New Alienware computer system.

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fstime

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2004
4,382
5
81
quote:
You do not own any version of the A64 or Prescott.



Umm actually i do. A64 laptop. HP Compaq zv6000 A64 3200+.

I'm talking desktops here.

quote:
When you have both at your fingertips, then tell me i'm full of BS.



I dont need to have both processors to tell you that something is BS.

You havn't compared both CPU's, you cant say an intel isn't smoother than the A64 in multitasking.

quote:
I believe DDR2's timmings have reduces by a lot to 3-2-2 and such.



I have seen no such timings for DDR2. :

Well DUH, you dont own a P4 so you dont own DDR2 memory, DDR2 may be advertised as 3-4-4 but it will run lower timmings usually.

I have compared bandwith tests with sandra comaring DDR1 and DDR2, the difference is minimal.

Heat is no longer an issue with the 6 series.



Yeah right!!! Those things suck power, like no tomorrow. A dual core A64 takes less power than a single core Prescott.


You may not feel you have to prove it to humey, but you wont win this argument with no support.

Once again kevin, stop assuming things without evidence.

You dont have a 6 series in front of you like me.


I have no heat issues, than again, I run XP-120's and XP-90's on all my CPU's.
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
I'm talking desktops here.

But earlier you said i dont own anything that is A64. Additionally, the mobile chips (this is a DTR) are the exact same as the Desktop only with lower voltage, and PowerNow! enabled.

You havn't compared both CPU's, you cant say an intel isn't smoother than the A64 in multitasking.

Once again you are putting words in my mouth. When did i EVER say they weren't. When comparing 2 single core CPU's the Intel cpu's are better under HEAVY multitasking. However, in dual core, AMD once again leads.

Well DUH, you dont own a P4 so you dont own DDR2 memory, DDR2 may be advertised as 3-4-4 but it will run lower timmings usually.

I have compared bandwith tests with sandra comaring DDR1 and DDR2, the difference is minimal.

Once again, i dont need the product to discuss it. You talk like i am some little kid who knows nothing. No kidding you can tighten the timings, but it is OCing. Not everyone wants to do that. Additionally, i still have yet to see DDR2 anywhere around 2-2-2 timings. Oooh, you tested the memory using a Synthetic Benchmark that means 0. Finally, never did i say DDR2 wasn't good or that DDR was better. DDR2 is slightly more expensive, and isn't THAT much better than DDR.

Once again kevin, stop assuming things without evidence.

You dont have a 6 series in front of you like me.


I have no heat issues, than again, I run XP-120's and XP-90's on all my CPU's.

Without evidence!? Ask anyone, look at any review, and you will see that the P4 eats power like crazy. That power doesn't just go away, it turns into heat. Once again you say i dont have a CPU, i dont need it to discuss it. Every single reviewer says the same thing. Even the ones that are heavily intel biased.

-Kevin
 

Preti9cboi

Senior member
Dec 8, 2004
364
0
0
Originally posted by: Drayvn
Thermaltake Tsunami. Great piece of case i admit.

Also when you do build your own computer, you have the knowledge of your own computer, so if you really get into it and read up about it. Youll most probably find if something goes wrong you know what itll be, saving you money on getting it fixed by someone else, when it could have easily been just a power connector coming loose.

I'm still new at this but i've built 5 systems to date.
Dont get the Tsunami case. It rattles when the harddrive spins because of the heavy front door. The fans sound like a someone drying their hair. I also use to get complaints of people who walk into my room and say "what's that noise" until i changed the fans.

Stick with Antec and Coolmaster. You can't go with with one of those name brand cases.
Much more quiet cases.

I would also like to recommend an AMD for gaming. But hey, it's still your money.
 

fstime

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2004
4,382
5
81
quote:
You havn't compared both CPU's, you cant say an intel isn't smoother than the A64 in multitasking.



Once again you are putting words in my mouth. When did i EVER say they weren't. When comparing 2 single core CPU's the Intel cpu's are better under HEAVY multitasking. However, in dual core, AMD once again leads.

From the horses mouth.

INTEL IS BETTER THAN AMD AT MULTITASKING, PERIOD. IT IS SMOOTHER OVERALL.

That is what i've been trying to proove this enitre time, there is a reason to buy Intel, if you dont game as much and do heavy multitasking.


No one cares about dual core, we are talking about single core right now.

 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
No one cares about dual core, we are talking about single core right now.

I would, if i knew i was going to be multi-tasking not recommend a single core CPU. There is no reason not to recommend dual core for multi tasking.

No one cares about dual core, we are talking about single core right now.

