|
|
|
Intel vs. AMD
|
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
7. January 2007 @ 09:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sammorriss
Thank you. I try to be civil and I like discussing computers with people with the same interest.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. January 2007 @ 12:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's the approach I always try to take. Unfortunately it doesn't always work...
|
Senior Member
|
8. January 2007 @ 08:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
sorry people, i wasnt aiming my last post at anyone in perticular, more to remind us all that that off topic posts get threads closed and people banned.
i pesonaly dont think that there is much in the pc world that does not fall under the amd vs intel banner (or vis versa) i was just pointing out that some specific topics have their own threads, some other things deserve their own thread.
i like the info people share in this thread and dont want to see it closed again.
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. January 2007 @ 11:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
From the looks of it this is a broad topic thread. It's touched on just about all aspects of PCs, both Intel and AMD. I've seen comments on particular builds and then I've seen speculation on what may come in the future. Personally I don't see any harm in that or even being a fan of a particular product. It's when participants become combative in their support of their choice instead of relying on the facts that problems start to happen. Hopefully this thread will stick to PCs and leave out flaming. I've enjoyed this thread and it's gotten me interested in contributing. But like Kivory666, I didn't come here to argue. I'm not trying to put myself in Kivory666's league either. I'm no expert and I doubt if I come close to knowing enough to really help many people. Sad, because Kivory666 had something to offer the forum. I won't need a mod to stop things, I'll do the smart thing like Kivory666 did and just leave. It isn't worth the trouble.
Let's get back to talking PCs before the mods really have reason to shut the thread for being off topic.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. January 2007 @ 11:30
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. January 2007 @ 11:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
I was reading a PC World article. Yeah, I got a scrip. LOL They were talking about the new quad cores and how good they are at multitasking with a number of memory and CPU intensive programs. I guess with 4 cores they should be. In the real world I wonder how many people are going to feel the need any time soon, especially with the high prices.
Does anyone have any links to reliable tests run on the new quad cores? I'm interested in finding something more than the Sandra benches. Sandra is a partial indicator of performance, but I don't see benches and torture tests telling us how a system is going to serve us in the real world. Many people tend to stay with stock settings or at least not go to competitive OC(ing) with their everyday PCs they want to work with.
|
Member
|
8. January 2007 @ 21:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hi all and I am sure glad to be welcomed back! 2007 resolution.. be nice.
So here is my input on the new Intel quad core from what I have read. Compared to the core 2 duo, the quad core is supposed to be much faster in encoding, vidio, editing etc. As far as multitasking, It pretty much depends on the other task you are doing a far as what the chip can handle. I for example with my sig, can copy a dvd and go online, do my check book or any other reasonable task with out much lag time. no no's are playing a game etc. Not that I have not done it, butyou do get bouts of lag time in playing the game. Now with that being said I assume the core 2 duo can do the same and a bit more if not a lot faster,( assuming that the computer is built with mid to premium parts..oc'd or not). So here comes the Quad core.... you should be able to do all with little or no lag time(we all know that there will be some). for the $$$ for now I personally will go with the core 2 duo (leave the quads for the servers). Amd quads will be out soon and we can talk about that.
And I think there is plenty to debate.. yes debate. as Long as we debate and not attack. We all have facts and we all let our personel preferences differ in interpretations. But that what make this all a lil wiser.
This is my opinion only. I have no facts to post to back up my opinion.
To the mods, can we show oc'd benches and other results with different memery and vid cards to provide help to one another?
