Looking for advices

[SubzeroDiabolos]

So, with a budget of 600$ onry, what's the best parts you guys would propose to get to build a new PC using this website only? By building a new PC, I mean just as if I just bought a new one.

Frosty's computers

My current system is a dell dimension 4300, 2GHz single core, 768 mo RAM, Windows XP, 160Gig HDD.

If you need anymore infos plz ask and if possible tell me how to get where the info is lol.

[Ollieyk]

Why that website only? There are loads of places that do it much cheaper.

[Isiolia]

Why that website? Is that your local PC shop or something? If so, go talk to them. Chances are they won't charge you the same price per component if you're buying the whole system from them. Presumably they'll also have some sort of warranty on it.

Otherwise, frankly, selection is limited and prices are kinda high. I'd just go browse Newegg or something.

[SubzeroDiabolos]

Prices are high? That's the cheapest place I know of for Quebec, and there are no taxes there because it's on indian territory or some shit, and I don't have to pay for any shipping since I can go there myself.

Also, does anyone know of a way to compare what's better between this and that videocard?

[Isiolia]

Prices are high?

It's partly the U.S. dollar versus Canadian (used to seeing US dollar prices), and partly local PC shop versus one of the largest mail order sites (my local PC shop, for comparison PC Land Home Page versus Newegg). I guess you can compare to NCIX.com - Canada's Premier Computer Store - Great Technology, Service and Selection.

As it's a local shop, definitely try going by and talking with them about a package deal of some kind. IMO, as that's basically what, like a $400US Newegg budget? You're probably looking at an E5200 or similar CPU, maybe a Radeon 4830-4850 or nVidia 9800GT, and basically whatever else you can squeeze in under budget to make it a complete system.

For video cards, do you mean general models, or manufacturer variations around a particular chipset? For overall model comparison, I usually look at VGA charts on Tom's or something similar (they just seem to be more comprehensive than most) Performance Charts Graphics Cards - Benchmark
Then compare more with reviews n' things for cards that seem to hit the price/performance mark I'm looking at.

[Spekkio]

Gizmodo - A $500 PC That Rocks Out Crysis - PCs
decent idea of a good price/performance ratio i think. only skimmed components but seemed pretty sensible.

[Akiyama]

I have a suggestion in the video card department. Has anyone tried/seen the performance of the ATI Radeon HD4770? It's ATI's latest card that actually outperforms the 4830 in most standards and it's GDDR5. It looks like a really good card for the value, and it's already caused the 4830 to drop in price somewhat. I may look at getting it for my computer I'm building soon.

[mootsfox]

The 4770 is a 4830 with better RAM.

640 steam processors compared to the 800 of the 4850, 4870 and 4890.

[Akiyama]

That's actually something I never understood. I get the Core Clock and what not, but what's with the Stream Processors? What are those for? Is that the RAM? I always thought it was the 1GB/512/256 part of the card that was the RAM. D:

[Tythera]

The stream processors are just that, processors. It's not a strict comparison (ie 640 processors worse than 800 processors) but if you multiply it by the core speed you can get an idea of the total processing power. Quick and extreme example: if there was a video card with 1000 processors at 100 MHz vs. a card with 100 processors at 2000 MHz, the latter would have a higher processing power ignoring possible bottlenecks and whatnot.

It's part of why offloading certain processing tasks to the video card is taking off lately. You need to do it correctly of course but when a modern CPU has 4 cores @ 3000 MHz and the video card has 240 cores @ 650 MHz each, it's fairly obvious why it works.

[mootsfox]

The stream processors are just that, processors. It's not a strict comparison (ie 640 processors worse than 800 processors) but if you multiply it by the core speed you can get an idea of the total processing power. Quick and extreme example: if there was a video card with 1000 processors at 100 MHz vs. a card with 100 processors at 2000 MHz, the latter would have a higher processing power ignoring possible bottlenecks and whatnot.

It's part of why offloading certain processing tasks to the video card is taking off lately. You need to do it correctly of course but when a modern CPU has 4 cores @ 3000 MHz and the video card has 240 cores @ 650 MHz each, it's fairly obvious why it works.

That's ignoring the different types of chips and 'cores' though. A GPU would SUCK royally as a CPU, it can't handle the type of requests a CPU gets. However when a GPU is told to process a set of code it does it very quickly. In terms a raw power, a GPU is many times faster than a CPU. In terms of usefulness at a OS level, a CPU is many times better than a GPU. They each have their place, and now we have GPUs fast enough to do some serious number crunching (a good gaming rig can hit 2Teraflops).


Akiyama, RAM is RAM, measured by the size, speed and bus width. Without going into how different levels of GDDR function, GDDR5 basically works at 2x the rated speed. A 256bit bus on GDDR4 is fine, you don't need more than that. On GDDR5 it's actually a 512bit bus in use. More than 512MB on any card on any resolution under 1680x1050 makes NO difference. Above that you may see an increase depending on the game. Cards like the 9500GT with 1GB are beyond stupid. You will have no difference in performance from or a 9500GT with 512MB of VRAM. A better upgrade would be to a 9600GSO or equal.

The cores of the current generation (two gens ago was 'pixel pipeline') are based on how many 'processing cores' or 'stream processors' it has. With ATI you divide by 5 to get the rough equivalence to the Nvidia counterpart. ATI's stream processors do more work then nvidia's as well.

Oh and as a fun fact, the GTX200 core is actually two G92 cores slapped together. Also known as innovation. ATI's R700 core is the R600 core with a die shrink and more stream processors.

