   finally settled on my new computer
  hey all.after a couple of weeks of grief ive finally ordered my components for my new computer. cantg wait to get them.the specs:3.2ghz Pentium Dual-Core4gbs OCZ Gold DDR2 RamIntel 975 MB with 3 PCIx16500gb Sata driveDVD Burner700watt FPS PSU with 4 railsATI x1900xtx 512mb videostil havent ordered the display or KB or mouse.i went with the MB that would still allow me to do a crossfire set up if i change my mind but for now just going to do the xtx and see how well it does.whatcha think?   
  I'm getting my new machine next month after the GST drop. Can't wait to play with it. Sadly, it only takes up to 2GB of RAM because there are no PC5300 2GB SODIMMs yet. [crying](700W. Holy shit. I remember moving from 23W to 50W and then thinking 350W was ungodly excessive.)   ;  I think I want a new computer too.Are you going to run Vista on it?   ;Quote:Original post by PrototypeI think I want a new computer too.Are you going to run Vista on it?Yeah, after SP1 or so :)I went with the 700w because it has 4 rails and i wanted to be able to do the crossfire setup if i decide to later.my only concern now is to see which revision of MBoard i get. 3.02 doesnt support the new Conroe chip, 3.04 does. Hopefully it will just be a firmware upgrade either way.;  Is there any reason why you chose dual pentium instead of 2x athlon64 or opteron?   ;Quote:Original post by bytecoderIs there any reason why you chose dual pentium instead of 2x athlon64 or opteron?It's going to sound odd saying this about a pentium product, but after researching it heavily i found that the MoBo CPU DDR2 combo was more bang for the buck than the AMD products. I'm not partial one way or the other and i went in thinking i would go AMD all the way.Primarily it was the dual channel ram at higher speeds and a more competitive price that did it for me.Here's a link to a fun little grapher that will let you do some comparisons. if you flip to price/performance ratio and roll down until you get into the processor speeds you have in mind, remember that the graph is relative it should help you decide.[Edited by - Dreddnafious Maelstrom on June 8, 2006 5:15:02 PM];Quote:Original post by Dreddnafious Maelstrommy only concern now is to see which revision of MBoard i get. 3.02 doesnt support the new Conroe chip, 3.04 does. Hopefully it will just be a firmware upgrade either way.It's three resistors + upgrade, and of course new bios. So be careful if you thik about compatibility with new CPUs.I would probably like 965 boards more, less confusion.Brand of DVD-RAM burner is also important, or you might get pretty shit burning. Only one HD is bit silly use RAID, if you spend that much money, and possibly one backup HD (Non raided).BTW I hope that CPU is 65 nm one, or you'd have problem. BTW I run one of the first Presscott celerons on 3.8 GHz, just to test how much it would be hot.   ;Quote:Original post by RagharQuote:Original post by Dreddnafious Maelstrommy only concern now is to see which revision of MBoard i get. 3.02 doesnt support the new Conroe chip, 3.04 does. Hopefully it will just be a firmware upgrade either way.It's three resistors + upgrade, and of course new bios. So be careful if you thik about compatibility with new CPUs.I would probably like 965 boards more, less confusion.Brand of DVD-RAM burner is also important, or you might get pretty shit burning. Only one HD is bit silly use RAID, if you spend that much money, and possibly one backup HD (Non raided).BTW I hope that CPU is 65 nm one, or you'd have problem. BTW I run one of the first Presscott celerons on 3.8 GHz, just to test how much it would be hot.odd. the intel site said the 3.04 revision of this board would be conroe compliant. for the burner i chose an LG, dont recall the model but it had good reviews.for the hard drive i just cant see needing more than 500gb. maybe ill be surprised but my current 120gb is nearly enough as it is since im not doing a lot of video editing anymore.yes, the CPU is 65nm. Something i was surprised about is that it seems the CPU speed has started slowing down from a price point standpoint. my current computer is about 3 years old and replaced my former computer. the processor speed was a full gig faster and my cost tolerance was less back then. this time im going from 2.66 to 3.2 and paying quite a bit more.true, its a dual core but the net effect of a dual core isnt twice that of a single. a lot of the best performing processors are still single cores.;  How much did the 500GB SATA drive cost you? If you bought on newegg, you could have saved at least $40 by going with 2x 250GB SATA instead.   ;Quote:Original post by ExtrariusHow much did the 500GB SATA drive cost you? If you bought on newegg, you could have saved at least $40 by going with 2x 250GB SATA instead.$224.99