Help New PC

[collegien]

I posted on another part of teh board and got a handy hint to post here as well sooooo ......

Hello peeps

I am about to buy a new pc and have got it down to 2 options. I am going for made to order as making it myself would involve me having some kind of clue :/

here they are

OPTION 1
Processor (CPU)
Intel® Core™2 Quad Q9550 (4 X 2.83GHz) 1333MHz FSB/12MB Cache
Memory (RAM)
4GB CORSAIR DOMINATOR 1066MHz - LIFETIME WARRANTY (2x2GB)
Motherboard
ASUS® P5N-T DELUXE: DDR2, SATA II, 3 x PCI-e x16, 1 PCI/2 x PCI-E
Operating System
Genuine Windows Vista™ Home Premium 64-bit Edition + SP1, CD (£59)
USB Options
4 PORT USB 2.0 INTERNAL PCI CARD (TOTAL: 10 USB 2.0 PORTS!)
Memory - 1st Hard Disk
640GB SERIAL ATA II HARD DRIVE WITH 16MB CACHE (7,200rpm)
1st CD/DVD Drive
20x Dual Layer LightScribe DVD Writer ±R/±RW/RAM
2nd CD/DVD Drive
6x BLU-RAY ROM & HD-DVD ROM Drive, 16x DVD ±R/±RW (£75)
Graphics Card
1024MB GEFORCE GTX280 PCI Express + DVI + TV-OUT
Sound Card
ONBOARD 8 CHANNEL (7.1) HIGH DEF AUDIO (AS STANDARD)
Network Facilities
ONBOARD 10/100/1000 GIGABIT LAN PORT
Memory Card Reader
INTERNAL 52 IN 1 CARD READER (READS XD, MS, CF, SD, etc)
Case
Stylish Silver/Black Trident case + 2 front USB
Power Supply & Case Cooling
700W Quiet Quad Rail PSU + 120mm Case Fan (£79)
Processor Cooling
ASUS SILENT KNIGHT II PURE COPPER ULTRA COOLER (£36)
Firewire & Video Editing
2 x IEEE 1394a FIREWIRE PORTS (1 onboard, 1 at back panel)
Warranty
1 Year Return-to-Base incl 1st Month Free Collect & Return
Delivery
STANDARD INSURED DELIVERY TO UK MAINLAND (MON-FRI)
FREE RaceDriver: Grid DVD Game (RRP: £34.99) with any Intel® Core™ 2 Quad CPU!



OPTION 2

- Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 GO 2.40GHz Quad Core CPU Overclocked too a minimum of 3.00GHz and beyond.
- Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro Intel approved cooler
- Arctic Silver 5 Heatsink compound professionally hand installed by our technicians
- Abit IX38 QuadGT Intel X38 (Socket 775) PCI-Express DDR2 Motherboard
- Award winning Corsair 4GB DDR2 XMS2 Dominator PC2-8500C5 TwinX (2x2GB) Supplied with Airflow Fan
- Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 500GB SATA-II 32MB Cache Hard Drive
- NVIDIA 280 GTX 1024MB GDDR3 HDTV/Dual DVI (PCI-Express) DirectX 10 Graphics Card
- Pioneer DVR-216DBK 20x DVD±RW SATA Dual Layer ReWriter (Black)
- Corsair 650w TX SLi Power Supply
- 1yr Onsite Collect & Return Warranty (Can collect from any address (UK Mainland ONLY) and same day collection possible if requested before 11am)

This one is with vista i would want to add a blu ray drive to it also.

The second is just over £100 cheaper than the first.



Which one do you guys think is teh one to go for ?


Thanks in advance for your comments

 

[Kryten]

I'd ditch the nVidia hardware on all counts - both the graphics and the motherboard in the case of the first system - not ideal for stability and performance reasons.
Graphics - if you're using a large screen the 4870x2 is going to be your best bet. If not, the single 4870 1gb will leave you plenty of performance and allow you to add a second card later down the line should you need it.

