I've made myself SICK with research

[Rawjhaw]

Between excellent sites like Anandtech and others on the web, I've spent the last month reading... and reading... and reading.... in preparation for a brand new pc build. Let me start off by saying that i'm no power-user nor hardcore gamer (not since the very early days of EQ) - my current system is a 5-year old P4 1.8 - so I'm looking to put a nice new all-around system together. Casual gaming, casual tinkering, possible home music recording... would preferring erring on the side of more performance than less, in case my computing needs change...

At first, it was all about agonizing over the cpu - E6750 (G0) vs. Q6600 (G0) vs. waiting for that slick E8400 right around the corner. Then it branched into the dizzying Vista vs. XP / x64 vs. x32 conundrum (still don't know what to do). Then it went to mobos/ram... good grief, there are so many ways to go. Initially, I was thinking of a system with specs like this:

E6750/Giga G-P35C-DS3R/8800 GTS 512k/650W Seasonic/4gb decent DDR2 800/Vista 64/500gb HDD..... basically $1,400ish when all is said and done.

I guess my biggest stumbling block right now is worrying that such a system would be obsolete once Nehalem arrives (especially if it's early 2009 vs. late)....... what are those in similar situations doing?

 

[MegaVovaN]

Originally posted by: Rawjhaw
.....
worrying that such a system would be obsolete once Nehalem arrives (especially if it's early 2009 vs. late)....... what are those in similar situations doing?

Others (including myself) are building a system now, and not caring about it becoming "obsolete". SO what? It is still damn fast computer!
Waiting game never ends. If you want a PC, buy it today.

I say go for Q6600 (in future more apps may be able to use quad core, and seems like you keep your computer for a LONG time), Vista 64 or XP 32 (up to you, I would go Vista 64).
8800GTS 512 is overkill, 8800GT is good enough, especially for "casual gaming".
650W PSU is also overkill, try Corsair 450VX.

4 gb DDr2 - must have.

~$100 P35 mobo will be fine.

 

[DSF]

Nehalem is not going to immediate make every processor that came before it a hunk of junk.

As many around here will tell you, there's always something better around the corner. At some point you have to buy, or you could be waiting forever. Core2Duos are plenty fast.

I agree with most of what MegaVovaN said. 4GB of DDR2 is not a must-have, but DDR2 is so cheap right now that there's little compelling reason not to go with 4GB, unless money is tight. I second the nomination for the 8800GT over the GTS if you're only gaming casually. As said, 450W is plenty.

I would skip the P35C motherboard. You're not likely to see a performance upgrade by switching to DDR3 without a complete system overhaul anyway. By the time you're ready to do that, you're going to be looking at a new motherboard and processor anyway. Go with the GA-P35-DS3L. If you need RAID or Firewire, then get the P35-DS3R or P35-DS3P.

 

[BlueAcolyte]

If you are worried about your computer becoming "obsolete," just get a E2140 and OC it for now, then get a Penryn.

My E4500 I just got will be passed down to my dad to replace his Pentium D. When Nehalem comes out next year, I'll pick up a Penryn for cheap.

 

[D13S3L]

I'd recommend going with the Q6600... 8800gt... vista 64... at least a 500 watt psu... 4gb ddr2 ram. IMHO that is the sweet spot for power/price.

8800gt can definitely hold its own in even the most demanding games (cryis/cod4).

The 6600 is a pretty good overclocker and a bit future proof.

Vista 64 runs smooth as silk for me.

If you go 64 bit, why not go 4gb+ ram? its fairly cheap and your op sys will actually use all of it.

 

[mizzou]

I don't see the point of Vista right now IMO.

There are like 2 decent DX 10 games, and zero games that are solely playable on DX10. Other then DX10, why else purchase Vista? DUal core applications probably won't become mainstream for 3-4 years.

I've seen win 95, 98, 2000, xp all come into play, and Vista is definitely the odd-ball out.

