spec me a machine

[Grundy]

hello people of earth:

Help me spec out a new computer for me and ali. we gonna need 2 new ones for UT fun and profit.

We currently use comps at 700/733 with Geforce 2 cards and 512 MB RAM so this should be a nice jump for us.

Computer innards are not my forte but here is what Im thinking so far:

Manufacturer: ??
Case: ??
Motherboard: ??
CPU: P4 2.53 Ghz with 533
MB: 512 MB PC-1066 RDRAM
DVD-ROM: ??
Video: Geforce4 Ti 4600
Monitor: 18 to 20 inch ?? LCD
Drive: 80 to 120 GB ?? ATA 100/133 based
Ethernet: reuse current one
Sounds: reuse current one

[Rooster]

First thing... are you sure you need the 5% gain by getting top of the line P4 w/RDRAM when you could probably spend 1/2 as much on a uber-AMD system (XP2200+) & DDR333 .

As well, you could go with a Ti4400 and o/c to 4600 performance, saving you another bundle.

An LCD with <25ms refresh time will cost a fortune (if you can find one - most manuf's don't post their refresh time). A 19" Trinitron monitor is probably the most reasonable you'll find. There are 21-22" diamondtron tubes that are really nice, but they run around $800. If that's okay with you, that's what I'd go with. Otherwise, you can get a great 19" Trinitron tube for $400 or less.

There's really no benefit to going ATA133 over ATA100 either.

Casewise, for cost & performance, I like my Maxtop. It's nothing real fancy, but has the intake fan on the side & exhaust on top. That's in addition to the intake in front and exhaust out back (would need to buy fans for those spots).
Manufacturer: ??
Case: ??
Motherboard: ??
CPU: P4 2.53 Ghz with 533
MB: 512 MB PC-1066 RDRAM
DVD-ROM: ??
Video: Geforce4 Ti 4600
Monitor: 18 to 20 inch ?? LCD
Drive: 80 to 120 GB ?? ATA 100/133 based
Ethernet: reuse current one
Sounds: reuse current one

I know when we were at Hammer's you stated your preference for Intel, but I assure you that millions of gamers prefer AMD for their price/performance ratio.

I can price one out for ya soon. Gotta give kiddos a bath now. :D

[Rooster]

Given the same components for everything else...

Gigabyte P4 board
P4 2.54GHz 533 bus (retail heatsink/fan)
2x 256MB PC1066 RDRAM
GF4 4600
------------------------------
$1335 (w/o shipping)


MSI KT3 Ultra (-50)
AMD XP 2200+
Thermal Take heatsink & smart fan w/arctic silver3 (overclocking insurance!)
1x 512MB PC2700
GF4 4400 (easily o/c to 4600 specs or higher)
---------------------------
$731 (w/o shipping)

I can just about guarantee that you would never notice the difference between the two. And if you benchmark them (with appropriate o/c on the video card) -- you'll probably see a 3-8% difference.

Is it worth $600 (per computer) difference for 5% performance increase? (Likely not even that if you bump up the bus on the XP2200)

That's your call.

[I_B_Bangin]

I would go with the AMD joint and wouldn't even bother overclocking anything.

I just built a machine with an MSI motherboard and I am very happy with the performance. It only runs pc133 sdram and it is actually faster than my Shuttle motherboard with DDR ram.

Anyway, save the loot and go with AMD. :cheese:

[Lothar]

Personally if I were to bite the bullet and fork out for a new machine, I would go P4 rdram. Asus P4Te and 2.0g .13 chip. I don't need something super fast, just something that works great and isnt insanely overpriced. What got AMD on the map I believe, was the requirement for P4 processors to use expensive RDRAM. Now RDRAM prices really arent that bad, some of the DDR chips are now more expensive I do believe.

The price difference between an AMD or Intel machine is what a hundred bucks? If you're building a hi-pro gaming box, you could quickly approach 3grand. So really, the cost of the CPU is negligible compared to the rest of your setup. When I get my car payed for, then I can get a real computer...for now I play on two turds 866/466.

[Rooster]

...isn't insanely overpriced.But you want a P4 with RDRAM?The price difference between an AMD or Intel machine is what a hundred bucks?Actually, it's $600. (Difference between AMD & P4 system)Now RDRAM prices really arent that bad, some of the DDR chips are now more expensive I do believe.RDRAM is still about 2x the cost of DDR.If you're building a hi-pro gaming box, you could quickly approach 3grand.Actually you can build the best gaming machine out there for less than $2000.

