Unsure of what system would fit me better

[imported_Davo]

I'm considering some budget PCs from HP and I'm not sure which would fit me better so I thought I'd ask the experts for some help.

Here are the main specs:

#1 - $1000
Athlon 64 X2 4400+ AM2 Socket
GeForce 6150 LE Chipset
Asus A8M2N-LA Board
2GB DDR2 (4 GB Max)
320 GB SATA 3G

or

#2 - $1230
Core 2 Duo E6400 775 Socket
Pentium 965 Chipset
Asus P5BW-LA Board
2 GB DDR 2 (8 GB Max)
500 GB SATA 3G


I don't do gaming but I do A LOT of multitasking. I usually check Outlook periodically while I have use Excel and several IE windows while MusicMatch, uTorrent, Trillian, Windows Update and Weather.com Desktop Alert running in the background. Whenever stuff finishes on uTorrent, I edit it in VirtualDub and then want to burn it to DVD using Nero right away.

Based on my usage, what would you suggest for me? The prices are similar so cost isn't a factor but as always, value is a plus.

Thanks in advance for your advice experts

 

[brikis98]

i don't know what vid card is coming with those machines, but otherwise, the main diff between them is the CPU. check out tom's hardware cpu guide and select these two cpus and check out how each performs in the various benchmarks.

you'll find that the core 2 duo cpu outperforms the 4400+ by a hefty margin in just about everything. if you have the extra $230 to spend, then by all means go for system #2.

 

[dexvx]

Good luck running #2 without a video card.

Edit: Cant even find that model of Asus.

 

[imported_Davo]

My apologies sir. They both have a GeForce 7300LE video card.

 

[dexvx]

You sure thats the model number?

I cannot find a Asus P5BW-LA Board anywhere on the Asus site nor on google.

 

[imported_Davo]

Link

 

[Some1ne]

I cannot find a Asus P5BW-LA Board anywhere on the Asus site nor on google.

You won't find it on either of those, as it's almost certainly a model designed specifically for OEM users. Meaning that it will have a stripped-down feature set, possibly lower quality components in general, and in all likelihood absolutely zero overclocking support.

Proprietary mainboards are one of the big reasons why I started building my own PC's in the first place.

 

[dexvx]

Thats not a bad board.

No, it wont use less quality components, its just designed for an OEM. You won't be able to overclock, if thats important. It seems like a solid board.

 

[imported_Davo]

I've never overclocked so atleast for the immediate future it isn't a concern.

Thanks for the suggestions.

My last question would be about doing two "heavy" applications at once. I know they both have dual processors but would editing video at the same time as burning something cause a system halt or would I be able to do both comfortably (meaning no underrun errors on the discs I'm burning) with rig #2?

 

[NuAlphaMan]

Would you consider building your own PC? For that type of money you could put together a decent system.

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: Davo
I've never overclocked so atleast for the immediate future it isn't a concern.

Thanks for the suggestions.

My last question would be about doing two "heavy" applications at once. I know they both have dual processors but would editing video at the same time as burning something cause a system halt or would I be able to do both comfortably (meaning no underrun errors on the discs I'm burning) with rig #2?

it should work without a hiccup. you can even assign one of the cpu cores to one process and the other to the other and it'll be (almost) as if you're running the applications on different computers. the almost is because, obviously, the RAM, hd, etc is being shared, but you shouldn't have any issues.

 

[Noubourne]

Editing video and burning something at the same time won't be a problem for either system.

It will just be slightly faster on the Conroe. A pretty good chunk faster actually. I'd get the Conroe, since there's only a $200 difference.

 

[Noubourne]

And by the way, editing video and burning at the same time are the only 2 tasks you have on there worth mentioning. Everything else takes .01% CPU power on a modern chip and a little RAM. Unless you have a WICKED huge set of XLS data or something. And even then it's more RAM than CPU. I have a crapall Celery 1200 with 512MB of RAM here at work, and I can't even stress it with 10 spreadsheets, 5 word docs, a couple visio docs, Outlook, and a bunch of other random proggies running. And this ain't HALF the machine either of those 2 are.

You'll see a difference editing and encoding video though, that's for sure.

 

[imported_Davo]

Thanks for all the help