[Tythera]

Yeah, I mentioned certain processing tasks and just didn't expand on it. I know there's only certain things that can be offloaded to a GPU but the ones that can be sent it runs extremely fast. The newest version of one of our electromagnetic simulation tools started using CUDA extensions and it's really only useful for things like this; not the things an every day user would run into.

Also, I never knew the divide by 5 thing between ATI and Nvidia, that's good to know.

[Akiyama]

Ah wow. See, I didn't know any of that. That's why I asked. Learn something new every day. So the GDDR5 ATI Radeon HD4770 is in reality a 256bit and not the 128bit it's labeled as? That's if I'm reading what you guys said correctly. The 4770 just seems like the best bang for the buck, and I was looking at upgrading to that when/if I do a computer upgrade. The one I'm currently using is uh.. well, let's just say crap and leave it at that.

[mootsfox]

Yeah, I mentioned certain processing tasks and just didn't expand on it. I know there's only certain things that can be offloaded to a GPU but the ones that can be sent it runs extremely fast. The newest version of one of our electromagnetic simulation tools started using CUDA extensions and it's really only useful for things like this; not the things an every day user would run into.

Also, I never knew the divide by 5 thing between ATI and Nvidia, that's good to know.

Yeah, I shouldn't have even said that though, as it's not fair to compare them based on just the number of 'cores'.

Nvidia can rape with the CUDA set now lol. I bought a GTX260 for the sole purpose of folding as it rapes what my HD4850 or even HD4870X2 can do in PPD.

[mootsfox]

The HD4770 is a fine card, but an open box HD4850 is a better bang for the buck.

$92: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...2E16814131125R

Lowest priced HD4770 is $90: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102835

The HD4850 should be about 20% faster than a HD4770. Maybe a bit less (15% at the least).

[Akiyama]

Yeah, that Sapphire 4770 worries me. I dunno why. That review may have gotten to me.

I was on a review site that listed the % of power.. but yeah. The 4850 outperforms the 4770 on everything which is to be expected. The 4770 comes real close to the 4850 on a lot of stuff though.

[Olo401]

Ah wow. See, I didn't know any of that. That's why I asked. Learn something new every day. So the GDDR5 ATI Radeon HD4770 is in reality a 256bit and not the 128bit it's labeled as? That's if I'm reading what you guys said correctly. The 4770 just seems like the best bang for the buck, and I was looking at upgrading to that when/if I do a computer upgrade. The one I'm currently using is uh.. well, let's just say crap and leave it at that.

Well no, it is a 128-bit card, but the memory is the same speed as what you'd find on a 4870/4890 so that kinda makes up the difference.

Plus the 4770 is a newer, smaller process die (lookout here, some extra-techie terms comin'!) which means it does more with less power and puts out less heat. All that together puts it just about equal with a 4830/4850 in terms of raw graphic power.

[mootsfox]

Well no, it is a 128-bit card, but the memory is the same speed as what you'd find on a 4870/4890 so that kinda makes up the difference.

Plus the 4770 is a newer, smaller process die (lookout here, some extra-techie terms comin'!) which means it does more with less power and puts out less heat. All that together puts it just about equal with a 4830/4850 in terms of raw graphic power.

Ok, a HD4830 and a HD4850 are very different cards. The HD4830 is 640SP, which is much closer to the HD4770, the HD4850 has 800SP and is faster than the HD4770 in every case I've seen.

A smaller process doesn't by itself increase performance.

[SubzeroDiabolos]

I'm going to try and build something on paper using items and prices from link in OP, you guys please tell me if this works or not, and if they're reasonable prices. All pricing are in canadian dollars, free of taxes.

CPU

AMD AM2 5400+ Dual Core Socket 940 100$ or

AMD AM2 7850 Dual Core Socket 940 2.8Ghz 100$
I don't understand the difference between those 2, they're the same price.

Memory

Platinum 2GB DDR2 667 PC5300 52$ or

Kingston 2GB PC2 6400 CL5 240 PIN KVR800D2N5/2G 39.50$ or

2x KINGTSON 1GB PC2 6400 KVR800D2N5/1G 24$ because I hard with dual core processor it's better to have 2x 1 gig than 1x 2gig

Motherboards

ASUS P5QC < GREEN> LGA 775 207$ or

ASUS P5Q-E < GREEN> LGA775 215.05$

I don't know if with all that i'd need a power supply so i'll add in some just in case.

Power supply

ANTEC SMARTPOWER 2.0 500WATT ATX12V v2.0 SP-500 79.84$ or

Cooler Master eXtreme Power Plus 550W 68$

Video card

ZOTAC GeFORCE 9500GT 1GB GDDR2, DVI AUDIO, DVI to HDMI Adapter, Dual Dual-Link DVI, HDTV, HDCP, Low 115$ or

ZOTAC GeForce 9600GT 1GB GDDR3, Dual Dual Link DVI, HDTV, HDCP, DVI Audio, DVI to HDMI Adapter, PC 165$ or

SAPPHIRE RADEON HD4670 1G DDR3 PCI-E DUAL DVI/TVO 120.65

Maximum total possible: 611.89$, that's if I take the most expensive of each set of item I listed.

Now the question is, do they all work together, or do I need more stuff? How can I tell if some stuff is AGP or PCI-E, and most importantly, is everything in that list better than what I already have?

Memory refresher, my specs are dell dimension 4300, 2GHz single core, 768 mo RAM, Windows XP, 160Gig HDD.

Thanks in advance and sorry for the lengty post.

[SubzeroDiabolos]

Bumping in hope of some help.