What Intel processor and MB for wifes computer?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

billwinkle

Member
Mar 3, 2005
74
0
0
My wifes mb bit the big one tonight. I decided that because she uses paint shop pro all day along with alot of other programs, that maybe a Intel hyperthreading compter might be better for her. Her computer has my old setup, Asus a782nx deluxe with a Barton that has been overclocked for too long. Any way I am not sure what chip and motherboard to go with. She does not need to be overclocked as she does not play any games(except with my head).
Current hardware:
video: 9800pro
HD: 1x wd 200g sata
1x seagate 200g ide
1x wd 160g ide
sound: onboard
optical: nec 3520a
sony 48x cd burner.

Any suggestions greatfully accepted.
Flamewars and fanboys are not.

Thanks in advance everyone.

I have been away from Intel a long time. I am not up on what is the right core to go with.

With everything she always has running the AMD chip just can't keep up and I am tired her complaints.
BTW I work 75+ hours a week now, and I just don't have the time for research as I used to.
Thanks again

 
F

Furen

Golden Member
Oct 21, 2004
1,567
0
0
How much are you willing to spend? If painshop pro is mutithreaded a pentium D 830 might be a good cpu for her. 3GHz dual core will beat hyperthreading any day. They run a bit hot for my taste but you shouldnt have any problems with it anyway.

Your video card is agp, I believe, so you'd either need to upgrade to PCIe or downgrade to integrated video, which shouldnt be a problem if your wife doesnt game at all. I dont think there are any AGP/LGA775 motherboards that support the newer pentiums (6x0/8x0) so if you want to keep the 9800pro, you'll have to get a 500 series cpu.
 
GuitarDaddy

GuitarDaddy

Lifer
Nov 9, 2004
11,465
1
0
I agree dual core. If on a tight budget the pentium D840, is not the AMD X2 4200+

*edit*
What was I thinking? X2 4200+ all the way, it costs more but performs better, runs cooler, uses less electricity, and overclocks better if necessary.
 
B

billwinkle

Member
Mar 3, 2005
74
0
0
Let's say no more than 400-500. I can't let her computer be better than mine.

If at all possible I would like to keep the same video card. It is only 6 month old.
 
F

Furen

Golden Member
Oct 21, 2004
1,567
0
0
to keep that video card you'd need one of those bastardized LGA775/i865 motherboards. I'm not too familiar with them so I cant really help much there. What I do know is that you'll only be able to use the 500 series CPUs.
 
Markfw

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
27,105
16,017
136
How about get a 939 board and cpu, and when dual-core gets cheaper , then throw it in. I would hate to see you get a space heater....
 
B

BlingBlingArsch

Golden Member
May 10, 2005
1,249
0
0
i agree. maybe a Gigabyte GA-K8NSC-939, nForce3 250Gb for 80$ and a 3000+ Venice for 130$. Cheap, good perfomance, stable. Dunno if there will be a bios update for X2 support.
 
V

Viditor

Diamond Member
Oct 25, 1999
3,290
0
0
With everything she always has running the AMD chip just can't keep up
Click to expand...

I think you'll find that the new AMD dualcores and single cores will far outperform the Intel chips, and be lower (by lower I mean less than half) in both heat (so they will last longer) and power (runs cheaper).
That said, if your budget is $400-500 for both the CPU and mobo, then you can't get a dual core without a new video card as well (Intel's DC mobos are strictly PCIe).
You CAN get an AMD X2 (dual core) with AGP because the X2 uses existing and older 939 mobos...

For single core, my personal suggestion is something like the Asus A8V Deluxe v2.0 with an AMD San Diego core 3700+ (total ~$465). That has AGP and believe me when I say that you will hear NO complaints about speed...

If you definately want Intel only, try something like the ASUS P5P800 and a P4 650 (total ~$500)...

BTW...before you guys give me grief on the mobo suggestions, remember that he needs AGP!

Edit: forgot to add...for an X2 4200+ and the same Asus mobo, it's ~$665.

PPS: One last thing (I'll shut up soon...), if you DO go with a newer Intel system, you will also need to get new DDR2 Ram...
 
S

sbuckler

Senior member
Aug 11, 2004
224
0
0
If she doesn't play games and want's better multi-tasking you've got to go for a pentium with ht or an amd/pentium dual core. Non dual core amd's may be great for gaming, but suck when it comes to multi-tasking. Cheapest solution would be to just get a 478 motherboard and 3.0 P4E, then give it a modest overclock (to bring it up to 3.4 say - much cheaper then buying a 3.4E).
Anything else requires an upgrade to PCI-E which means a new graphics card, etc.
 
B

BlingBlingArsch

Golden Member
May 10, 2005
1,249
0
0
Socket 478 means total lack of upgradability, i mean S478 is 2-3 years old hardware!!. Stick to a cheap Socket 939 rig and upgrade with a cheap dualcore in mid 2006 or 2007. Best bang for the buck and all those "u MUST oc ur CPU" or "U need HT" or "AMD sucks in Multitasking" comments are just crap. She wants to do her photo edition and stuff, she will be pleased with an A64`s performance. And when its time she can have a dualcore upgrade. Cant beat that.

and someone mentioned a 3700+ San Diego. Cmon, why would his wife need such an expensive single core like that? Everybody knows u can almoste allways overclock a 3200+ at least at 3700+ niveau. Save the money.
 
dainthomas

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,907
3,882
136
Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
i agree. maybe a Gigabyte GA-K8NSC-939, nForce3 250Gb for 80$ and a 3000+ Venice for 130$. Cheap, good perfomance, stable. Dunno if there will be a bios update for X2 support.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Mine's at stock voltage with the stock cooler. Runs low 40s during Prime also. With SSE3, the Venice should run Paint Shop Pro just fine (unless she's encoding DVDs or playing HL2 at the same time, I guess).
 