Thanks for your time and hope you all a great 2007
p-4 3.2 prescott HT curently at 3.6/Abit IC7-G (Abit rule!)/2 Gig Mushkin extream 2.5-2-2-6
LG 20.1 FLATRON WIDESCREEN/BFG 6800 ultra@450 mgz/2 wd raptor 150 raid/Ultra 500 watt Direct connet ps
NZXT GUARDIAN CASE(BLUE)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
8. January 2007 @ 22:18 |
Link to this message
|
I wouldn't see that beeing a problem, plenty of benches have been posted in this thread before. With regard to the dual core/quad core issue, one of the noticeable multitasks you get from running a dual core is being able to talk on Skype and game at the same time, without game lag or voice corruption. Quad cores can only enhance that effect, they will eventually be valuable, but until lots of applications can make use of one core, their price isn't justified by the little extra convenience they currently provide, so like you I'm sticking with dual cores for now, probably even my next upgrade.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. January 2007 @ 22:27 |
Link to this message
|
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. January 2007 @ 22:30
|
|
MichaelP1
Suspended permanently
|
8. January 2007 @ 22:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
the quad-cores may have alot of bugs to work out before there worth buying
is heat a problem with them
We shall go to the end,we shall fight in France,we shall fight on the seas and oceans,we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air,we shall defend our Island,whatever the cost may be,we shall fight on the beaches,we shall fight on the landing grounds,we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,we shall fight in the hills;we shall never surrender
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. January 2007 @ 22:55 |
Link to this message
|
Quads have already been released. Dell has one if you want to spend $2000. It's the Intel QX6700. AMD released their version, Barcelona. Problem is it's dual socket and it takes Vista Ultimate, Enterprise, or Business to recognize the second dual core. They're saying it's for megataskers. With Vista just coming online, I doubt any serious comparisons have been done. Intel's version works with both XP and Vista, so it has broader usability at this point.
As we've seen from the start, most dual cores will make single cores look like they're setting on jacks. As I mentioned earlier and Sammorriss just reconfirmed there's not really enough software out yet to make the quad cores shine. I was just wondering if anyone had seen any reliable reviews and not just sales promos by the manufacturers.
Here's an article I noticed not long.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2065924,00.asp
This one points out some of the ironies of the new AMD quad.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2065493,00.asp
At this point my take is that there's not enough software to need the QX6700, so I'd go with the E6600 to be reasonable. If you're willing to pay $110 for future proofing with the QX6700, it may eventually get the software it needs. But currently I've been hearing the X6800 does as well or better. I noticed seeing some benches on those, but forget where. That's why I asked if anyone had links for the new processors.
Now they're projecting an AMD 8x8 for release in 07...
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. January 2007 @ 23:03 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by MichaelP1:
the quad-cores may have alot of bugs to work out before there worth buying
is heat a problem with them
It appears to be with the AMD. Take a look at the article I posted.
Theonejrs
I noticed the Dell. Since they got up and running after their initial problems, Dell has been pushing hard on sales of the Core 2 Duos, including the X6800 and new QX6700. The article on quads you listed is from September O6 and the QX6700 hadn't been released yet. That was one of Tomshardware "heads up" inserts.
|
|
MichaelP1
Suspended permanently
|
8. January 2007 @ 23:06 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Now they're projecting an AMD 8x8 for release in 07...
lol wheres this ALL stop
We shall go to the end,we shall fight in France,we shall fight on the seas and oceans,we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air,we shall defend our Island,whatever the cost may be,we shall fight on the beaches,we shall fight on the landing grounds,we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,we shall fight in the hills;we shall never surrender
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. January 2007 @ 23:06 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I would have posted the link but I thought everyone checks in on Tom's Hardware!
Many of us do, but on occasion we'll miss an article. If you're like me you either don't have the time or end up in so many places you can't keep up with everything. It never hurts to post a link, maybe you'll be helping someone.
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
8. January 2007 @ 23:15 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
[quote]
Now they're projecting an AMD 8x8 for release in 07...
lol wheres this ALL stop[/quote]
Good question. The performance enthusiasts want so see it keep going and then there's the school of thought that our 4 year old PCs are plenty good enough. It boils down to what you want to do with a PC. When they get it right, a user should be able to play the most demanding games, encode a video, while burning one, and have a conversation on Skype all at the same time. The spinoff is that even lesser equipment usually benefits from technology advancement. So, either way, all of us should hope it keeps going.
Prices are ridiculously low. If everyone is paying attention, only a few years ago high end P3s were as expensive as high end systems we're seeing now. Systems built with processors like the E6600 are a bargain in comparison.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. January 2007 @ 00:40 |
Link to this message
|
PacMan777,
It's interesting! The Quad-Cores excell at some things and absoultely stink at others. I suspect it's like Sam said about not much software support. I don't know that I would pay $2000 for any Dell!
Quote:
The article on quads you listed is from September O6 and the QX6700 hadn't been released yet. That was one of Tomshardware "heads up" inserts.
I noticed that in a few comparisums (I won't say tests) there were no Quad-Core scores and in some there were 4.
