree with getting the XTX it IS the fastest single card on the market and i'd take it anyday over the 7900gt sli. and i'm sure its faster than a gtx oced. you dont have to, but a great motherboard would be the asus a8r32-mvp deluxe. good stability, reliability, oc-ability and everything works with it

Ignore this idiot. Look at his posts, Icall him out on alot of his stupid fallacious information and he flees until some people reply that agree with someone else then he uses it as reinforcement to convey something he did not intend to initially.

Loiussss is an idiot you cannot win with him, he will advocate the a8rmvp32 and the x1900xt to no end when in essence the a8n32 sli is a much better board with more longevity(SLI is the future PERIOD) and the x1900xt being toatlly overrated (Claims it's awesome because it's 375 for an OEM, YEOUCH too bad you dont wanna risk it with sapphire)

wtf is wrong with you noob? maybe the cooling and overclocking is over-rated as you said, but it sure as hell won't hurt to get an x1900xt! Can you not admit the fact that the x1900 is cheaper(powercolor has a lifetime warranty you idiot), has better image quality, much higher minimum frame rates than NVIDIA, takes less of a performance hit with AA, etc. SLI is NOT a future upgrade option you IDIOT this has been discussed MANY times. You either get SLI off the line, or you won't use it. By the time you want to add another card for SLI, that card you have will be outdated.