I don't really mean to disprove every point you attempted to make, but it doesn't really sound like you've done your homework on this one.

[Hammer]

Dude!!! get a Dell;) If you you're gonna put one together, Roo has some real sound advice. He really stays on top of price/performance and benchmarks. I'm just lazy and think screwdrivers are something you drink.

[]LoL[Harm]

My computer runs off the souls of children. Wait, that doesn't really help you does it?

[Rooster]

You really want to freak out Canidae?

[Lothar]

I really dont think it's quite fair to compare prices with a 2.53ghz chip, that just came out on the market, that only a moron would pay that much money for. Price diff between a AMD xp2200 and an Intel 2.2 is 50 bucks, if that. Price between 128m rimm and 128m ddr is 20 bucks.

In another 6 months or so when Intel has their new foundry blasting out .13 chips, this whole price/performance issue will be hard to push. AMD is about to eat some serious dirt.

I'm a die hard gamer, been doing it for 20 years. To me though, there's not one game out there, that's worth spending 3 thousand dollars on my UBER new pc for. This is where I insert my pitch to ditch the fluffy 3d graphics, and insert gameplay <here>. Did anyone here ever play NETHACK? These pc's now a days are soo fast, and so powerfull, yet all the games SUCK.

If I want fluffy graphics, I'll turn on the TV.

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/l/a/amd.html

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/l/i/intc.html

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.html

AMD is made in taiwan, Intel is made in the good old USA. Intel uses its own foundry, AMD contracts its work out. That might possibly be how AMD can sell a cheaper chip...they dont make it, and it gets made oversees. Now you have to stop and think, is AMD overcharging for a Taiwanese manufactured chip? I guess it doesnt really matter, as long as it's cheaper than Intel.

[Canidae]

*smacks Harm around a little* You goofball.

Does someone other than me wanna tell Lothar that maybe he should back off before Roo really starts in on him??? Oh and that maybe he should see the origanal post to see why Roo is comparing the AMD to that particular Intel. :rolleyes:

[Rooster]

I really dont think it's quite fair to compare prices with a 2.53ghz chip, that just came out on the market, that only a moron would pay that much money for. Price diff between a AMD xp2200 and an Intel 2.2 is 50 bucks, if that. Price between 128m rimm and 128m ddr is 20 bucks.Quite fair? So comparing performance as a baseline isn't fair because Intel gouges the public on their fastest CPU? Fair because it's exactly the CPU that we were ASKED to consider? I don't know that Grundy would appreciate being called a moron. I've met him and certainly don't consider him to be one. As for an XP2200 vs Intel 2.2, performance, I'll still take the XP2200... and now YOU'RE comparing a top-of-the-line chip vs a few steps old. Is that fair? Memory wise... who the heck wants 128MB? Pfft... that's what you need to run the OS now-days. Not to mention you have to install RDRAM in pairs. Ugh, that's so '90's. That went out with the Pentium. Talk about screwing the consumer. In another 6 months or so when Intel has their new foundry blasting out .13 chips, this whole price/performance issue will be hard to push. AMD is about to eat some serious dirt.That really sounds like fanboy drivel to me. It seems in your not-so-subtle attempt to back Intel, you may have forgotten about the 64Bit CPU that runs circles around anything even close in clock speed that Intel has (2GHz running like an Intel P4-3GHz?). Oh, did I forget to mention that AMD's 64Bit CPU actually runs 32Bit just as well? And did you forget to mention that Intel's 64Bit CPU runs 32Bit software like crap (if at all)? Last I checked, Intel has been running .13ø for a while now (over 50% of their CPU shipments). It's the .09ø that's the new thing in 2003. Oh yeah, AMD has more patents than Intel (and Intel's been at it a lot longer). I'm a die hard gamer, been doing it for 20 years. To me though, there's not one game out there, that's worth spending 3 thousand dollars on my UBER new pc for. This is where I insert my pitch to ditch the fluffy 3d graphics, and insert gameplay <here>. Did anyone here ever play NETHACK? These pc's now a days are soo fast, and so powerfull, yet all the games SUCK.20 years... not bad. Only a few years behind myself. That $3000 is a relative amount. 5 years ago, that's what would have been required for a high-end gaming system. You know, I'm glad I don't feel the same way as you about all games sucking. Perhaps you're just jaded and memory is being kind (we were younger then, and games didn't have to be as complex to be considered "good"). But that's your opinion, and I'm not out to change that.AMD is made in taiwan, Intel is made in the good old USA. Intel uses its own foundry, AMD contracts its work out. That might possibly be how AMD can sell a cheaper chip...they dont make it, and it gets made oversees. Now you have to stop and think, is AMD overcharging for a Taiwanese manufactured chip? I guess it doesnt really matter, as long as it's cheaper than Intel.Oh, remember that .09ø process I corrected you on? Guess where that's going to be produced. In Ireland. Hmm... last I checked, that's not in the USA (not that I mind Intel creating lots of hi-tech jobs in lovely Ireland). I wasn't aware it was BAD to employ large amounts of people in countries where they may not have it as good as the USA. Yeah, I like to support American companies, but when they gouge their customers and rely on market share (that has nothing to do with performance or reliability) and misleading the public (re: performance; MHz ), I tend to want to go with the other guy. As for your attempt to bash AMD and it's pricing, either provide proof or pipe-down. Speculation like that just reinforces the label "fan-boy".