I was kind of chuckling the other day when I followed that link to the 6300 HP Ace_2 posted. I just worked on one and it ain't worth the $999 price tag. The hard drive gave up the ghost and my customer went to Fry's and bought a new one, but couldn't install it. He's going to send back the drive for RMA but he didn't want to wait. No PCIe! Crappy memory and only 2 PCI expansion slots. GeForce 7500 Video that uses system memory up to 512 MB, Ugh!! It didn't run near as fast as some of the ones I've seen built by some friends on another forum. Not a very good representation of the Conroe. It did beat my D-940 by a whole 32 seconds copying a DVD with shrink in the high quality mode! LOL!! The design looks nice but poorly conceived. It draws air through the slots all over the front and collects a lot of dust that easily packs the dust in the slots every time you plug anything into them. Same with the USBs even though it's got a sliding door. Looked like a carpet inside them! Regular shots of canned air are a must. Dell had the same problem with the front USBs on the 3000 I had. I particularly loved all the labels telling you how much you could do with it, HP just forgot to tell you that it doesn't do any of them particularly well! LOL!! The Optical drives can use regular store bought drives but it will look like crap because the front of the ones from HP come with thier own bezel which is larger than normal so if you replaced them with good drives there would be this huge gap all around it!
Ace_2 could build a much better 6600 for that kind of money that would be better for gaming, video encoding, you name it, in every way! Even if he just put it together and ran it stock it would be a much better machine. It just isn't that difficult to do these days and there's a certain sense of accomplishment that you can't get from buying a "ready-made"! He could also count on a lot of help from the nice folks around here!
Happy Computering,
theone
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
9. January 2007 @ 02:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
Without question. LOL that Quad FX article brought back memories, I highly doubt there will be many sales of that platform, I pray AMD will make something competent in the Quad core market! Twice the heat of the Intel and significantly less performance??
|
Senior Member
|
9. January 2007 @ 06:10 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
lol wheres this ALL stop
they never will thats why we all read/post in places like this to get a common concensus on which is the best way to spend our money.
first it was the ghz war, now its the core war.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. January 2007 @ 06:13
|
|
caucano
Member
|
9. January 2007 @ 06:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
9. January 2007 @ 13:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, I've finally had the chance to sit down and slap my build together. I have had absolutely no problems with the new board except for the CPU fan speed controller. I just went in and turned off the controller and it runs wide open with the stock cooler.
My System is as follows:
Pentium 4 541 3.2GHz
Gigabyte GA-965P-S3
2x512MB Corsair ValueSelect DDR2 667
Powercolor X800GTO 256MB
Samsung Combo Drive
120GB Seagate Barracuda SATA 3GB/s
Coolermaster Centurion 5 Case
Thermaltake 430W PSU
I'm starting to collect too many computers lol. But I have all three hooked up in my room and can have them on all at the same time. I got a cheapo eMachines LCD from my buddy at school for $60.
Sceptre Naga 17" LCD for my dual core
Dell 15" LCD for my Sempron
eMachines 16" LCD for my Pentium 4
I Keep them all on a crecent work bench that I have cut down to be comfortable to sit at. Spent some money and got some nice roll-out keyboard/mouse trays for them to mount under the bench. I have since then stopped needing my space heater in the winter.
The build went together very nicely and I found the Pentium 4 was just a bit slower "feeling" than my Sempron. Runs 35-40*C idle and about 50-58*C on load. I'm not too inclined to run any benchmarks but it was a good cheap build and I'm very happy with it. I think it was a very good discount find for $30. I might use it to replace the old Dell my mom is using.
I'm not going to OC because I feel it should just stay a "budget" build for the time being. If I ever get the urge to upgrade to Conroe I'll definitely strip out my dual core and transfer over to the Gigabyte board.
I have made more than enough purchases for now. I think I'll go into hibernation as far as upgrades go.
If anyone wants to know something about my builds, feel free to ask.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. January 2007 @ 13:14
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. January 2007 @ 16:23 |
Link to this message
|
Estuansis,
Quote:
The build went together very nicely and I found the Pentium 4 was just a bit slower "feeling" than my Sempron. Runs 35-40*C idle and about 50-58*C on load.