Dont try to put constraints on this discussion. Dual core means everything, and changes the whole scenario.

-Kevin
 

fstime

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2004
4,382
5
81
Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
No one cares about dual core, we are talking about single core right now.

I would, if i knew i was going to be multi-tasking not recommend a single core CPU. There is no reason not to recommend dual core for multi tasking.

No one cares about dual core, we are talking about single core right now.

Dont try to put constraints on this discussion. Dual core means everything, and changes the whole scenario.

-Kevin


I love it Kevin.

The first thing I said was Intel was better than AMD at multitasking.

Now you your self have even admited it.

You have now "changed the subject" over to dual core because you just prooved my point, Intel does have an advantage over AMD.

Later.
 

imported_humey

Senior member
Nov 9, 2004
863
0
0
BouZouki, How can you claim this "INTEL IS BETTER THAN AMD AT MULTITASKING, PERIOD. IT IS SMOOTHER OVERALL", "No one cares about dual core, we are talking about single core right now.".

1st of everyone cares about dualcore as its here now, but you think your INTEL pos is better as of hyperthreading where cpu acts as 2 cpus (comes up in dev-man as 2).

Well AMD in 2002 invented and patented hyperthreading but they have short pipes in cpu so dont really benifit or need it, im not sure how they didnt stop Intel using it, but the slow intels benifit as they have long pipes, AMD has move on to hypertransport which claims to let PC parts communicate upto 48x faster then current non hyperstransport PC's.

You info is a load of crap and no hard links to back up anything, i could goto my cousin shop and set up 2 rigs right now, he is like you and a twat, he waves the Intel flag slagging AMD then a few months later he jumps sides he has did this all the time i known him and the same with ATI and Nvidia, i prefer to be consistant and i stay with AMD and Nvidia as i prefer them, i only skipped the crappy FX range.

You info is flawed, mines is taken from real info thats easy to google and its the same im saying now as i did last year and i will still be saying it next year.

You seem to make a joke out me claiming i got axx as his shop, well its true, i couldnt afford to buy all different parts to test, so i am lucky i can with his shop, i did dtate he will let me borrow a GPU but to borrow parts to build a complete Intel rig and not pay for it is a bit much to ask, so i help out if a customer wants a Intel rig, so i get to build, test it.
 

fstime

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2004
4,382
5
81
Wow humey, you really try don't you.

Maybe when you figure out what multitasking is, you can ask your daddy to bring you to the little computer shop and try it out?

Okay?

We're not talking about dual core, thats why I said no one cares about it right now.

You're simply trying to change to subject

Even kevin himself admited Intel was better than AMD at multitasking.

Go to the CPU forum and ask, what single core CPU is the best for multitasking, you'll get the correct answer.

Later.

 

KeepItRed

Senior member
Jul 19, 2005
811
0
0
In my eyes, Intel is very good for multi-tasking, and AMD is very good at doing 1 task extremely fast. This is why gamers choose AMD > Intel
 

Randum

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2004
2,473
0
76
im a gamer, and a small business owner, and video editor- i multitask like a bat out of hell- need HT, and soon to be dual core w/HT thats practically almost 4 CPus!
 

Soccerman06

Diamond Member
Jul 29, 2004
5,830
5
81
im a gamer, and a small business owner, and video editor- i multitask like a bat out of hell- need HT, and soon to be dual core w/HT thats practically almost 4 CPus
Now do you use Windows XP Pro or Home? If your using Home, Windows can only use 2 threads at a time so the 840E is a waste of money, of course Pro makes use of those extra 2 cores.

I havent read into your huge thread yet but you are making a big mistake getting Alienware. Actually making comps is quite easy. But then again, its your money and you can do whatever you want with it :). Seriously though, heres my setup for getting the most top of the line computer so far:

AMD 64 4400+ (2200mhz 1m L2 Cache) if you plan on OCing- $700
DFI LANParty nF4 SLI-DR- $200
2xNvidia 7800GTX in SLI- $1080
Mushkin Redline XP4000 (DS) 2X512MB or OCZ EL PC4000 VX Gold (DS) 2X512MB- $240
2xWestern Digital Raptor 74GB (10,000RPM/8MB/SATA)- $350
OCZ PowerStream 600W PSU- $200
Samsung SyncMaster 915N- $350
SLI Total: $3120
Non-SLI Total: $2470 (using DFI Ultra not SLI, and 420w psu)

This is mine, and probably everyone else that uses this forum's idea of the best setup right now (new HDD are out now that use SATA2, which i havent look up yet).
 

pulsedrive

Senior member
Apr 19, 2005
688
0
0
Incorrect. Windows XP Home can use as many "threads" as you can give it. Also as many "Cores" You are thinking of windows XP Home's restriction to one "socket" This means you can't have 2 P4's in the same system with home, but since dual cores are just one socket, it doesn't matter, home will run an EE dual core w/HT just fine.
 

