|
|
|
Upgrade, Or New System?
|
|
|
Dubu
Junior Member
|
13. August 2007 @ 11:57 |
Link to this message
|
Here's my current system: Intel P4 3.0GHz, Abit IC-7G Max II, 512K RAM dual channel (2x256K), GeForce Max4000 vidcard, one 80G HD (SATA) and one 160G HD (IDE), an old hand-me-down 4x CD burner, a new Lite-On DVD burner, and an old hand-me-down 15" CRT monitor with nasty speakers (I had a decent set that blew when lightning struck my house).
I mostly use my system for internet/email, say about 80% of the time, but I also copy and burn dvd's and cd's (disclaimer: my personal ones for backup purposes only), and convert dvd to avi and vice versa, the remaining 20% of the time. I would like to do a lot more of the dvd work, but I really can't do anything else while that is going on. Would upgrading my RAM and video card be enough, or should I go ahead and get a whole new system? I was looking at this one.
I built my current system and quite honestly I really don't care to do it again aside from the small upgrades mentioned above. The cost difference between an upgrade or the new system is not an issue.
Also, say I did buy the new computer, would it be worth it to do a clean install of XP Pro and get rid of Vista, or just go ahead and keep Vista?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. August 2007 @ 12:02
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
13. August 2007 @ 12:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, you're welcome to keep the hard disk and optical drive if you like. Depending on what the case is like you could keep that too. Upgrade.
|
|
Dubu
Junior Member
|
13. August 2007 @ 13:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
The quad core cpu wouldn't be worth the extra cash? I'm sure my biggest problem is the RAM (or lack of..) How about a slightly less expensive dual core cpu system then? Something in the range of $750 or so? Oh, and my current case is a $30 CompUSA piece of junk.
|
Senior Member
|
13. August 2007 @ 13:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yea, a quad core would be overkill for just surfin the net, checkin emails and burning cds. A core 2 Duo would work though... On newegg, a quad core is $500 USD, but I think the core 2 duos are like $100.
Also, you need more ram... At *least* a gig...
|
|
abscheele
Junior Member
|
13. August 2007 @ 14:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
does the motherboard have PCI E slots is yes it would be very easy to upgrade the graphics card if it doesnt have PCI E slots I would have to say replace it
|
|
Dubu
Junior Member
|
13. August 2007 @ 16:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Waymon3X6:
Yea, a quad core would be overkill for just surfin the net, checkin emails and burning cds. A core 2 Duo would work though... On newegg, a quad core is $500 USD, but I think the core 2 duos are like $100.
Also, you need more ram... At *least* a gig...
Even for doing the above while ripping and burning dvds or converting dvd to avi? That's the thing, I'd like to pop in a dvd and get it ripping, and then surf the net, etc... while it's doing it's thing. I figured the dual cores would be right up my alley, then came across the HP system in the link in my first post and thought it was a pretty good deal, so I figured I'd check into it. Quad core, 3 gigs RAM, 640 gig HD (2x320)... looked pretty sweet to me.
The more I think and look into it (newegg for prices), I could spend around $300 - $500 USD for 2-4gigs memory and a decent graphics card. For a few hundred more I can get a dual core system with 2gigs memory. I was just thinking that for a few hundred more than a nice dual core I could do the quad core... I think I will just get a whole new system the more I think about it. New monitor, speakers, etc...whole nine yards.
Decisions, decision....geez
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. August 2007 @ 16:46
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
14. August 2007 @ 01:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
Unless you do SERIOUS processing work, you will never notice the benefit of having a quad over a dual, not for a long time.
|
|
Dubu
Junior Member
|
14. August 2007 @ 18:14 |
Link to this message
|
OK, so let's say I'm going to buy a new dual core system. Who're the contenders these days? HP? Dell? Compaq? Acer? Sony? I haven't been keeping up with the big companies lately, so I don't know who has a good rep still or not. Maybe I'll look into a local computer shop, see what they have to say about prices on comparable systems. At least then I could have a custom built system without the hassle of doing it myself, and the headaches of trying to figure out what I screwed up when it doesn't work.
Also, Intel or AMD? I thought I heard something somewhere that Intel's dual cores were better than AMD's, right now anyways...
Now, XP or Vista? If I buy new, it'll come with Vista. Any problems with formatting and doing a clean install of XP? Or just stick with the Vista? If I get one from a local shop, have them put XP or Vista on it?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. August 2007 @ 18:16
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
14. August 2007 @ 18:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
You could be a contender and build a better quality PC yourself. I agree with everyone else is saying, your requirements aren't that much that you should need a quad core. Go with a Intel Core 2 Duo, nothing else and Windows XP. With Vista you use up about 600 MB of RAM doing nothing(Just running the OS) and with XP it's around 125 MB.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
15. August 2007 @ 02:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
A lot of premade PCs have no drivers available for XP, so you could be stuffed, but on the same notion I dislike Vista, so I'd recommend you assemble your own!
|
|
Dubu
Junior Member
|
15. August 2007 @ 08:23 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
A lot of premade PCs have no drivers available for XP, so you could be stuffed, but on the same notion I dislike Vista, so I'd recommend you assemble your own!
Really? No drivers available for XP? That's ridiculous. I guess they're really trying to push total changeover to Vista, huh? If I buy all new parts myself, what's the guarantee they'll be XP compatible? Or will I have to buy older parts that have XP drivers?
Man, I don't want to hassle with building my own again. Maybe I just didn't do it right the first time, but it seemed a bit of a hassle to me.
Here's a question for you...how well will a Vista system and an XP system work on a network? My current XP system will go to my kids and I want to network the two systems for internet access and printer sharing.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
15. August 2007 @ 08:31 |
Link to this message
|
The only time I had vista on a PC, the motherboard failed, and I didn't like the ambiguity of not knowing what caused the problem. Essentially, it wouldn't recognise any network card I plugged in, and I had to change back to XP to find it was a hardware issue. This isn't the only reason I dislike vista, but I just found it easier to keep XP.
The reason why you can't get XP drivers for premade PCs with Vista isn't to force you to use Vista, it's because the PCs are designed to be left alone, and often use obscure hardware you can't buy over the shelf. Consequently the only drivers that get made for those components are the ones that the PC comes with, no need to make them for other operating systems, because most people will never use them... Unfortunately the upshot of that is that you can't change back to Vista afterwards.
This is one of the other reasons I recommend people build their own PCs if they can.
|
|
