Good PC @ Good Price?

Hi guys, i just found this PC and I was wandering what u guys thought of it?

Is it any good @ all...? I.e. all the components and parts? esp case, hard drive, and mobo and PSU?

whats your guys opinions?

thanks.

Komplett.co.uk

ps. also, on the ram, what is DHX?

 

Well... the price is fine, but a combination of quad core CPU and 256MB of GPU is a-bit ridiculous (I think). You can check my configurations in my "My New PC 2008..." thread - I have plenty of configurations and adding more... maybe this will help.

Good luck!

Edite: Also, check what type of vintilation this fine chassis is using... for example my'n using 1x120mm front and 1x120mm rear fans (that's good).

 

thanks buddy.

actually, i have just got new configurations my self

These are the components I am going to be getting if I buy a 'customized' pre-built rig:

Antec Nine Hundred black miditower,

OCZ GameXStream Powersupply ATX/EPS 600W

Gigabyte GA-P35-DS4, P35, Socket-775,

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz

OCZ DDR2 PC6400 4096MB KIT, Reaper HPC,

Gigabyte GeForce 8400GS 256MB DDR2,

Western Digital Caviar SE16 500GB SATA2

Pioneer DVD±RW burner, DVR-212, 18x,

Creative SB X-FI Xtreme Gamer

Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium Eng

I would very much appreciate it if you guys could give me your honest opinions about each component in the rig - is it good, bad or ok, and what could be improved, and if it can be improved, to what??

p.s. I know the gfx card isnt good - i'll upgrade that later lol

p.s.2: In regards to RAM, which latency is better CL5 or CL4??

Thanks v. Much all - much appreciated :good:

 

please go to this thread to check out my configuration (a slightly new/edited 1)

http://www.hardwareforums.com/my-new-pc-2008-configuration-s-need-advice-s-20841/2/

is is post #29 ( http://www.hardwareforums.com/129744-show-post-29/ )

 

I kinda laugh at everyone telling others to build their configurations. You've got yourself a good case, PSU, mobo, proc, RAM, and HDD. All of those are actually quite nice. It sounds like you know it, but that GPU is absolute bollocks. What other options have you got to throw into that. Anyway to get like a 7900 or 8800GT thrown in there? Why buy all of those nice parts if you are going to put a strangle hold on your graphics processing?

 

hey man thnx -

i think that is what i will get, i just want to make sure ram is definitely good, and the same with HDD - who is better to have, samsung or western digital?

also, is the mobo definitely good? i.e. in terms of quality and upgrade ability?

the other gfx option is to get a:

Point of View GeForce 8800GTX 768MB, GDDR3, PCI-Express, DVI/Tv-Out

what do u think? is this one any good?

In regards to RAM, which latency is better CL5 or CL4

and also, is 4GB ram too excessive? or should i just o with 2? i hear XP and vista both don't recognize over 3GB of RAM?


p.s. which of these mobos is better? :Komplett.co.uk

p.p.s.: also if somebody doesn't mind, maybe they could try a configuration of their own, which they may think is better than the one i currently have and can then give/ post me the details? : Komplett.co.uk

thnx all

 

Personally I stick with Western digital for my HDDs. I have just had better luck, it's mostly an opinion based question (unless you want the fastest HDD.)

That mobo is definately good, you won't be needing to change that at all.

You definately don't want to change to a 8800GTX. There is no reason (except triple SLI with 780i chipset) to get the 8800GTX. You may want to stick with the crap 8400 and buy a 8800GT seperately. The GTX is definately the best card you can get, but it's extremely expensive.

4G of RAM is not excessive, not for Vista. Yes, 32-bit OSs will only recognise 3.5G of RAM, but you need as much as you can get if you plan on gaming on Vista. If you're able to you might want to consider upgrading to the 64-bit Vista though.

 

ummm ok, i see. well, i'll stick with western digital. i wont be needing more than 500GB lol.

Should i just get 1 500GB or 2 250GB's or 2 320GB's (whatever it'll let me do?)

ok, i'll stick with that mobo. i won't be doing any SLI as of yet, but does this mobo have the option for me to get another GTX lets say 2 months from now, and then install it?

I may just stick with the 8400 and get an 8800 GT SSC @ 512 from EVGA, that was my original plan... what do u think? or should i just get this Point of View GTX? there is also a Gainward one? who is better, POV, or Gainward?

lastly, i'll try n get a 64bit OS, and i'll stick with the 4GB of ram lol should I get XP or Vista?

oh, and one more thing... is my PSU i have chosen a good one? or should I up to 700W?

as for the RAM, is that OCZ one I have given in my configuration a very god one? or should I go for sumone like Crucial, or Corsair??