VIAN

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2003
6,575
1
0
If you game AMD is the chip for you. Intel's only rival to AMD is the Pentium M, and not only is it more expensive, but AMD has faster chips. So AMD is still price/perfomance better than Intel. Even overall, just thinking about performance, AMD is better than Intel. In multi-tasking, which is generally not related to gaming, Intel is better price/performance on some tests if IIRC. But if you are a hardcore gamer, that won't matter to you. I recommend Intel for multi-tasking only if that is what you do most of the time and you do casual gaming.

Intel is just a marketing machine.

I always thought that putting computers together was like building legos, but maybe I did miss the fact that I know all that extra knowledge of what to in BIOS and troublshooting.

I would recommend you build it, it is cheaper and you have so many more options, it's just flexible.

I could always build it for ya, if you give me the money in advance. :)
 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
1. Alienware is horrendously overpriced, look at some other options, shop around.

2. You dont want Crossfire on a low end Intel CPU (3.0 dual core) itll perform like a 3.0E in all games out today, with a margainal increase over single core in doom 3. Nvidias newest betas take advantage of SMP/SMT but ATis drivers do not. In other words, youll be CPU limited, severely, in everything.

3. ATis crossfire motherboard has some horrendous issues with the southbridge, make sure its the ALi chip for the southbridge and not ATis.



With a name like "keepitred" im sure suggesting an Athlon 64 3500+ venice, Nforce 4 SLI, and 7800GT/GTX system built on your own is stepping over the line, but its the best gaming option out there right now, and will literally save you hundreds, and perform better.
 

KeepItRed

Senior member
Jul 19, 2005
811
0
0
Well your close...lol I've been shopping on ICCT and I came up with this computer.

AMD FX 57 Socket 939 - $1,299

MSI K8N Neo4 Platinum nForce Socket 939 - $184

Seagate 120GB w/ 8MB Cache - $98

Cosair 1GB RAM (2X 512MB) - $127

Lite-On 52x32x52 CR-RW - $26.50

Aspire Aluminum see-through 500W PSU - $98

Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 - $125

Radeon X900 - $??? (My computer is not complete without this:p)

TOTAL: $1,957.50

Is this all compatible? :confused:
 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: KeepItRed
Well your close...lol I've been shopping on ICCT and I came up with this computer.

AMD FX 57 Socket 939 - $1,299

MSI K8N Neo4 Platinum nForce Socket 939 - $184

Seagate 120GB w/ 8MB Cache - $98

Cosair 1GB RAM (2X 512MB) - $127

Lite-On 52x32x52 CR-RW - $26.50

Aspire Aluminum see-through 500W PSU - $98

Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 - $125

Radeon X900 - $??? (My computer is not complete without this:p)

TOTAL: $1,957.50

Is this all compatible? :confused:

It appears to be a decent system. I would dump the aspire power supply for an Antec but thats personal preference. As this PC is built for gaming id have to reccomend getting 2x1GB dimms for memory, new games are likely to use it, and one has already broke the 1GB barrier (Battlefield 2). Going with 512MB modules may hurt you in the long run, as upgrading to 2GB will require 2x1GB dimms. The A64 hates running 4 sticks of memory and often you have to loosen timings or run a divider (DDR333) to get it stable.
 

KeepItRed

Senior member
Jul 19, 2005
811
0
0
Ok, looks like I'll get 2GB. I was leaning toward that anyway. Does Corsair offer 1GB X2 in PC3200 type? I couldn't find it before..
 

KeepItRed

Senior member
Jul 19, 2005
811
0
0
Ok I found this on ICCT:

Corsair DDR PC3200 (400MHz) CL2.5
2X512MB - $127 (current config)

Corsair DDR PC3200 (400MHz) CL3
1024MB - $129 ]
1024MB - $129 ] $258

Worth it? And is there a difference between CL2.5 and CL3?
 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: KeepItRed
Ok, looks like I'll get 2GB. I was leaning toward that anyway. Does Corsair offer 1GB X2 in PC3200 type? I couldn't find it before..

Yeah, im running Corsair value select PC3200 1GB x2 :)
 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: KeepItRed
Ok I found this on ICCT:

Corsair DDR PC3200 (400MHz) CL2.5
2X512MB - $127 (current config)

Corsair DDR PC3200 (400MHz) CL3
1024MB - $129 ]
1024MB - $129 ] $258

Worth it? And is there a difference between CL2.5 and CL3?