[Rooster]

Dang it ... my little micron symbol didn't post right.

Oh well, you know what I meant.

[WAnk]

JEEBUS ROO!!!!!!!!!!

just let people buy the chip they want :p whats the worst thats gonna happen? they are going to spend a little extra money for something that still works great.

[Rooster]

I wasn't saying he shouldn't. I was giving him reasons why he (Grundy) may want to go with AMD. (It's obvious that Lothar doesn't give a rat's ass about price/performance ratio. That's his call as well. But to try and justify spending more on an Intel system that doesn't perform as well as an AMD system by arguing points that don't relate to price/performance is pretty typical of the Intel thought process.)

If you read through my first posts (not my discussion with Lothar), you'll see I just make points about cost / performance.

The P4-2.53 is way over-priced. The 2.26 is much more reasonable if you want an Intel CPU/system.

If that's what he wants, cool. But honestly, it's a waste of money to buy the $500 P4-2.53GHz. Now, if he just wants an Intel system,

Get the P4-2.26, 512MB DDR & a ... wait for NV30 ... Or Radeon 9700 if you're okay with their drivers, issues, etc...

[Rooster]

My recommended Intel system:

Intel 2.4GHz (B, Northwood) ($336)
Gigabyte 8IEXP motherboard (DDR, IDE RAID) ($132)
512MB PC2100 DDR RAM ($121)
GeForce4 4400 ($224)
----------------------------------------
$813

Much closer to the $731 for the AMD system. This should perform a little better than the XP2200+ (unless you over clock the AMD). Again though, the difference would likely be unnoticeable in everything but benchmarks.

Is it worth $80 difference? If having an Intel system gives you a piece of mind, sure.

[Canidae]

I told ya'll to warn Lothar before Roo went off. Heh.. guess I was too late. Sorry! :cheese:

[Lothar]

I completely agree that Intel's high rent chips have ALWAYS been over priced. I also think this has a lot to do with production numbers of the new chips...there just isnt the supply. AMD has been around for 30 years, but hasnt gotten support until recently, when they could get the bugs worked out of their chips.

I support the use of RDRAM. It's more expensive, RAMBUS business tactics are horrid, but it does seem to give better performance(sometimes) than SDRAM. If there was an AMD chipset that used RDRAM, then cool...but I dont think there is one, hence my lack of support for AMD in an Uber system. Your machine is only as fast as it's weakest link, be it slow ram, crappy seek times on a hard disk, poor bus bandwidth, whatever your I/O request your CPU happens to have to wait on.

All chips being equal, you still have to wait on I/O

[Rooster]

That's why I think the nForce2 chipset will rock. (DDR400) That will dramatically increase the bus bandwidth (greater than the Intel 850) as well as easily catching RDRAM performance (perhaps not PC1066, but there's not even official support for it yet).

Combine that with my 10,000RPM (4.9ms seek baby!) & 7200RPM Ultra 160 SCSI drives, I think I'll be in pretty good shape.

Personally, RDRAM is over-rated. It benches well, but in real world apps, it doesn't make the difference to justify the price or the companies behavior.

What, did RAMBUS take the Microsoft course on "How to Win Friends and Influence People"? :D

[Lothar]

I think most if not all the world hates RAMBUS, except maybe the PS2 owners out there. One of the main reasons I'm sitting and waiting on buying a new pc, is the new bus proposals. But that could take years to decide on. About the only thing that excites me anymore is the Nano-tech and Clockless computing research.

couple of the best computer sites I know of:
www.tomshardware.com (http://www.tomshardware.com)
http://www.eet.com

[Mulletious]

uhh holy shit.... ill just hump i guess :hump: