Hello, I am looking for some further advise. I am building 3x identical budget machines for general home/office use, ATX cases along with 450w PSUs have been purchased, the OS will be XP Home but will be upgraded to WIN 7 ASAP. One of the PCs I am building for myself and will have both XP and a Linux OS. Each machine will have 4gbs of ram and will be left on constantly, 18hrs a day, so power consumption is a concern. My original choice for a MOBO was the Gigabyte GA-M78SM-2H but I visted another forum and received some excellent options. The choice of MOBOs were this, or this. I settled for the Asus MOBO simply because it was similar to the Gigabyte in build better value, solid capacitors and the reviews were OK. However, I am also a big Asrock fan, like the brand and the 2nd option fitted the bill, not the same build but better value again. If I fitted either this or this CPU to either of the boards above, how much of a difference would we notice in machine speed/processing power, I mean in actual use, not the charts, taking into account the PCs general use. Also for around £20-£25 mark what CPU fans could I fit instead of of those out of the box but would it be nessasarry to so?, they are not gaming machines and extra case fans would be fitted as standard. For the moment the PCs are going to rely on the on board graphics so that is going to cut down on power consumption but will it cope with downloading and burning DVDs or Blu-ray or is a separate card the way to go. I'm also a little confused on ram sticks what would be my best options with the above mix? Lastly one of the people I am building for has thrown a spanner and now tells me they might prefer the Intel route. What equivalent, core 2 Intell MOBOs to the above are available and CPUs? Thanks.
I'd be concerned about the PSU. I really wouldn't trust any computer on a no-brand bundled-with-case 450W cheapie. At least not if it's going to be on 18h a day!
and yet 99.9% of office machines are just that Gotta remember most office machines never see full load for emails, word etc etc.
my thoughts exactly. but we've been tooting that horn for years...lol absolutely right. look at it further though, i don't know about every company, but i know with some of the companies i worked for if an office pc stays in service longer than a year without some kind of significant repair, well, that is definitely not the norm. i have alot of clients that over a 2 year lease plan never call me once. in fact, i'd say less than 3 % have ever had to have me come in for warranty work, and even then it's usually malware. advice: get a case and psu seperately. as far as the other pieces, i'll let your fellow countrymen advise.
Thank you lads, Not quite the advise I was hoping for put point taken. The the PSUs were purchased separately and are a enough decent brand. Any advise on my further inquiries or are you just PSU gurus?
There has been some controversy around (early) 780G mATX motherboards and adequate power phase design. This has probably been fixed in new revisions of many boards but I'd still be wary of putting a "Black Edition" processor in any of them, even if it's just a dual core. I'd say the 5050e fits the bill just fine, also because it's quite energy efficient. As for coolers have a look at Arctic Cooling. They're dirt cheap, yet usually easy on the ears. My A64 3200+ got an Arctic Cooling Alpine 64 instead of the boxed cooler. It doesn't keep the cpu much cooler but it's certainly quiet. I'd say current AMD processors don't get quite as hot as my A64 3200+. Actually, I built a friend's HTPC around an X2 4850e and that's still using the boxed cooler, which is quite quiet. For RAM go with Corsair. It's one of those "sure bets". Intel processors are a bit more capable than their AMD counterparts, but for a good integrated graphics solution you'd be locked in on anything nVidia-based. They've had quite some production issues in the last year, so they'd not be on my personal short list.
Thanks Azrael for the information, sorry for not replying sooner. I have settled for the 5050E, still not decided on which MOBO and if I choose a 780G or try to find a 790G MOBO for the same price. Memory will be Corsair, I wasn't sure what speed to go for with the above MOBOs and CPU.
Unless you plan to overclock there's really no need to go for high-speed memory modules. Of course, if you find them on sale there's no need to be "abstinent" either. You might also opt for some extra security by getting ECC memory. As you probably know all AMD processors from K8 (Opteron, Athlon64) and onwards have the memory controller integrated into the processor itself. The first incarnation of the K8 was the Opteron and with that being a server/workstation processor AMD put in support for ECC memory. In a very cool move AMD decided NOT castrate the consumer level chips, so they also support ECC memory. That being said, ECC memory comes at a small performance penalty, but at least you have the choice. For reasons beyond my grasp not all AMD *motherboards* support ECC memory. It's a bit ridiculous really since it requires little extra work on behalf on the manufacturer. Most of ASUS' AMD motherboards do support ECC, but that's really the only thing making ASUS stand out these days. If you look at a "790" motherboard then make sure you pay attention to the suffix of the northbridge. The "new" chipset is the 790GX. It's essentially an enhanced version of the 780G (usually always paired with the SB700 southbridge). There's also an older northbridge 790FX. While this northbridge in many case is superior to the 790GX it is without integrated graphics and was earlier paired with the painfully slow SB600 southbridge. These days you do NOT want anything from AMDs 600 series! For some reason 790GX boards also mainly come in the ATX form factor whereas 780G boards usually come in the mATX form factor. Who said choice makes things easier... To get back on the issue of memory modules you might want to look out for anything speedwise from DDR2 800/6400 and upwards. Ideally with a CAS Latency (CL) of 4 or lower and a rated power input of 1.8V. Most "enthusiast" modules need more power which makes them run hotter and they're also outside JEDEC specifications.