Those temps are about what I was getting with the 3.0/800 I had. What CPU cooler are you using? The Arctic freezer 7 made about a 6C or so difference. My Presler runs cooler in this new case since I took out the side fan and cut down the side duct to fit. The problem seemed to be the airflow was blowing right across the Freezer 7 fan blade. Now you can feel a gentle breeze directed at the cooler and it works much better. It's idling at 33C right now at an ambient of 28C. Encoding, which I just finished was 50C Max! I know I'll catch a lot of static for this but I've had both the Zalman 9500LED and the Arctic Freezer 7 on this MB/CPU combo and I prefer the Arctic. it's always run cooler in either case than it did with the Zalman. Light years easier to clean as well!
Eventually I'm going to get one of those Jet engine looking Xclio cases as they are reported to cool real well with both the Prescotts and Preslers and aren't very loud with 2 slow turning 250mm fans. Looks a little wierd but it sort of grows on you and it looks bad-assed at night! Most folks that own one use the middle (600 rpm) setting with good results. I don't use Q-Fan or cool and quiet so I just let em roar. I tried it and don't like it. It's more annoying with the fan going up and down when it's loaded down. Temps run hotter overall as well!
Anyway, good luck with the new toy, and enjoy!
Happy Computering,
theone
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. January 2007 @ 16:31
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
9. January 2007 @ 16:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
Right now, I'm using the stock cooler. I might invest in something better but these temps aren't too uncomfortable for me. I expected it to run hot being a 5xx Prescott.
I'm gonna see what I can do about the fan placement on my case though. It came with 2 80mms and a 120mm. Right now the 120 is on the back and the 80s are on the side window and on front.
I might put the 120 on front and the two 80s on back then add another 80 on the window side. That should cool it down nicely.
EDIT: That's a damn fine case theone. I might look into it but my Silent Storm and Centurion are very nice for me right now.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. January 2007 @ 16:38
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. January 2007 @ 18:55 |
Link to this message
|
Estuansis,
Quote:
Right now, I'm using the stock cooler.
That explains it. My P4 with the stock cooler ran about 60+ under load at 3.0GHz (stock)! I won't even use them on a customer build. My standard order most times is an OEM and an Arctic. Wait until these are on sale. Usually around $16 to $18, and sometimes free shipping!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16835186134
Excellent CPU Cooler!
Question! Does your case have a side window? Did it come with a fan or did you remove a duct to install one. I had to cut my duct to fit but the reward was a couple of degrees C cooler and 1 less fan. a The fan was disturbing the air from the CPU fan. Works much better with the duct. I cut it with a fine blade coping saw. Had to lop about 3/4" off of it, but it does cool better with just the 120MM in the back and an 80mm in the front.
Happy Computering,
theone
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. January 2007 @ 21:28 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
PacMan777,
It's interesting! The Quad-Cores excell at some things and absoultely stink at others. I suspect it's like Sam said about not much software support. I don't know that I would pay $2000 for any Dell!
The article on quads you listed is from September O6 and the QX6700 hadn't been released yet. That was one of Tomshardware "heads up" inserts.
I noticed that in a few comparisums (I won't say tests) there were no Quad-Core scores and in some there were 4.
I was kind of chuckling the other day when I followed that link to the 6300 HP Ace_2 posted. I just worked on one and it ain't worth the $999 price tag. The hard drive gave up the ghost and my customer went to Fry's and bought a new one, but couldn't install it. He's going to send back the drive for RMA but he didn't want to wait. No PCIe! Crappy memory and only 2 PCI expansion slots. GeForce 7500 Video that uses system memory up to 512 MB, Ugh!! It didn't run near as fast as some of the ones I've seen built by some friends on another forum. Not a very good representation of the Conroe. It did beat my D-940 by a whole 32 seconds copying a DVD with shrink in the high quality mode! LOL!! The design looks nice but poorly conceived. It draws air through the slots all over the front and collects a lot of dust that easily packs the dust in the slots every time you plug anything into them. Same with the USBs even though it's got a sliding door. Looked like a carpet inside them! Regular shots of canned air are a must. Dell had the same problem with the front USBs on the 3000 I had. I particularly loved all the labels telling you how much you could do with it, HP just forgot to tell you that it doesn't do any of them particularly well! LOL!! The Optical drives can use regular store bought drives but it will look like crap because the front of the ones from HP come with thier own bezel which is larger than normal so if you replaced them with good drives there would be this huge gap all around it!
