|
|
#1
08-30-2005, 04:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Tentative Build Specs - Critque
All prices are in Canadian and this site does do price match so I will get them slightly cheaper (priced it out earlier about $100 less).
AMD X2 4200+ - $599 I want a dual core processor if I am going to build a new system and I understand that AMD's are more stable than Intel. I am also willing to go down to a X2 3800+ for $460 DFI Lanparty - $178 or Asus A8N-E - $144 I'm open to suggestions here for motherboards. I think that if I am going AMD for a processor I want an NF4 chipset though, but other than that I don't think I need many extra options. Seagate 160GB SATA - $120 I have debated buying a raptor for my OS and applications and using this drive just for data but atm I'm not sure. The raptor seems like a lot of money. Corsair Value Select Twin-X 1GB - $140 Also, a DVD writer and Antec Sonata 2 case (I want it to be quiet). I currently have a ATI PCI video card with one DVI output and one VGA. I have a 2001FP. I think that I am looking for another 2001FP and a dual DVI video card but I can't find a dual DVI video card at this site (or in canada in my limited research). I don't really care about playing games but at the same time I don't know if I want to limit myself. What are the current recommended dual dvi video cards? 
|
|
#2
08-30-2005, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tentative Build Specs - Critque
[ QUOTE ]
I understand that AMD's are more stable than Intel. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong. [ QUOTE ] I am also willing to go down to a X2 3800+ for $460 [/ QUOTE ] Good, paying 30% extra for a cpu that is not even 10% faster is bad. You will hardly ever notice it.
|
|
#3
08-30-2005, 04:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tentative Build Specs - Critque
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I understand that AMD's are more stable than Intel. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong. [ QUOTE ] I am also willing to go down to a X2 3800+ for $460 [/ QUOTE ] Good, paying 30% extra for a cpu that is not even 10% faster is bad. You will hardly ever notice it. [/ QUOTE ] Ok, I figured that the 3800 was a better deal and I meant that I hear the AMD dual cores are more stable than the Intel counterparts. This was what all the review sites were saying a month or two ago. Is dual core worth the couple of hundred extra I will spend over a single core?
|
|
#4
08-30-2005, 05:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tentative Build Specs - Critque
[ QUOTE ]
Is dual core worth the couple of hundred extra I will spend over a single core? [/ QUOTE ] Depends on how much use you got of it. If you are gonna run alot of programs that eats cpu time simlultaniously I would go for dual core. They are not very expencive (atleast not the ones I looked at).
|
|
#5
08-30-2005, 05:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tentative Build Specs - Critque
Go with the AMD 3800 with the Asus board. I am a fan of Crucial memory myself but Corair is fine. I always look to purchase AMD over Intel just because I have always had better luck with AMD systems. As for going ahead and getting the dual core over a single core, you might as well go ahead and make the investment now.
|
|
#6
08-30-2005, 11:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tentative Build Specs - Critque
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Is dual core worth the couple of hundred extra I will spend over a single core? [/ QUOTE ] Depends on how much use you got of it. If you are gonna run alot of programs that eats cpu time simlultaniously I would go for dual core. They are not very expencive (atleast not the ones I looked at). [/ QUOTE ] how does dual core compare to running multiplpe processors?
|
|
#8
08-31-2005, 03:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tentative Build Specs - Critque
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Is dual core worth the couple of hundred extra I will spend over a single core? [/ QUOTE ] Depends on how much use you got of it. If you are gonna run alot of programs that eats cpu time simlultaniously I would go for dual core. They are not very expencive (atleast not the ones I looked at). [/ QUOTE ] how does dual core compare to running multiplpe processors? [/ QUOTE ] Being a CET major I find it funny we were just discussing this in class. Running multiple physical processors requires special software to take advantage of the 2 processors. Dual core technology is basically the same as hyper threading. However in hyper threading the cache is shared. Hyper threading can execute 2 threads at a time however sharing a cache causes collisions which cause the cores to wait on eachother. With dual core, each core has it own cache. The dual-cores run threaded applications faster than single-core or HT microprocessors.
|
|
#9
08-31-2005, 04:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tentative Build Specs - Critque
[ QUOTE ]
Running multiple physical processors requires special software to take advantage of the 2 processors. [/ QUOTE ]Sorta. Most software requires extensive restructuring to parallelize it to run on multiple or multicore processors. The software limitations are the same. A properly designed OS has no trouble ditinguishing between running a single thread process on one processor or on one core of a multicore processor.
|
|
#10
08-31-2005, 05:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tentative Build Specs - Critque
[ QUOTE ]
Running multiple physical processors requires special software to take advantage of the 2 processors. Dual core technology is basically the same as hyper threading. However in hyper threading the cache is shared. Hyper threading can execute 2 threads at a time however sharing a cache causes collisions which cause the cores to wait on eachother. With dual core, each core has it own cache. The dual-cores run threaded applications faster than single-core or HT microprocessors. [/ QUOTE ] Not quite right, on a dual core system you can run two single threaded aplications independat of each other at the same time. And what you call special software is just realy threaded software (and especially those with several "active" threads). A person getting dual cores for doing some webbrowsing and stuff wont notice much, but if you run quad tables of poker and got poker tracker and several GT+ (or similar) there should be great difference.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