Processor - do you really need quad core? There are games in the pipeline that claim to use multiple cores properly but until or if they surface, you're left with Crysis that can do it - badly. In this case you'll be better off with a decent Dual core.

Chuck the Silent Knight - the arctic freezer is more than enough, but if you want to push your processor a bit more a Tuniq Tower. Scythe Mugen or Thermalright ULtra 120 will be far better performing.

Mainboard - do you really need an X38? It's an older tech too, so possibly slightly limiting. You'd be better off with a standard to high end P45 board such as the Gigabyte P45-DS5 or Asus P5Q-E - less limited with the available bandwidth to your graphics board(s) than the X38 is, at less cost.

No real other issues - I try to recommend systems that balance performance with stability as well as taking into consideration possible limiting factors such as multi monitor performance and lack of TV output on nVidia kit, as well as known instability and lacking slightly in overclocking on the 780/790 motherboards.

Assuming from the layout this is a pre-built but self-prescribed system from a store? Gives you room to play if something goes wrong if so.

 

[collegien]

Thanks very much for your input i appreciate you taking the time to let me know. I will take a look at the setup again and may throw a couple more questions this way.


:worthy:

 

[liloe]

Apple (United Kingdom) - Mac Pro - Tech Specs

Yes I like to promote Apple computers, but let me explain:

- How much do you want to spend? That would've been interesting to know.

- What do you need your computer for? For gaming purposes only you might be better off with a windows system, but don't forget you can install the cheapest Vista or XP x64 on a Mac aswell. Also, more and more games appear for Mac.

- Imho Macs have real advantages when it comes to handyness. Every time I start my windows I start cursing about the absolutely aweful system layout. MacOS has a superb handling and to be exact, even MS Office:Mac is way better than MS Office.

- The system is expensive, yes I know that, but: You get top-notch hardware and the thing I like most: If something doesn't work, you bring it to the Apple store and tell them to fix it. Yes I CAN fix computers by myself, but time = money so every second I spend checking for errors is a second I could spend on doing somethign else like making money I used to do a lot of selfmake on computers (the reason I have my strange server-like windows machine ), but hey, everybody depends on service nowadays and it's so handy =)

- You'll need an extra BluRay drive though.

------------------------------

Well OK, that's for the Mac. Otherwise can't add much more to what Kryten already said. Multicore isn't that much used in games.

Personally I think 4 GB isn't enough for a Quadcore, so I'd try to get 8 Gigs running in there. Even if you think it's overkill now, RAM costs near to thing atm, so who cares

 

[Cadelin]

Liloe I don't think a mac desktop is the best option as the vast majority of users of this forum are game players. Getting a mac only to use windows on it most of the time is not sensible.

Of course if you are getting a laptop for working on then get a mac every time but that's not the case here.

 

[old.user4556]

I would agree, gorgeous as they are.

 

[liloe]

Liloe I don't think a mac desktop is the best option as the vast majority of users of this forum are game players. Getting a mac only to use windows on it most of the time is not sensible.

Of course if you are getting a laptop for working on then get a mac every time but that's not the case here.

Yer, that's why I was asking if it's a pure gaming machine. For me it's cool, cause I like to do both with my computer.
Well basically I know that not many ppl will like that option, but I wanted to point it out, in case he's interested =)

P.S. Anyone wanna buy an old MacBook so I can buy a new one? Perfect condition, gets much love every day. Just polished it yesterday night ^^

 

[Helme]

Personally I think it's pretty moronic to pay silly amounts of cash for a Mac regardless if you want to game or not, when the PC alternative goes for 1/3 the price, easily and can do exactly the same things.

 

[Cadelin]

Personally I think it's pretty moronic to pay silly amounts of cash for a Mac regardless if you want to game or not, when the PC alternative goes for 1/3 the price, easily and can do exactly the same things.