CL2.5 will be slightly (read 1%ish) faster. AMD cpus dont take much of a performance hit from DDR latency timings. Although there are some here that will preach to death that their sisoft sandra scores went up, it makes no real difference in the real world, especially gaming.
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
Originally posted by: KeepItRed
Ok I found this on ICCT:

Corsair DDR PC3200 (400MHz) CL2.5
2X512MB - $127 (current config)

Corsair DDR PC3200 (400MHz) CL3
1024MB - $129 ]
1024MB - $129 ] $258

Worth it? And is there a difference between CL2.5 and CL3?

Way too much money.

Newegg has 1gig Corsair for ~$79.

-Kevin
 

VIAN

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2003
6,575
1
0
Looks fine to me as compatability goes, but you are spending a bit too much in some places and a bit too little in other places.

The most important part in a game, for performance, is the GPU, then it is the CPU. You are spending a bit too much on that. I would go with a regualr AMD 64 or low end X2 instead of the FX, just cause the price is much cheaper and the performance is still top notch. FX is actually for noobs or with people with lots of money who can afford it all.

And it turns out over the course of a computer lifetime, your CPU will probably be upgraded less than your GPU, depending on the graphics settings you like to play at.

As for the MSI, Make sure you use all or most of the features in the board, you don't want to be spending all this money for features that you're not gonna use. IIRC, the Ultra features were pretty useless performance wise, you may be better off getting the regulear Neo4-F.

RAM is where people think they can cheap out on, but it's wrong. RAM is one of the most important things you can buy. And technically, you can never have too much of it. Just right now, games are starting to recommend 1GB, so you get 2GB. That's 2 sticks of 1GB.

A CD-RW, only!? In a world that is moving towards DVD storage you better have something better planned. NEC ND-3520A -this baby is a DVD-RW drive.

I don't know if Aspire is reputable as a power supply. So, I really can't say, I just know that you can't go wrong with Antec Power supplies. They rock. Something near 500, but not over, is fine I guess.

If you want the computer now, you can't go wrong with Nvidia, as they are good as well. And especially this generation, I think they are gonna have more equal performance due to programmable pipes. However, you may want to wait till ATI releases their cards so that Nvidia could lower their prices, and then of course, you could get the ATI as well, if it's nicer looking.

Don't forget a case, find the case that you want. A case is also a very important part. It would suck if you got a shtty case with shtty airlow and stuff - like my case. When I was a noob at this crap about 2-3 years ago. I bought 100 dollar POS case. The case I'm eyeing right now that looks awsome to me and has nice cooling is the Antec P180.

Get protection for your system like Mcafee Intenet Security suite. Never be connect to the internet without a firewall and always have anti-virus/spam/spyware... just anti-bad stuff tools to kill anything that gets in your way.

A sound card is also a good idea. Has better sound and lowers CPU usage. You can get a Audigy2 Value. Or if you want to wait for this new X-Fi sound card that's supposed to have amazing effects, but costily. But I don't know when it's gonna be released.

EDIT: And if you plan on overclocking you should know how to build a computer and troubleshoot it to greatly lower the risk of messing something up. Here is a tip: don't overclock to get more performance. Overclocking costs more money that you spend on cooling and extra performance peices that allow you to overclock higher such as low latency RAM, which is only good for overclocking, but a waste of money to use at stock speed.

Overclocking also and requires lots patience for testing for stability. If something goes wrong and the computer restarts, you may have configured it improperly and now you have to troubleshoot.. Most of the overclockers do it for fun and/or braggin rights to show off their e-penis. I used to overclock, but I hate maintenance, so overclocking sucked for me. I did it well, just wasn't my cup of tea. Other problems arise: such as Some games are overclocking sensitive, meaning they are more unstable.
 

Soccerman06

Diamond Member
Jul 29, 2004
5,830
5
81
go to anandtech and look at the memory section, decide which one you want, and then look for it on the internet. Money seems to be on no concern for you, you could get the best performing memory and save money at 2x1gig. You cant really go wrong with LL memory since they all perform basically the same at stock speeds (give or take a couple frames).

Keepitred, dont bet on ATI on having a superior card just yet, they may or may not have the better card, but you wont know that until August/September. And yes it will cost $550+ depending on which brand. The proc you picked is fast yes, but OCing the 4400 X2 can go all the way to 2800mhz on stock air for $600 less. That gives you a FX57x2. DFI is a better board all around than MSI (if your worrying about onboard sound, they both have it) and has the performance to show for $30 less if your not going the SLI way.