Thanks very very much on all the tips buddy

 

Ok, my friend... I feel, like I need to help you out a-bit.

First of all - you don't need GeForce 8800GTX (Ultra is better)... the better choice is a mobo with dual PCI-E slots and a pair of 8800GT/8800GTS in SLI.

8xxx series are for DirectX 10 gaming, which is ONLY available on Vista. Yes, you should get as much RAM as possible... I recommend 4GB (from 3.2GB, that 32-bit OS can recognize).

If you're planning on playing many games from 2008~2010 period - your choice must be at least 500GB hard disk space.

The cheaper DDR2 memory you'll find - the better. It really doesn't matters much. I recomment 1066MHz if CPU's FSB is the same or better.

That's are the essential things for feature proof PC. You can check my'n config 15... it's my best one, plus feature proof.

I hope, that I've helped you out a-bit with that... feel free to question-up anything else - I'll be checking you time to time.

Peace and good luck with feature gaming.

-Apollo-

 

Oops... my 100's post!

-Apollo-

 

hey apollo, firstly i don't think there is really any need for an 8 series ultra, i mean, those things are expensive. a GTX does the job very well, any benchmarking tests will show you. i'm all for 2 8800GT's but y get 2 of them if i can have 2 GTX's, after all they are the better cards right? of course i wouldn't mind ultra though at all

in terms of mobos i think i have picked a very good one... but, just one thing, for me to know my mobo will sli, must it say SLI, or should i just make sure it has 2 PCI-E slots??

if u take a look at my config below, u'll see that i have chosen the 4GB OCZ DDR2 , Reaper HPC RAM kit which has a heat pipe too as far as i am aware this is a very good RAM... unless someone knows otherwise maybe?

atm this is my config as it stands, let me know what u think and if anything needs changing:


Antec Nine Hundred black miditower,

OCZ GameXStream Powersupply ATX/EPS 600W

Gigabyte GA-P35-DS4, P35, Socket-775,

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz

OCZ DDR2 PC6400 4096MB KIT, Reaper HPC,

XFX 8800GTX 512MB DDR3

Western Digital Caviar SE16 500GB SATA2

Pioneer DVD±RW burner, DVR-212, 18x,

Creative SB X-FI Xtreme Gamer

Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium Eng (64bit)

thanks for all the help guys

 

If you want to SLI you will need a different mobo. You will have to get a mobo with a 680i chipset. The p35 chipset is an intel chipset not nvidia, thus does not allow SLI. Once again, getting a 8800 GTX is a waste of money, waaaaaayyy to expensive for the performance. Stick with the GT cards. Basically the Directx10 issue is this.. If you plan on running games in Dx10 you will see a loss of performance. If you plan on running games in Dx9 in Vista you will see a loss of performance. To get the most performance out of your hardware you will want to get XP either 64 or 32 bit. The beauty of XP is that it's not a resource hog and you won't need 4G of ram, but of course if you want to install Vista later (when the performance issues are fixed) then you may as well get the 4G now and enjoy the over abundance of performance. The RAM you have chosen is great, no need to change it. One thing though is that I believe that the OCZ ram you chose already has a heat solution on it, then you're going to add another?

 

interesting points raised... now i am more confused lol

ok, lets have a look see...

i'll change my mobo then i spose, maybe get one with a 680i, or 780i chipset; any recommendations? i'll do this because i want to be future prroof and i know one day i'll have an sli setup.

as for DX10 tbh i do plan on running games in dx10, but thats only when alan wake is released as that is the only 'true' DX10 game; crysis looked great on very high detail setting on xp and thats DX9, so i am not fussed about that on vista. bottom line is, i will be getting a new pc by the end of this month so should i get vista or not?

as for the GFX card i have absolutely no problem in buying and 8800GT @ 512mb, i know they are extremely good i.e. performance for money.

lastly the ram you said i chose was great, but u mentioned it already had a heat solution and i would be adding another; what did you mean by that?

this is the link to the OCZ ram i am getting: Komplett.co.uk - OCZ DDR2 PC6400 4096MB KIT, Reaper HPC, 2x2GB, Heat Pipe, (CL4-4-4-15)

 

Ah, I apoligise about the RAM, I read through your post a bit quickly and saw you were getting the Reaper then somehow thought you were going to remove that and add an after-market ram heat solution. Sorry lol.

As far as the mobo goes, I would stick with the 680i. The biggest difference between the 680i and the 780i would be three way SLI. You can SLI three cards with the 780i as apposed to the two. The only card that is three way "SLIable" is the GTX (which I'm sure you know is bunk.) I believe the new 98xx series comming out in Feb will be three way ready, but it's going to cost about $500.