I wouldn't agree that its 1/3 the price but it would be possible to get the same hardware cheaper. It is also possible to configure Linux to do just as much as you can on a mac but it doesn't have the same ease of use. I think the small additional cost makes the mac a very attractive buy.

 

[Kryten]

As a moderator I probably should try and avoid personal bias, however with Apple hardware it's not possible for me to do that. You would be far better spending your money on a lifetime supply of laxatives than wasting it on a Mac of any description for any purpose. You pay the premium in effect for the operating system only, which regardless of some opinions is far from perfect in itself.

I suggest hardware and solutions in accordance with an average budget unless told otherwise - and even when money is no object, it doesn't mean it should be wasted. Limited upgrades, limited compatibility regardless of what unsupported dual booting systems are being used, not particularly good performance levels. Not bad, but let's face it, a Mac is just a PC with more limited hardware options. I represent value for money, Apple doesn't supply that type of kit.

 

[dysfunction]

I quite agree with Kryten. An Appl Mac doesn't really make any sense from a cost vs benefit perspective.

Yes they look cool etc but its all a marketing ploy and you are paying money for an apparantly "cool brand" that has diversified in such a way that people think that spending that bit more money for a Mac makes it a better machine.

Well done Apple for having excellent marketing and product strategies.

 

[Cadelin]

I quite agree with Kryten. An Appl Mac doesn't really make any sense from a cost vs benefit perspective.

That depends on your definition of benefit. It really depend on what you want to do. A games console has 0 upgrade options but that doesn't mean you wouldn't buy it. Similarly the wii is alot less powerful than both the XBox and PS3 but you wouldn't tell people to not buy a wii because you get better hardware for your money from the others.

There are plenty of situations where a Mac is significantly better than a windows/linux based machine. However in this particular case where the individual would like to play games I do not think this is the case.

 

[Kryten]

The only real benefit from Macs comes from the very few native peices of software that happen to have PC ports - Photoshop as an example, and the only reason for this is because it's basically a fixed machine. You console analogy is a good one, however if you had 2 machines that were otherwise very close but one was nearly half the price and upgradable, it's a quick argument

 

[Cadelin]

The only real benefit from Macs comes from the very few native peices of software that happen to have PC ports - Photoshop as an example, and the only reason for this is because it's basically a fixed machine. You console analogy is a good one, however if you had 2 machines that were otherwise very close but one was nearly half the price and upgradable, it's a quick argument

There are a large number of things that windows systems can't do and you have to use a Linux/Mac based system. I strongly disagree when you say they are otherwise very close.

I do accept the upgradability argument which is why I generally only recommend mac laptops where upgradability is limited to basically just RAM. Also with laptops the quality of the design is alot more important and that is where macs have a distinct advantage. Mac laptops are in general lighter, have better battery life and have more features than other laptops. It adds to the price a bit but its in general very worthwhile. Getting additional batteries or power supplies isn't stupidly expensive either.

 

[Kryten]

I will strong disagree about any "quality" arguments from Apple hardware, it's of a standard that in PC terms you expect from the likes of MSI, PC Chips and Medion - this is coming from someone who has spent months and months repairing thousands of the machines. Apple hardware has *serious* quality problems.

What however I was asking was for you to be a bit more specific in the things Windows systems can't do? (or not as well). I'm all for Linux in certain situations, especially when serving data or resources however as neither of these are Mac specialities, I'm intrigued as to what the other uses are.

Don't take this as a flame by any means, if there is a genuine reason why the average Mac is worth as much as a high end PC then we'll all be better to know it - it may well be someone's exact requirement further down the line. And as much as an Apple-disliker such as myself would hate to say it, that one (or more) thing could save them money and hassle further down the line having bought the right bit of kit the first time round.

 

[Cadelin]

I will strong disagree about any "quality" arguments from Apple hardware, it's of a standard that in PC terms you expect from the likes of MSI, PC Chips and Medion - this is coming from someone who has spent months and months repairing thousands of the machines. Apple hardware has *serious* quality problems.