As far as hardware, keep in mind that something twice as expensive does not mean it be as viable for twice as long. I always go with the mid-range or upper-mid range for upgrades. But I'm happy with not going at full res with full options =)

 

[Rawjhaw]

Perhaps after reading volumes of posts & reviews - mostly by high-lvl tech enthusiasts - it has led me to overthinking this decision. You can't help but get caught up in the frenzy of wanting to keep pace with the Joneses - all the while, getting bombarded by a seemingly endless array of great options and an equal number of opinions both for and against each option.

I really want to place my orders next week... not sure why, but there's something about the Q6600 that doesn't resonate with me right now. The E6750 w/G0 is very attractive but I feel at this point, with the 45nm E8400 release a couple weeks away, it seems senseless not to wait. Regardless, I think I've decided to stick with XP Pro 32 for this build.... I don't doubt that Vista is solid these days, but I worry about its increased "Big Brother" element (which not many people seem to address btw)

Thanks for the input, gents - much appreciated. I was initially concerned about the high temps of the 8800 GT, but it's nothing that a decent heatsink/fan can't fix.

 

[DSF]

Originally posted by: Rawjhaw
Thanks for the input, gents - much appreciated. I was initially concerned about the high temps of the 8800 GT, but it's nothing that a decent heatsink/fan can't fix.

For what it's worth, those reports don't match my personal experience. I set a fan profile in RivaTuner and my card idles at 50C, never going above about 72-73 even in a hard load like Crysis on high. Even without setting a fan profile, the cards run within spec.

 

[0roo0roo]

I guess my biggest stumbling block right now is worrying that such a system would be obsolete once Nehalem arrives (especially if it's early 2009 vs. late)....... what are those in similar situations doing?

lol

solution. buy nothing ever

 

[Hop]

Reading is the key here. I spent almost two months researching every aspect of my new C2D build. I was away from the game for a very long time, and KNEW I had to come back here if I wanted to get it done right. I was jumping from a P4 Prescott 3GHz machine with AGP into the PCI Express world and dual cores. I knew nothing.

And after reading all the posts, especially the ones that replied to my queries for information, when I thought I had it all zipped up, there was yet more info that made me second guess my decisions.

So I guess it's like what people have said here, that you can wait forever for the right deal or part to be available, and then there will STILL be something better the moment you click SUBMIT on your shopping cart purchase.

I went in with OC in mind, so I picked my Allendale E4500 for price, the 2.2GHz clock, and the multiplier of 11x. I'm sure plenty would say I made the wrong decision, but too many people were overclocking it to 3-3.2GHz for me to step away from it. The 65XX and 68XX types offered bigger L2 cache, but lower multipliers, and I wasn't excited about spending a lot more on higher RAM that can be pushed higher on the FSB.

So I got to say that even though I probably could have done better, my first C2D is screaming fast compared to my old P4, my Antec 900 runs cool and looks good (I keep saying it... I love that 200mm fan on the top), so my feeling is I did good with my first C2D, thanks to the GREAT advice from these chaps around here. I'll make mental notes as I OC on what to do on my next rig in about six months because my Linux machine would LOVE this C2D as a hand-me-down.

Getting my feet wet on this platform was a good experience thanks to the research. It was worth it. And it's posts like yours that give me ideas on my next machine. Weigh the research, the posts about what is good and not good, and you can't go wrong. I didn't.

Except I see a lot about the 8800GT. I compromised and got a 8600GT. Went from about 20-30 FPS with World of Warcraft with medium settings on a Radeon 1650 Pro 512MB AGP to over 100 FPS with everything set to max on the 8600GT, at 1680x1050 resolution. The cost difference was about $150 and I wanted to see what I could get out of the 8600GT. My next rig will have the 8800GT.

Sorry for the long reply. I know, I talk too much!

Hop

 

[palladium]

I have to agree with the waiting game, I bet right now Intel has already completed most of the design work for Sandy Bridge ( successor to Nehalem's die shrink). By the time you buy a Nehalem, Sandy Bridge will appear in the IDF already. In short, no point waiting, just go for it if you need it.