Dx9 vs Dx10... This is going to continue to be an arguement for a while. Basically running games in XP is alot easier than running games in Vista. If you've got the resources (which you'll have the resources to run pretty well) and you want the eye candy then run on Vista with Dx10. If you want the frame rate (such as an online FPS like COD4 or something) then run in XP for the edge. The hardware you plan on getting is very nice, but you will STILL see a framerate drop gaming in Vista instead of XP. Your choice.

Edit: Another thing to note is that if you do end up getting Vista and do play a FPS and want the frame rate you could always force Dx9.

 

thats ok - u had me confused

yeh, i agree with u here - i think 680i would probably best, no need for 3way sli lol! thats excessive!!! as for a 9 series, i don't think i mind waiting a little while to get one lol

again, the points u raise about DX9 v DX10 are true, its just a confusing choice u know maybe what i could do is get a 64bit XP for the time being, and then later buy Vista when a few of the kinks have been worked out. what do u think? also, are all versions of Vista 64bit?

again, thanx for the help

 

The 32-bit OS is STANDARD... both, XP and Vista can be found in 64-bit. The primary difference, is that 32-bit can't handle even 4GB, but 64-bit can handle up to 16GB and even more. Though, everything right now is adopted to work with 32-bit and 64-bit is only starting to raise (almost nothing works with 64-bit... it's for IT professionals, that need more that 3.2GB of RAM).

There is no GeForce 8800 GTX on 512MB... there's only GeForce 8800 GTX on 768MB.

GIGABYTE do have motherboards/mainboards with dual PCI-E slots (on Intel's P35 chipset), but I'm not sure, if it's for NVIDIA cards (for ATI absolutely).

Primary difference betwene DX9 and DX10, is that DX10 is almost like a photography (espesially faces). Though, DX10 potencial haven't been raised in nowa-days games.

If you'll come-up with newbie questions again - don't feel bad to ask, but I recommend you to do your own investigations, instead of waiting for a reply... use Google to find a needed web-pages, like NVIDIA's and GIGABYTE's (in your case) and search for the information there... it's much more faster and easier (like GIGABYTE'S dual PCI-E slot motherboards and NVIDIA's cards).

Good luck!

 

i didn't mean to write gtx @ 512, i meant GT...

fair points raised about 64bit v 32bit, so in that instance its not worth getting XP 64 but rather vista? everything is becoming vista compatible now, and more games will be using it; i.e. alan wake, and alone in the dark amongst others... primarily for its dx10 features and ability to create detailed lighting environments - shadows and all...

no offense sunshine, but I'm not really asking newbie questions, rather i am asking for others opinions or perspectives if you will; i actually have done a lot of research in what i need, but i prefer a popular consensus over the hardware i purchase rather than just my own in case I've missed out something; as you have done in your last 16 configurations...

i am very much into computing and gaming, or technology as a whole; a very interesting environment i must say; so i do like to keep up with things. it is difficult trying build your own super PC on ur own lol so i do like others views.

thanks for the help though, i mean, i never really thought too much about 32bit/64bit OS's untill, u and gazaway mentioned it :good:

to be honest i am thinking of settling with that config I have above, but i may change the mobo to a 680i chipset and the gfx card to either an xfx 8800 GTX @ 768mb, or an EVGA 8800GT SSC @ 512mb.

btw, i remember reading somewhere on HF that someone had the EVGA 8800 GT, is that a good card btw? i hear good things about it.

thanx for the help again guys.

 

Ya that's prolly the best idea. And no I believe Vista comes in 32-bit and 64-bit just like XP. Personally when I rebuild my comp next month I will be sticking to XP just because I prefer performance over eyecandy.

 

u know, i was speaking to a buddy o mine - he has an E6600, a 7600GS and 2GB ram, and runs vista. he has games like Call of Duty 4 and he can run them on full settings, no lag, and that includes online. i mean, if his hardware can do that surly mine would be able to right? or is he just one of those lucky ones

personally i usually prefer performance over eyecandy, but if i can have both, y not

 

With only 2 gigs of RAM on Vista he should not be able to play COD4 on full settings, ESPECIALLY with a 7600GS. There's no way that card could run at full settings on COD4 and be playable in a multiplayer fasion. Another issue is that your buddy is playing on Dx9 only, as his card can't run the Dx10. So you need to remember that the game he is playing will be ALOT easier on his hardware than running COD4 on full in Dx10. But once again, he is either mistaken or pulling your chain, because a 7600GS is just a 128-bit interphase low-budget card that wouldnt be capable of COD4 on full..

Actually, now that I think about it, didn't COD4 skip Dx10? I am a little too lazy to research this at work, so does anyone know? I'm sure that they will put out a huge patch for it, if they haven't already though..