Computers and such

[Savaric]

Can anyone provide some links to user-friendly computer advice sites? I don't like to open threads for personal questions. So perhaps you computer-savvy peoples can point us commoners toward some useful material on computer hardware and how to choose a new machine.

My biggest concern is getting some new processor that will be phased out in another month or two. Any kind of recommended sites (with articles) that provide info on how to balance the best computer for your needs and budget with unbiased opinion would be fabulous.

[Rosuav]

Part of the trouble is that computer advice that you can just go and read is inherently going to be nonspecific, and it's likely to be out of date already, too.

For instance, with your question, here's how it might be answered.

1) What sort of work are you trying to do with it? Heavy games? Number crunching / simulation? Word processing and basic internet work? On-site work with clients or suppliers?

Okay, now the question has to be split into four or five. Unfortunately, this sort of thing is never goign to be able to equal real live tech support.

[Sier]

www.tomshardware.com has many helpful articles for both computer junkies and computer gamers. You'll also find charts comparing processors to each other, so you know which one is supperior for what you want to do. If you want a gamers perspective, I've designed quite a few computers on different budgets if you want a list of parts on a certain budget. =)

[Grantref]

My biggest concern is getting some new processor that will be phased out in another month or two.

This should not be your biggest concern. Why should it bother you if you get a processor that is phased out in a month or two, as long as the processor you get is a good value for the price and meets your needs? I mean, you can still buy pentium 4 processors and motherboards for them, even though they've been long-since replaced by Core and then Core 2.

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by Grantref
This should not be your biggest concern. Why should it bother you if you get a processor that is phased out in a month or two, as long as the processor you get is a good value for the price and meets your needs? I mean, you can still buy pentium 4 processors and motherboards for them, even though they've been long-since replaced by Core and then Core 2.

This is true, but it all depends what you're trying to do. Picking up on my earlier post:

* Heavy games?
You'll probably want a superb video card. Today's video card might play tomorrow's games, but yesterday's card probably won't.

* Number crunching / simulation?
Major work like ray tracing, molecule folding, and stuff like that, will need some serious grunt in the CPU. You don't want to buy yourself a P4 for this work.

* Word processing and basic internet work?
You have few needs. Get yourself something secondhand, P4 is fine, P3 might even do if you're on a tight budget. (I wouldn't recommend anything less than P3. Not worth the hassle.)

* On-site work with clients or suppliers?
Get yourself a laptop, and if your business depends on it, make sure it looks professional. But even so, a P4 laptop will probably suffice - Pentium-M certainly would. No need for dual core and stuff.


I saw an Intel ad for their dual core CPUs a little while back, but I can't trace it now Basically, it was saying that dual core means you don't notice when Windows Update is running. That's all. Worth spending heaps more dollars on? Not yet, I reckon. Most Windows apps can't exploit multiple CPUs because they're simply not written to. In fact, using dual core to perfect advantage is practically impossible in an office environment - you'd only get the true benefit if you're doing some kind of heavy analysis. (You may get _some_ benefit, but not a 100% increase in productivity.) Everyone's waiting on someone else. Waiting for RAM. Waiting for hard disk. Waiting for the user (this is very common). Waiting for the user to finish browsing Thresh Forums..... well, apart from that.

[Sier]

Well, either way you need to go dual core. You can get a cheap Athlon dual core processor for about 60 dollars, which will outperform any single core processor.

[Rosuav]

I don't necessarily agree with that, Sier - all my computers are single core, and they do everything I need them to. Granted, I don't play heavy graphical games; but we're running a number of servers off single core computers.

Thing is, though, you can usually upgrade components. So if you buy today's fairly-good computer, tomorrow you could stick in some more RAM, add another hard drive, upgrade the CPU, and so on. There's nothing you can't upgrade, although some things will be linked (you often can't upgrade the CPU to a new generation one without changing motherboard and memory); at times the border between "upgrading the old computer" and "buying a new computer and migrating the hard drive" gets rather blurred. But you're never locked into anything.

[Sier]

I'm not saying its completely neccessary. I'm saying that for 60 dollars, that's really a good deal on something that outperforms most, if not all of single core processors. Most people will gladly toss in an extra 20 bucks, and reguardless of the use of the computer the processor will usually be the most valuable part.

Now if you are a gamer, here is a good suggestion of graphics cards:
Heavy gamer: Nvidia Geforce 8800 ($280-600 depending on memory)
Moderate gamer: Nvidia Geforce 8600 GT (Will play anything and everything for the next 1-2 years, even games like Crysis on at least medium settings for $100)
Minor gamer: Just buy a motherboard with an integrated graphics card, won't cost any extra

You probably will need 2 gigs of ram if you are an avid gamer, 1 gig if you are not, reguardless of whether you use vista or not. If you are using xp or linux you can skimp by with half a gig.

Motherboards just depend on what parts you want to stick in the computer. They can range from 30$ to 200$.

All in all, you will spend anywhere from 250$ to 2000$ just depending on how powerful you want it to be. You can have a good, moderate gaming computer which will play all modern games and games for 1 year from this date for a good 400-500$.
I would not advice going single core unless you want your system to be gimped when it comes to gaming, although it won't be a huge problem unless you play games like crysis. But I'm willing to bet you want to chuck in an extra 20 bucks for it.

[Savaric]

Originally posted by Grantref
This should not be your biggest concern. Why should it bother you if you get a processor that is phased out in a month or two, as long as the processor you get is a good value for the price and meets your needs?

That's a valid point. From my perspective though if I have some kind of heads up that a new processor will be introduced then the older ones will come down in price (I'm assuming). It seems they are cranking out new processors all the time, the E6550, the E6600, the E6750, now I think E6850, err, now a 4-cored processor is out there. These are Intel though.

Personally for me I will be spending 1000 to 1200 on a computer for gaming and to hopefully last me the next 3 to 4 years. I need to decide between building my own (feels risky) and buying a Dell. Buying oem gets me the blanket warranty which I like. However, dealing with individual component manufacturer's and possibly having to troubleshoot my own system in the event of problems isn't a plus. The current system I have selected is 1200 ($) for an E6550 with just 2 GB of 800MHz ram (can move up to 4). The card is an 8600 GT, but I don't know who it is made by... I think that processor is good but it might be an older one. However I get a 4 year warranty and a big software pack that includes Excel and Word (needed). Oh and 3 years McAfee virus. I know the importance of video cards too, but there is like 50 different manufacturer's with very different pricing.

Buying OEM is easy, building seems risky to me.

[Kerrida]

I personally have never bought a pre-built system. When I first started in computers, my dad had got an old system from a friend of his, which his friend had built. Since then, he and I built our own, and adamantly refusing to ever purchase a pre-built system for ourselves, as well as always recommended them to our friends.

About the only time we'd recommend buying something like a Dell or any of the other brands out there) was if the person had no intentions of upgrading the parts down the road (used to be an issue due to them all liking to use proprietary hardware and crap.. not so much of an issue now) and if they did not have someone who could be their Techie if it was needed. Of course.. building them yourself used to be cheaper.. now it's not as big of a price difference.

That said, I've never had any issues with a machine that I've built for myself. In doing so, I know *exactly* what I have in my machine, down to the tiniest detail, and had exactly what I wanted without having to sacrifice anything. Since I'm a techie geek I can troubleshoot my systems myself. Only real issue is when multiple parts go bad around the same time (and still under warranty), I have to make several differnet calls. However, I've never had to do that, but that'd be the only drawback in my eyes... having to call multiple places for getting RMA approval and such.