F

fstime

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2004
4,382
5
81
If she doesnt game, get a Pentium 4.

A64 are so SLUGISH at multitasking.

My buddy has a seperate P4 for DVD ripping, =).
 
B

BitByBit

Senior member
Jan 2, 2005
474
2
81
Originally posted by: BouZouki
A64 are so SLUGISH at multitasking.
Click to expand...

If I didn't quote that, someone else would have.
Do you mean A64s are sluggish when switching between windows?
Or when running demanding applications simultaneously?
I've never used an Athlon 64, and the fastest AMD processor I've used was a Duron.
That certainly didn't seem sluggish, and I doubt the Athlon 64, with its IMC, could ever be sluggish - certainly not in general use.

You'll have to define what you mean by multitasking here.




 
B

billwinkle

Member
Mar 3, 2005
74
0
0
Thanks everyone for chiming in. After reading everything, I think I will go with Viditor's suggestion. Looks promising. I did not realize how bad a heat problem Intel was having. And for the extra money, and having to buy memory to boot, it looks like AMD wins again. I sorry to bug everyone for help as I usually do all my homework myself, but with the hours I put in, that and I am still recovering from cervical surgery, time does not allow.
I knew I could count on everyone hear for some good advice and I was right.
Thanks Again everyone.
Cheers.
Bill :beer:
 
V

Valkerie

Banned
May 28, 2005
1,148
0
0
There is nothing wrong with running socket 478/LGA, 2.8 GHz w/HT - 1m cache on a P4, using Paintshop.

Coupled with 1 gig of DDR and a decent 9800, I don't see why you guys are trying to get this guy to pay extra for something he doesn't need.

I've seen multi computer performance with many different apps, and none should underestimate the power of single cores or even 478's and LGA's when it comes to photo development programs.
 
Hacp

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
Intels do not have that big of a heat problem. Your probably better off going with a Asus 865 PE, 3.0 GHZ p4 5xx series, and 1 gig of Ram. Hyperthreading is not something to be laughed at.
 
V

Viditor

Diamond Member
Oct 25, 1999
3,290
0
0
Originally posted by: Hacp
Intels do not have that big of a heat problem. Your probably better off going with a Asus 865 PE, 3.0 GHZ p4 5xx series, and 1 gig of Ram. Hyperthreading is not something to be laughed at.
Click to expand...

It depends on (I suppose) what you consider a "problem" is...
The 3.0 GHz P4 costs more than the 3200+ Venice...and it uses twice as much power and generates twice as much heat as the Venice, while performing at a net slower speed.
It's true that multitasking is smoother on apps that work with HT, but not very much (usually 3-5% on average)...while many apps will work slower.
HT is really not very powerful...certainly not enough to overcome the raw speed of the AMD CPU (unless you are doing nothing EXCEPT multitasking with video encoding programs).

I work as a video professional, and we are continuing to convert over to AMD X2s from our older dual Xeon systems...Lucas has already done this (Star Wars 3 was made on all-AMD systems).
 
F

fstime

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2004
4,382
5
81
Originally posted by: BitByBit
Originally posted by: BouZouki
A64 are so SLUGISH at multitasking.
Click to expand...

If I didn't quote that, someone else would have.
Do you mean A64s are sluggish when switching between windows?
Or when running demanding applications simultaneously?
I've never used an Athlon 64, and the fastest AMD processor I've used was a Duron.
That certainly didn't seem sluggish, and I doubt the Athlon 64, with its IMC, could ever be sluggish - certainly not in general use.

You'll have to define what you mean by multitasking here.
Click to expand...




I have a A64 and a Pentium 4 Prescott at 3.5-6 ghz.


Maybe its the OC but the Pentium peforms much better.


With an Athlon, you get OKAY multitasking and great gamming.

I can tell the difference though, the pentium rips my dvds much faster, thats just one example.



EDIT: The A64 is a 3000+ at 300fsb, 2.7 ghz.

Both systems are using UTT.
 
A

anandtechrocks

Senior member
Dec 7, 2004
760
0
76
I too have noticed both my A64s are slow when doing multiple CPU intensive processes. For example trying to do any 2 of the following: trying to surf the web, run DVD burning software, antivirus scans, defragmenting, etc. really slows the PC to a crawl. I know that is expected, but with my parents old socket 478 3.2 Ghz P4 w/HT I honestly never noticed that problem. What I think it really comes down to is according to the task manager the A64 runs 100% for any of the above tasks, and each new application you run really drains it. The P4 on the other hand would display 30% usage on each logical processor, I really do think HT helps here.

By the way both my A64s (3200+ Vience and 3700+ SD) are clocked at 2.6 Ghz (~35-40C idle), and the P4 was stock running at a very modest 45C idle. On the other hand, I have also built a socket 775 P4 computer (530J), and for some reason that sucker was hot! When I first put it together it was running at 60C idle. Just running for a few hours doing nothing would bring it closer to 65C. At first I freaked but I figured given time it would cool down. Eventually it leveled off at about 55C idle (which is still high in my opinion).

To be completely honest I think buying your wife an A64 would be a mistake. Buy a cheap P4 with HT and I am sure she will have more than enough power, expecially for multitasking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom