About to buy a new machine

[DocDutch]

well Wicked, I would just ask Zing what he could build for you with the dosh...the support will be better then that of say MESH, Eversham, and all the other builders. If I had the dosh I might just think about doing it that way myself as well.

also it helps the "help Zing through the winter" fund

Originally Posted by Wicked_and_Crazy

not a lot of use without a screen

---------- Post added at 00:57 ---------- Previous post was at 00:54 ----------



lol, the MESH comment was to pre-empt you!

The OC one doesnt look bad, thats a single GPU rather than the dual that you suggested?

on the Mesh one I added the 1 gig 7950 gx2 (dual gpu) and the 22 inch screen
The OC one has the X1950xtx so you could add a master card if you fancied. Mind you ive not looked at the mobo all Intel it would be not sure if I like that idea or not lol

[MadGamer]

Originally Posted by nffc

i want that.

So do i mate

[nffc]

Originally Posted by MadGamer

So do i mate

Normally if I want something i'll get it, but that aint worth the effort, because I probably would notice minimal difference between my spec and that in real terms (ie day to day stuff) the only issue is that if you buy that you won't need a new PC for another 10 years

Windows Game Advisor said that mine was top 2%, yet it's a single core Athlon 64 on s754 done on the incredibly cheap about 15-18 months ago

Then its wrong lol
You would notice a difference specially if you had a conroe instead. I can tell the difference between a single cored 754 machine and a dual core conroe or the low end 3600 x2 for that matter

[nffc]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

Then its wrong lol
You would notice a difference specially if you had a conroe instead. I can tell the difference between a single cored 754 machine and a dual core conroe or the low end 3600 x2 for that matter

Yes you probably would - but only if you were maxing the CPU where the dual core would kick in as essentially that's 2 CPUs.

The difference between say a mid-range X2 or a C2D and that machine with 4 GB RAM etc, in real terms for everyday use, probably wouldn't be that much.

In any case, though I probably could upgrade this, if I changed the CPU it would be AM2 as opposed to 939, and if I did that, then i'd need new RAM and PCI-E graphics (Damn - there goes the new-ish 6600) and I'd probably not be able to fit the 3 PCI cards in (sound, TV, wireless), so wouldn't be worth the effort for something I probably wouldn't notice that much for browsing the web, email, odd bit of Office, kinda casual gaming and music

(woo, 5000th post!)

Thats not true. Ive got a AM2 board with and nforce 3 chipset that uses agp gfx and ddrII ive used boards often that run apg and ddr I with Intel cpus also ie the D805
I would argue also and of the conroes will wee on a skt 754 cpu even if only using one core and imo you would deffo notice.I also would argue the mid range x2 cpu against a conroe in apps such as video encoding would show a difference markedly

[nffc]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

Thats not true. Ive got a AM2 board with and nforce 3 chipset that uses agp gfx and ddrII ive used boards often that run apg and ddr I with Intel cpus also ie the D805
I would argue also and of the conroes will wee on a skt 754 cpu even if only using one core and imo you would deffo notice.I also would argue the mid range x2 cpu against a conroe in apps such as video encoding would show a difference markedly

Be better to use PCI-E though wouldn't it, seeing as AGP is practically a legacy interface now.

I still maintain for web browsing, email, and MS Office type stuff, you wouldn't really notice a marked difference. Video editing, gaming, yes. But the fact remains, right now I have Media Player, Thunderbird and Firefox up, as well as anti virus stuff etc, and i'm hardly stressing this. CPU 15 odd %, RAM about 866, and Thunderbird seems to be such a RAM hog these days I have quite a lot running, but I do that, because I know the PC can cope.

Yeah a 754 is two sockets out of date and far from the fastest around, but there will still be people happy with their Pentium IIs running Win98 and crashing every 2 minutes! Likewise, some people will still be using old PCs, because it suits their needs fine, probably not for enthusiasts (in fact, defo not) but a £1000 PC four years ago could do exactly what the purchaser intends it to do, and is not interested in intensive tasks... those who do, keep on top of the game, and spend more on it. Believe it or not, I have a PII kicking around, it is perfectly fine for web browsing apart from the fact it's now running an unsupported operating system. Don't use it very often, but that's because this one is faster.

You would only notice the difference in things like benchmarking, video editing, gaming etc and yeah, in that situation a conroe would **** on a 754. But that is very much the tip of the iceberg, and for me, gaming isn't a priority, I play the odd bit of GTA:SA and Football Manager / Pro Evo and that's about it. Don't forget this may be a 754 but it is a 3700+, it's no slouch in terms of clock speed (it was the fastest 754 I could get, because it was all I wanted to upgrade). What would be noticeable is the fact it's not dual core, which is more of a gain, especially if you have more than one CPU-intensive task running at the same time. At the top of the ladder, I'd say the number of cores was more important than the clock speed. Is there much difference between, say, a 3500+ and a 5000+, all other factors (cache, cores) being equal? Course not. But there is a big difference between a single core 3500+ and a dual core 3500+.

the productivety of my machines have increased hugely since going dual core on both my main machines.Its knocked minuted off dvd ripping and it all adds up.Also as I have posted before my machines are geared towards high productivety when needed with extra hard drives etc so apps can run off seperate hard drives etc. So when I say I would notice the difference im only being honest
BTW the smallest x2 is the 3600 and its AM2 only iirc

[danielf]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

the productivety of my machines have increased hugely since going dual core on both my main machines.Its knocked minuted off dvd ripping and it all adds up.Also as I have posted before my machines are geared towards high productivety when needed with extra hard drives etc so apps can run off seperate hard drives etc. So when I say I would notice the difference im only being honest
BTW the smallest x2 is the 3600 and its AM2 only iirc

Originally Posted by nffc

web browsing, email, and MS Office type stuff

Nuff said, innit?

Well yes and no because these still need to be run and processed so you could do all 3 and notice a difference on a dual core machine.I would say a difference would be noticed by someone used to a fast machine doing said work on an office machine and vice versa. Lesser machines will run those apps adequately but faster dual core etc machines will do more of said apps at a time

Originally Posted by danielf

[/b] Nuff said, innit?

'suits you sir'

[nffc]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

the productivety of my machines have increased hugely since going dual core on both my main machines.Its knocked minuted off dvd ripping and it all adds up.Also as I have posted before my machines are geared towards high productivety when needed with extra hard drives etc so apps can run off seperate hard drives etc. So when I say I would notice the difference im only being honest
BTW the smallest x2 is the 3600 and its AM2 only iirc

Which in a way backs up what I'm saying - it's the dual core that makes the difference. That's assuming that what you are using the machine for is enough to get a significant benefit from dual-core to begin with, which depends on what you're doing.

I'm waiting for quad core

Not really as these new cored cpus run single threaded apps much better than older models.I would put my c2d in a singled cored app ie prime 95 running once thread against yours running the same and lets see which passes the self test first?

Its like theinking the fx57 wont piddle over the 3700 running apps it would.Im not arguing you need to upgrade im arguing the benefits of the newer cpus.Also my main point in this thread is why pay a large amount of cash on a machine with a second best cpu in it when you can have the best for the same or less

[Wicked_and_Crazy]

i know i said no to MESH but i just priced this up from ebuyer parts (as best i could) and the MESH price came lower.

Ignore the PCPRO recommended by, the supplied machine had an X1950XTX in it, this one doesnt

http://www.meshcomputers.com/Default...UCT&KEY=130038