|
Build me a computer (please?) (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Sushipunk |
LMFAO at the (super-low-res) graphic in the top right there. It's not even in English :stongue: |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Turbonium
At best, ASUS is as stable as the best Intel boards, but not better. Why spend the extra cash if you're not going to OC, anyway? You're throwing money away. |
because whenever i upgrade and go shopping, intel boards rarely have the best-performing board in its class. gigabyte and asus almost always have higher recommendations from the experts, at least in the 3-5 year intervals when ive gone shopping. |
|
|
| Turbonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
because whenever i upgrade and go shopping, intel boards rarely have the best-performing board in its class. gigabyte and asus almost always have higher recommendations from the experts, at least in the 3-5 year intervals when ive gone shopping. |
Fair enough, but that's just having different priorities. I'd rather the best possible stability over +3% in a memory bandwidth test. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Turbonium
Fair enough, but that's just having different priorities. I'd rather the best possible stability over +3% in a memory bandwidth test. |
in all my years of pissing around with PCs i haven't come across an unstable motherboard. |
|
|
| Turbonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
in all my years of pissing around with PCs i haven't come across an unstable motherboard. |
Fair enough, but I'd still rather spend less, and at the end of the day not notice the performance difference, but potentially avoid stability issues that may have arisen. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Turbonium
Fair enough, but I'd still rather spend less, and at the end of the day not notice the performance difference, but potentially avoid stability issues that may have arisen. |
that's fair enough for sure, esp the price difference. |
|
|
| Turbonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
that's fair enough for sure, esp the price difference. |
tbh I'd still go for Intel, even if it was the more expensive board. I value stability over anything else.
Plus, there's something very assuring in knowing your motherboard and CPU were made by the same manufacturer, even though it's probably irrelevant. That being said, Intel boards are known for stability among casual users and enthusiasts alike, and this should be taken into consideration. |
|
|
| BTG |
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5300 Socket LGA775, 2.6 GHz, 800 MHz FSB, 2MB L2 Cache, 45nm (Retail Box) (BX80571E5300)
$74.99
Asrock G965M-S Socket 775 Intel G965 + ICH8 Chipset Intel GMA X3000 Graphics Dual-Channel DDR2 800/667/533Mhz 5.1 CH HD Audio LAN Support Core 2 Quad / Core 2 Duo 1333Mhz FSB Micro ATX
$49.99
Hitachi Deskstar 1TB (1000GB) 3.5" SATAII 7200rpm 16MB (0A38016)
$89.99
Antec BASIQ BP-350 350W ATX 12V V2.01 Power Supply
$30.99
Antec VSK-2000 ATX Mid Tower Case
$42.99
Corsair XMS2 TWIN2X2048-6400C4DHX Matched Pairs 2GB Kit (2x1GB) PC6400 DDR2-800 CL 4-4-4-12 240-pin Dual Channel DHX Memory
$68.99
Total $357.94
www.canadacomputers.com |
|
|
| Lews |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Don't judge my needs by your own standards. I won't be doing video editing, music production or anything that requires near that amount of RAM, however I just want to stay current. I've been running Ableton 6 on the 800mhZ computer for 2 years and it works fine, if a little slow.
I never asked for a 'low end' system either. I am just looking for something that's new and up to date but not top-end. On-board graphics card is fine, every computer I've ever owned has had one. Again, you are judging my requirements by your own standards.
I have no real price budget. |
I don't do video editing or music production either. All I do is a few basic programs. I'm assuming you don't want to need upgrade again soon? That's one of the reasons I recommend 4 gb of ram. Plus it will just help for multi-tasking. With the low cost of ram these days there really is no harm in having 4 gb, either.
When I say low end I mean priced low. Obviously not something that is old or bad, just not costing a ton.
My own standards are laughable.
I merely meant to help you find something that would not need to be replaced for a while, would let you do everything you want to do, and not cost a ton. |
|
|
| kr00t0n |
I don't know about US prices, but on a budget:
 |
|
|
| Cloudburst |
haha! :stongue: |
|
|
| Jarvmeister |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lews
2gb isn't enough. I'm running 6 and often wish I had more.
4 is the minimum.
Don't go for an onboard graphics card. I'll ask up my tech friends for a really good low end system recommendations for parts.
What's your price cap for all of this? |
Utter horse - ignore this post.
The clue is in the line that reads: I'll ask up my tech friends........... |
|
|
|
|