I can't comment on the quality of individual components. I was instead referring to the quality of the design. Mac laptops seem to be significantly better designed than the average laptop. Things like the power adapter, the better battery life, the inbuilt camera and mic, the better integrated wireless and bluetooth features. These days the power of the components shouldn't be that important. Everything you buy should be able to do anything a normal user could want.

What however I was asking was for you to be a bit more specific in the things Windows systems can't do? (or not as well). I'm all for Linux in certain situations, especially when serving data or resources however as neither of these are Mac specialities, I'm intrigued as to what the other uses are.

Don't take this as a flame by any means, if there is a genuine reason why the average Mac is worth as much as a high end PC then we'll all be better to know it - it may well be someone's exact requirement further down the line. And as much as an Apple-disliker such as myself would hate to say it, that one (or more) thing could save them money and hassle further down the line having bought the right bit of kit the first time round.

Well I work at CERN and so my specific user requirements could be considered slightly unusual. We have large Linux based computer clusters to perform our calculations and run the experiments. However we still need more standard programs for making presentations, posters, publications, animations/videos, webpages etc which are generally found on windows (but also mac) machines. You either have to dual boot linux + windows, get a mac or get 2 computers. It really wouldn't surprise me if over half the physicist at CERN had macs.

Now from having used a mac, I have found that there is very little I can't actually do using one and in general it is alot more straight forward to do than on a windows machine. I still have a desktop with windows at home but now I only use it for games, primarily DaoC and now WAR despite the fact that its vastly more powerful than my mac laptop.

 

[Kryten]

Design wise, it's the design that causes several models to shock it users, and others to overheat horribly - the only way Apple could appropriately keep the innards of 2 of their macbook models was by attaching them to the rear of an LCD display and marketing it as an iMac with some really silly & inefficient cooling methods. Of course not the only laptops that shocked people - Dell did a couple of models also guilty of that

I'm a definite advocate of Linux in the workplace for scientific and research reasons, but for "the more standard programs" I hate to say Windows doesn't even really come into it - so much more is achievable properly in Linux as standards are followed far more closely than the roundabout ways and bodge jobs we get in windows - Internet Explorer, Office, Excel, Access etc are all classic examples of "industry standards being buggered silly."

If I have to pick a favoured OS, it would be Ubuntu in general for it's ease of use, however if Apple were to licence OSX over to PC users, they'd make themselves more of a killing than they are selling Macs to Americans/Fanboys and could one day be a real threat to Windows as a home system. I don't have a huge issue with OSX, just the hardware.

At the end of the day, the PC market as it stands will fade off to an enthusiast market whilst all in one machines deal with home entertainment, gaming, internet and applications in a single box. I've been saying that for nearly 8 years, but I still only think it's a matter of time.

 

[Cadelin]

I'm a definite advocate of Linux in the workplace for scientific and research reasons, but for "the more standard programs" I hate to say Windows doesn't even really come into it - so much more is achievable properly in Linux as standards are followed far more closely than the roundabout ways and bodge jobs we get in windows - Internet Explorer, Office, Excel, Access etc are all classic examples of "industry standards being buggered silly."

If I have to pick a favoured OS, it would be Ubuntu in general for it's ease of use, however if Apple were to licence OSX over to PC users, they'd make themselves more of a killing than they are selling Macs to Americans/Fanboys and could one day be a real threat to Windows as a home system. I don't have a huge issue with OSX, just the hardware.

If I could do everything on Linux I would. Maybe I am not quite knowledgable enough. As an overall package the mac just worked for me and alot of other similar users. Linux has vastly improved its user friendlyness and I haven't tried the latest version of ubuntu (I think that last one I used was around version 6.10 or 7 something?) but things like video conferencing and making presentations was still often a pain in the arse.

 

[Kryten]

Indeed, a long way to go. If we could have the compatibility of windows, ease of use of OSX and features + relibility of core linux dists in one OS we'd be laughing.