I'm building a PC for my bro with a Q6600, as for myself I think I'll wait for Nehalem to be released, then decide on the best bang-for-buck chip.

 

[justly]

Originally posted by: Rawjhaw
Perhaps after reading volumes of posts & reviews - mostly by high-lvl tech enthusiasts - it has led me to overthinking this decision. You can't help but get caught up in the frenzy of wanting to keep pace with the Joneses - all the while, getting bombarded by a seemingly endless array of great options and an equal number of opinions both for and against each option.

I had considered telling you what you where looking at appeared like overkill for your intended use. I chose to stay silent instead because a lot of people seem to take offense when someone actually tries to tailor a system to the users needs, especially when that means coming in under budget and with lower performance.

With the realization that you just got "caught up in the frenzy of wanting to keep pace with the Joneses" I reconsidered staying silent and thought you might benefit from a non high-lvl enthusiast point of view, if however my opinion doesn't help you then by all means buy what you think is best for your needs.

I would suggest that you start with something that shows a significant improvement compared to your current system (on a five year old system I would suggest approximately twice the performance). Once you have determined a minimum starting point, then consider moving up from there only if two conditions exist, first you are below budget, and second only if it makes sence (don't spend 50% more for a component that only gives 10-15% performance improvement). Of course there can always be exceptions for thing you really want, just don't make a habit of wanting everything.

Since the processor (a P4 1.8 Ghz) is the only part of your current system that you mentioned, there is a good probability even the lowest speed X2 or C2D should double your current p4 1.8 Ghz in performance.
Stepping up one or even a few speed grades is usually inexpensive and often a good decision, so a mid-range part will probably serve your needs well.

Without knowing anything else about your current system I would just recommend sticking with primarily mid-range components to keep the system balanced. That would be something like 2 to 4GB of RAM (for heavy gaming, or graphics work lean towards 4GB). A Radeon 3850, 3870 or the Nvidia 8800 GT should do nicely (deciding between these will depend on how serious a gamer you are and the resolution you play at). There are cheaper video alternatives that I didn't list but it doesn't sound like your budget is tight enough to make them a consideration. HD prices are for the most part linear with relation to size so just get the size you need.

No matter what you decide on, I wish you good luck on the new build.

Just wanted to add one thing. There are differing opinions about computer obsolescence, and two ways people often try to minimize it. One method is to buy the most powerful system possible, and the other is to buy cheap and upgrade more frequently. What I commonly see is that these two ideas are often taken to the extreme and the person either ends up with an outdated top of the line system, or they are stuck in a constant upgrade cycle.
Find a nice middle ground, plan your own systems obsolescence in 2 or 3 years based on how you use it, then you can shorten or extend the life of your system based on your needs and finances.

 

[Hop]

Originally posted by: justly

Originally posted by: Rawjhaw
Perhaps after reading volumes of posts & reviews - mostly by high-lvl tech enthusiasts - it has led me to overthinking this decision. You can't help but get caught up in the frenzy of wanting to keep pace with the Joneses - all the while, getting bombarded by a seemingly endless array of great options and an equal number of opinions both for and against each option.

Find a nice middle ground, plan your own systems obsolescence in 2 or 3 years based on how you use it, then you can shorten or extend the life of your system based on your needs and finances.

Agreed. I'm blessed now with the fact that I own a house in an old neighborhood. My last home was on a street that was newly created just a year earlier. I was blessed with neighbors that were Intel engineers, and other high income individuals...

And everyone had to have the fastest machine. I got sick of it!

I build a machine to do the things I need it to do. To give me the most pleasant experience either watching movies, or a desirable frame rate in the games I play. IMHO, who CARES who has the fastest machine?? I often laugh at my buddies that bought the latest, greatest processor, or memory, or the new SSD drives out there. I ALWAYS try to stay within the sweet spot of that price/performance curve. I look at a processor, hard drive, video card, etc, and see what the next 'upgrade' means in price. If it's like $10 more or so, I explore that. It's when the increase starts up that ramp to the top, when the grade becomes too steep, that I back-peddle a little and settle for what is main stream.