Thank you so much Azrael, I understood most of what you wrote, clearly you are way-way ahead of me, I shall never catch up with such things I have almost settled on the ASUS Mobo in my first link which is a Matx board and costs around £60, I think that's about 500DKK, it will also be my first Matx. I prefer ATX, I did Google to see if there was a 790GX MOBO with the same specs' as the ASUS and for the same price, I couldn't find anything, do you know of such a MOBO or am I asking to much for the budget?
I'm afraid you won't currently find 790GX-based boards for around £60. You'd have to up your budget by about £20-25 to get one. That being said, I'm not sure if you'd stand to gain that much extra from a 790GX than from a 780G. The cheapest 790GX-based board I've been able to find is this Biostar at Scan.co.uk for about £75. Then again, living in Denmark I don't know the best places to buy (cheaply) in the UK. Also, Biostar is a bit of a bet. They make both good and bad products. If I should choose a reasonably cheap 790GX board I'd probably go for this J&W at Scan. J&W is still a bit unknown hereabouts but they make some seriously nice hardware. I'm not sure I'd recommend it to you, though, as we're entering "enthusiast" territory here, which usually means spending more money for (usually) a very small gain. By the way, if there's anything specific you'd like me to elaborate on, just ask. Problem is, you might have a hard time getting me to stop again. As for my "knowledge", consider it a lot of wasted time I could probably have spent better...
Hi Azrael and thanks. There is so much I would like to ask, I'm not ashamed too, perhaps just a bit embarrassed. Biostar products have a had a reasonably good time of it here in the UK as far as reviews and I have warmed to the brand. I shall see if I can find any reviews on the BIO TA790GX I can read. I really do prefer an ATX board so may spend a little more. I will look for something in the ASUS brand too but I think any 790GX might be a little above the budget, so Matx it may have to be. Could you explain something if you know. My friends and I, our chosen OSs is Win XP home or Vista. I never jumped on to the bandwagon that was Vista preferring to stick with XP. XP is now getting on and as soon as commercially available I will purchase the New WIN 7 OS. Where my confusion lays is, one of the things the promised land that WIn 7 is, is the touch screen capabilities. Now I know Vista needs DX10 to run properly and Win 7 is DX 11 I believe. I also understand for touch screen you need a compatible touch screen monitor but would the on board graphics on any of the boards mentioned be able to cope with touch screen or will I need to install a separate Graphics Card? I think what I'm asking is,-- will Win 7, DX11, and graphics all depend on each other, are they connected?
I applaud you for waiting for Windows 7 and skipping Vista completely. I'm pretty much anti-Vista. No need to beat around the bush... With that out of the way, while (multi) touch capability may be a part of DirectX 11 (actually I'm not really sure there's anything but Direct3D left of DirectX) it certainly should have no impact at all on your choice of graphics cards (or integrated graphics) or vice versa. I'd say it's rather a question of the type of touch capability of the monitor. Which monitors support (or are supported by) Windows 7 we'll probably have to wait for Windows 7 to find out. I know there's been talk of the touch screen technology in HPs all-in-one (AIO) PCs being supported natively in Windows 7 instead of the proprietary drivers that are used now. As far as I know these AIO PCs use integrated graphics as well, so I'd say you're set. My guess is that at some point you'll want to have dedicated graphics anyway, but that's not something you need to think about now. As long as you're able to put in a graphics card you have nothing to worry about.
For general office use and home use, i guess you mean internet browsing and emails. Why not go for Intels Atom ITX systems, low power perfect for the above role i mentioned, and there bloody cheap!
Hi Burnout, No I don't although I receive an do an awful lot of both. I do a lot of WP, photo editing, I would like to down load and burn DVDs, I've never done it, I never needed to, I would like to turn the PC into a home security set up, lots of thing I can't do with an Atom. Also and I'm sorry if this sounds silly, I like to have something chunky other then the dogs sitting under the desk. The other thing I so want to do is partition a HD and run a Linux OS.
I have no idea what you're on about. I have given jago advice to the best of my abilities. Feel free to jump in with your own.
Which kind of FUD Horizon, Frequently Used Disinformation or Fear, Uncertainty, and Disinformation?? Because so far what I have received from Azrael is RUT, Reasoning, Understanding and Thoughtfulness.
Misinformation. Some cases he's not entirely correct, others he's just wrong. He says it with a tone like he knows what he is talking about, why i couldn't help telling him to shut up/ I'm currently at work so I can't type out a lengthy response, examples the issues with early 780g motherboards, had nothing to do with the chipset directly but the power phase that the manufactures were using and certifying for use with 125w AMD cpus, 9850BE at the time. It was ANY quad core that used more than 125w, not black edition cpus. 790gx 7 = series 90 = position in series g = integrated graphics x = crossfire motherboard 790gx, was simply an oced crossfire capable 780g with an update sb
I believe you need to shut up. Nowhere did I blame the 780G chipset, but early 780G-based boards (their power phases, to be precise, which I also stated). I also said that the 790GX was a slightly enhanced 780G, unlike the 790FX which is a completely different chip. Also, the issues weren't just limited to (Phenom) quad cores, but to high-end (and therefore high-powered) Athlon X2s as well. I was referring to "Black Edition" CPUs, because jago linked to both the 5050e and an Athlon X2 Black Edition in his original post. It pays off to be able to read...