Thanks, by the way for a decent and well enough informed argument & not taking my opinions the wrong way, many would have gone into outright flaming by the end of their first reply

 

[SheepCow]

Being a Mac and Windows user I thought I'd post some comments. I've briefly read the huge blocks of text above but they scare me so ...

My take on Apple is:

• Cheapish hardware components.
• Excellent at design, not engineering.
• Usability and design is their wheelhouse, stupidly simple things in OS X are amazing for productivity.

I do almost all development on Linux and Macs now simply because I've got used to the tools (TextMate is the best text editor on the planet (I used to like EditPlus)) and the way of working.

Cadelin said something about bluetooth on Apple laptops which I have to comment on. My MacBook suffers from a widespread and well known Apple bug which is basically:

1. They placed the Bluetooth module near things that get hot.
2. They placed the bluetooth cables near cables which produce a lot of EMI.
3. When my laptop has been on for about 20 mins (so it's slightly warm) the bluetooth module fails.
4. When the bluetooth module has failed the laptop is unable to enter sleep correctly.
5. Basically whenever it sleeps after about 30 seconds to 2 minutes the bluetooth thinks it's being spoken to and causes the laptop to wake up again. Obviously with the lid closed this is a bit of a fucker, as it then sleeps again, and wakes, and sleeps and overheats and catches fire.

Long and short of it. I really like Apple stuff on a Mac and they're very good at designing things, but their engineering leaves a little to be desired.

Edit:
As Kryt says above, I think a mash of Windows + OS X + Linux would be amazing

One other thing. Something I've noticed is other laptop peeps in recent years have been creating laptops that have been "designed". The Dell Studio line of laptops look quite pretty and are clearly designed to be, well, designed. No longer do PC laptops look like grey bricks (IBM Thinkpads I'm looking at you)

 

[Cadelin]

Cadelin said something about bluetooth on Apple laptops which I have to comment on. My MacBook suffers from a widespread and well known Apple bug which is basically:

1. They placed the Bluetooth module near things that get hot.
2. They placed the bluetooth cables near cables which produce a lot of EMI.
3. When my laptop has been on for about 20 mins (so it's slightly warm) the bluetooth module fails.
4. When the bluetooth module has failed the laptop is unable to enter sleep correctly.
5. Basically whenever it sleeps after about 30 seconds to 2 minutes the bluetooth thinks it's being spoken to and causes the laptop to wake up again. Obviously with the lid closed this is a bit of a fucker, as it then sleeps again, and wakes, and sleeps and overheats and catches fire.

Long and short of it. I really like Apple stuff on a Mac and they're very good at designing things, but their engineering leaves a little to be desired.

I guess I must be lucky that all the mac I have had and all my colleagues mac haven't had problems. Maybe it was only certain types of models that suffered from this?

I mentioned bluetooth because that is one of the features that mac laptops have had for several years, which still isn't standard on all laptops. Bluetooth devices often simply refuse to work on windows machines. I may well have somehow configured it incorrectly but I like to think of myself as quite an experienced user and if I can't get something to work after following the instructions and checking on the web then something must be screwed.

 

[SheepCow]

I'm not sure if it affects the new models but the previous line (the white/black MacBook and aluminium MacBook Pro) were all affected, but of course it depends if you get a dodgy one or not.

When it comes to laptops, I've heard horror stories from pretty much all manufacturers so it's all down to luck I suppose

 

[rynnor]

I just hate Macs - is that a valid reply.

My hatred began back in the early 90s when i first used one with its retarded mouse and locked down system. Obviously things have moved on a long way but the following are still true -

If you favour form above function buy a mac.

If you like working on a platform thats poorly supported buy a Mac.

If you dont like playing most recent games buy a Mac

If you dont need the flexibility of a modern pc buy a Mac

If you want to spend more cash on inferior technology buy a Mac

<Confirmed lifelong Mac hater - hell I even hate Ipods so dont take it too much to heart >