[Archived] Help Needed In Building A New Pc.

[mattyc2422]

So I need a new PC.

A mate said he can build me a PC easily enough if I provide him with the specs, but I'm not sure what I need.

Primary use would be for internet browsing, usual music and photo type stuff, a bit of gaming (sport games) and a bit of word processing (work and other commitees).

Firstly, is this a better option than buying one retail? Obviously I don't get a warranty and all that, but he can sort me out.

Whilst I don't want to go overboard, I do want something that will last me a considerable amount of time.

My mate came back with this initial suggestion. Thoughts? I immediately think more RAM. We are talking Australian dollars here.

Dual Core processor Intel E5200

2Gb Transcend Pc6400 DDR2 RAM

160Gb sata2 hard drive

DVD burner

512mb gigabyte 4350 graphics card

(this system comes with a brand new keyboard and mouse i believe)

coolermaster elite 333 case

19" LCD moitor

windows XP / Vista home - roughly $130

so in total bout be bout $840.

[thebigguy]

I personally would update the ram to at least 4gig and i would get another hard drive as a backup for all your documents/pictures/etc.

Why i say get another hard drive is that you can chuck all your stuff on there for when ever you need to reformate instead of having to burn stuff to cd's or by putting onto pen drives.

why i said update ram is because your talking about photoshop and gaming which can some times be ram intensive

[mattyc2422]

I do have an external HD (250gig) that is just about the only thing pushing my old computer along at the moment!

Agree on more RAM. What you think about monitor size and the processor mentioned?

[thebigguy]

I do have an external HD (250gig) that is just about the only thing pushing my old computer along at the moment!

Agree on more RAM. What you think about monitor size and the processor mentioned?

Id say 22" if gonan do alot fo gaming but since ur not i will have to say 19"

[LeChuck]

Obviously I don't get a warranty and all that

Actually, I'm pretty sure all the components would come with a warranty, it would just be a case of finding out which one had the problem if anything were to happen to your system.

Don't bother with Vista by the way, there are absolutely no benefits to having it and you'll just get less use out of the RAM you do buy. Go for the 64 bit version of XP if you're getting 4gb of RAM.

[RovertheHill]

Actually, I'm pretty sure all the components would come with a warranty, it would just be a case of finding out which one had the problem if anything were to happen to your system.

Don't bother with Vista by the way, there are absolutely no benefits to having it and you'll just get less use out of the RAM you do buy. Go for the 64 bit version of XP if you're getting 4gb of RAM.

Agree - Vista 32 bit can only address a maximum of 4Gb of address space - not necessarily RAM because it includes your video card memory for example. So with a 512Mb card you will only see approx 3.5Gb of available RAM to Vista. Finally, as I don't play games on PC anymore - do games these days run on 64 bit Vista or do they need 32 bit?

[BuckyRover]

64 bit Vista is far more stable than 64 bit XP.

I saw the results of a closed user group test where they experimented with Windows XP and Windows Vista but told the two groups they were using the new Windows 7 and asked for their opinions on it.

The Vista version outscored the XP one in every department. It seems that Vista is still seen in a bad light due to its very bad launch (incompatability issues etc).

I would say if you already have XP and are planning an upgrade to Vista then don't bother. If you are buying a new machine then get Vista. My version of Vista hasn't crashed in a year, I can't say the same about XP (which is still a good OS). I also find it runs programs in compatability mode much better than in XP.

I would say its personal preference but if you aren't really sure I would go with Vista.

[LeChuck]

Google 'XP 64 or Vista 64' and the vast majority of results will favour XP 64. Vista is just a horrible piece of software, hence why Microsoft have had to prolong support for XP (it was meant to be redundant by now) and introduce Windows 7 to the public to try and brush Vista under the carpet, so to speak.

[Biddy]

Late to the party I know but I disagree, Vista 64-bit has far more driver support than XP-64bit ever had. I found that at least 50% of my devices never had support under XP 64-bit whereas everything seems to work under Vista and that is just by letting it go off and find drivers.

Also, the main reason Microsoft extended support of XP was actually down to the uptake of netbooks which can't take vista. They needed to make sure Linux didn't capture the market.

Back on what to buy, 4GB and under you might as well go for the 32-bit version (either XP or vista) for most compatibility with software, especially older software.

[LeChuck]

Hmm...drivers for what? I'm in the process of building a new desktop (gone for the E5200 with 4gb OCZ ram) so I was planning to go with XP 64. What sort of things might I have trouble with? Don't really fancy going to Vista.

[Biddy]

Hmm...drivers for what? I'm in the process of building a new desktop (gone for the E5200 with 4gb OCZ ram) so I was planning to go with XP 64. What sort of things might I have trouble with? Don't really fancy going to Vista.

Depends, I had an older TV tuner, scanner and printer. XP 64-bit didn't have drivers for any of that. It also didn't have motherboard drivers for newer motherboards so half the onboard things didn't work. Likewise AutoCAD 14 which my wife uses wouldn't work (newer versions do work but we don't have any newer versions). Little things like that. Hardly anyone supports 64-bit XP as no one uses it.

Again, unless you are using more than 4GB ram, there really is no point in using a 64-bit Windows OS. Hardly anything is tuned for it. Some video editing packages, a couple of other high end software packages and a couple of games and thats about it.

[LeChuck]

Ah, thanks for that.

So as I'm going to have 4gb of ram you'd recommend Vista 64?

I suppose I can always use vLite and make a slimmer version.

[Biddy]

Ah, thanks for that.

So as I'm going to have 4gb of ram you'd recommend Vista 64?

I suppose I can always use vLite and make a slimmer version.

Personally, I'd save your money, stick with whatever 32-bit OS you've got (I took Vista 64-bit off my machine again for some reason but I can't remember why now) and wait until Windows 7 comes out.

Or, if as your signature suggests, you are running Ubuntu, use the 64-bit version of that and then simply run XP 32-bit in a Virtual machine, best of both worlds then.

Out of interest, what do you actually want to run a 64-bit OS for? something specific? If it's the memory thing then 32-Bit support "up to" 4gb anyway (give or take 500mb for motherboard and shared GPU oddities), you only need to go 64-bit if you go over 4gb.

[LeChuck]

I bought the extra ram for gaming really which means it's not as much use to me on Ubuntu.

I'm wanting it for anything specific, just see I can see my full 4gb of ram I bought. I've read on most sites that Windows 32 bits typically see from 3 - 3.25 gb, which is quite a big drop. I could have saved money by buying 2gb + 1gb sticks so I want to try and use the full 4gb if possible, unless 64 bit really is that poor.

[Billy Castell]

Is it cheaper to build a laptop yourself, or to get one ready made? I ask as I may buy a laptop sometime this year.

[Biddy]

I bought the extra ram for gaming really which means it's not as much use to me on Ubuntu.

I'm wanting it for anything specific, just see I can see my full 4gb of ram I bought. I've read on most sites that Windows 32 bits typically see from 3 - 3.25 gb, which is quite a big drop. I could have saved money by buying 2gb + 1gb sticks so I want to try and use the full 4gb if possible, unless 64 bit really is that poor.

It's not that poor, just not worth the effort/cost. Even in games you won't see any difference.