Ace_2 could build a much better 6600 for that kind of money that would be better for gaming, video encoding, you name it, in every way! Even if he just put it together and ran it stock it would be a much better machine. It just isn't that difficult to do these days and there's a certain sense of accomplishment that you can't get from buying a "ready-made"! He could also count on a lot of help from the nice folks around here!
Happy Computering,
theone
You covered manufactured PCs vs custom built, but Ace_2, like most people, wants a decent PC he can buy. ZipZoomFly, Newegg, TigerDirect, and other vendors do a good business, but so do the manufacturers like Dell, Gateway, HP and others. Many of them use less expensive parts available wholesale that we can get from vendors. But at $999 some of the stock systems would be hard to beat. You have to remember you're getting all the necessary parts along with monitors, mouse, keyboards and OS with software bundles.
I've been admiring some of the systems like Sammorriss' and Estuansis' and I've got a feeling that when you add all those parts together along with the software and peripherals, you're looking at systems well in excess of $1000. Except a few economy builds, most of the PCs I build are well over $1000, and they're nothing I'd say overly expensive. AMD and Intel platforms with CPUs around $300-$400 along with performance RAM with quality mobos easily end up over the century mark.
I did a recent build list with nothing extraordinary for a E6600 system. It used good parts, but nothing I'd consider high end. It came to about $1500. What I put in makes it more preferrable to people that like customs though.
Most PCs have dust problems if they're in dusty environments. The thermaltakes and Cooler Masters I like get dust inside if there's dust outside. The only way to stop it is with filters and then you get into air flow restriction if you don't stay on top of cleaning the intake(s). I hate seeing PCs in for repair when there's a smoker in a dusty environment. It's about as bad as sludge in a crankcase, stock or custom doesn't matter. LOL Anyway, dust is going to get both stock and custom. I've done customs with front USB ports and they gather dust just as well as those old Dells.
I don't understand your dislike of the Zalman FHS. Just about every review I've seen has them near the top for air cooled systems. I used one on my last build with good results. I've also opened cases where there was dust. The Zalmans cleaned out with compressed air just as well as most other coolers I've been around. Unless there's something that makes the dust stick (like cigarette smoke), it should easily move on with compressed air. There's other good coolers, including your arctic. Thermaltake makes a good one as well.
Comparing manufactured PCs to customs the custom will usually win, if built properly from a good parts list. They're not always cheaper and at stock settings the custom isn't always better. There you get into parts selection. As for overclocking, many people either don't want to, can't, or don't have a board that will allow it. Manufactured PCs are intentionally locked so they can't be fried by an inexperienced user messing around with BIOS settings. Due to that, they can't be turned up to compare to a custom PC. The old apples to oranges story all over again. So, not many stock PCs are going to compare with your builder friend's custom PCs because they can't be tweaked.
PC World and other mags do reviews and make suggestions for best buy in PCs. I suggest buyers review those as well as our suggestions here on the forum. Most stock PCs are made from the same or similar components. Many are bought with no future thought of expansion. I've had PCs in the past that have needed no more than two RAM slots. So far I've not needed over 2GBs on anything I've built. That may change soon with Vista and the new hardware. A buyer should by all means compare what's in the machines as much as possible, but mag reviews and forum posts cover that as well. In the end it's up to the buyer to lay down the money, stock or custom. But the buyer should keep in mind when reading forum fodder that customs will usually outperform stock and not expect stock to compare unless more dollars are spent for upgrades.
Edited: Only because the quote function didn't work right. LOL
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. January 2007 @ 21:49
|
|
MichaelP1
Suspended permanently
|
9. January 2007 @ 21:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
PacMan777 , is there any advantage of the new Zalman 9700 over the 9500 ? which i have
We shall go to the end,we shall fight in France,we shall fight on the seas and oceans,we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air,we shall defend our Island,whatever the cost may be,we shall fight on the beaches,we shall fight on the landing grounds,we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,we shall fight in the hills;we shall never surrender
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
9. January 2007 @ 22:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Not to the extent I'd buy a 9700 to replace a 9500. I'd only do that if I had another use for the 9500. On a recent build I did with an AMD (with some moderate overclocking), I was getting temps around 53C. Max for the processor was 59C. The 9700 dropped the temp on down below 50C (normally about 48C under load for most things). So, if going with a new Zalman, I'd go with the 9700 over a 9500. Just be sure to shop around for the best prices.
|
|
