I'm currently in the market to get a new computer, however it's been quite some time since I last bought one and need a little help in choosing. First to explain what I'm looking for in a new PC:
1 – To run graphic programs - For illustrations, animation, and video editing
2 – U-streaming - I want to start back broadcasting myself drawing
3 – Games - I have two games that I can't play due to my current PC being too old
4 – Life span - My current computer, a Dell Dimension 4600, I bought back in 2001 and although when it comes to surfing the web and doing graphic on my computer it's adequate. However due to its age and being a Dell some parts are hard to replace, namely the mother board due to tower space. So I want to get a computer with well enough specs that over the years it will still hang in there when it comes to gaming and be ok down the road to upgrade.
One questing though I do have is processors, should I go with Intel or AMD? I've always heard that Intel is the best but that AMD is right there with them. (basically they swap places every so often in the leader board) So does it matter which one I go with?
I'm not too tech savvy when it comes to computers, I know some things but don't feel it's enough to build one from the ground up. So chances are I'll likely go with a name brand.
Which brings me to my final two question, what's a good PC brand? And what's a good Graphics / Video Card? The card question I have no clue on so this is where I need the most help.
As for price range let's just say $1,500 - $2,000 Max.
As I understand it, Intel holds the performance crown in their high-end products, but you'll be spending around $1000 on the processor alone for that. For what you're doing, pretty much anything current from either Intel or AMD should be fine.
If your current PC has lasted from 2001 to 2010, that's 9 years. That's about three times as long as your average company plans to keep desktops for.
If you're looking for that length of lifespan, you're looking way at the top end, and ending way at the bottom end. Which is well outside your budget, there. You might be better off just getting something reasonable, but not too excessive, and aiming for 5-6 years life on it.
Having said that - go heavy on the RAM. Most PCs get shipped with minimal specs on the RAM, just enough to get the OS up and going. And these days, you can get 4-8G in most desktops.
As Tapewolf says, the CPU is much of a muchness; the servers we have run Intel, but that's because we've tested the app we have on both Intel and AMD, and we get more requests delivered per amp of power with Intel servers; ie, we have a very specific load, and in that very very specific situation, Intel works better. For desktops, either will work fine. My laptop at home is Intel, but I'd rather have had an AMD. So it's much of a muchness...
My only suggestion is: don't get 32bit, either in the CPU or in the OS. It'll limit you to 4G of memory, and has issues with that, even, when you start loading it heavily.
I recommend going to newegg, buying each component, installing it yourself. (Or, asking your local geek to help put it together. (Learn from my mistake, do your research and don't get a crappy motherboard!)
I just don't like most mass-produced computers...
Quote from: Drayco84 on April 17, 2010, 11:28:35 PM(Learn from my mistake, do your research and don't get a crappy motherboard!)
What he said.
I bought a Socket 939 in 2006, expecting to upgrade soon after purchasing it, so I bought a crappy motherboard. This March, the computer started shutting down randomly, which I eventually discovered was my motherboard capacitors having exploded. This was, of course, after replacing the power supply (which was probably fine, if too small) and the video card (the fan for which was obviously broken).
My present motherboard got a ton of good reviews on Newegg, and I'd recommend that you do the same (if you don't buy from there, you might at least want to check their reviews). Also, their prices on CPUs are probably pretty good right now, since the unpleasantness (http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/07/newegg-sells-300-counterfeit-core-i7-920-cpus-is-now-investiga/).
If you go AMD, your best bet will probably be socket AM3.
Also,
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on April 17, 2010, 05:35:46 PMMy only suggestion is: don't get 32bit, either in the CPU or in the OS. It'll limit you to 4G of memory, and has issues with that, even, when you start loading it heavily.
From what I can tell, AMD no longer sells 32-bit, and Intel's only consumer-level 32-bit chips are the Atom Z and Atom N2xx chips. VIA also sells 32-bit chips for consumers, but I doubt you can find them easily.
These days, I firmly believe that if you want a PC that A, works excellently, B, lasts a good long time, and C, doesn't cost a rediculous amount of money - You have to make it yourself.
This isn't as hard as it seems; you simply need to assemble a dozen or so parts, stick your Windows CD into the drive, follow the on-screen instructions and you are good to go.
The parts even have highly descriptive instruction pamphlets; it shouldn't take more than an hour or two.
Heck, if you need help - there are plenty of us around here that can do it; I'd be willing to guide you through it if thats whats needed.
That being said...
Here's a full PC I designed for you, based on a AMD processor: http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=18673788
It will come out to around ~$1300.
Now, two things: One, PC cases are somewhat 'personal' items - The ones you like may not be the ones I like. Some people like side windows, some don't. And really, you'll spend $50-$100 for a decent case. I picked one that looked fairly decent, that would make installation easily, but you may want to look for your own if you don't like how it looks.
Two, if you plan on playing brand-new games at high resolutions on "high" settings, you may want to get a better video card than the one I've chosen - but if you want to do that, I'd wait a few weeks for the new Nvidia GTX400 series cards.
Despite saying that, I'm not sure you'd need it - I have a GTX260(Younger sibling to that build's), and I haven't run into any frame-rate issues on Windows(Gaming via Linux/Wine is a different matter, but thats just poor drivers).
Overall, I think this build would work excellently - I have the same motherboard, and the same class of processor, and I've had absolutely no stability or performance issues with it - I've had 0 hardware-related crashes, and only a couple of faulty-driver issues; for things -not- in your build, so I think you'll be fine.
Hope that helps!
-Robbie
My last 12-15 PC's I built myself, from dinky little Mini-ITX boxes to overclocked gaming rigs. Hand-picked components, silent running, OS of my choice (mostly XP), they are exactly how I want them to be. That said, I usually recommend "clueless" people to just get a Mac. They're not much more expensive than PC's of similar quality. Of course, you can get a crappy PC much, much cheaper than a Mac.
But a PC is preferable for gaming. So, build your own. There are dozens of how-to's on the 'net, like this one (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-core-i7,2582.html). Skip the overclocking. In later years, I've spent quite a bit of time and money on getting the noise level down. Well worth it.
I can't recommend any PC brand names, sorry. I bought my last pre-built brand-name PC sometime before 1995. But stay well away from the cheap stuff, you never get more than you pay for. No more Dell for you! :P
Quote from: Bjalf on April 18, 2010, 04:17:04 PM
That said, I usually recommend "clueless" people to just get a Mac. They're not much more expensive than PC's of similar quality. Of course, you can get a crappy PC much, much cheaper than a Mac.
That's an idea, but it has a number of drawbacks. In particular, I don't think he going to be able to upgrade the graphics card unless he gets a mac pro, which
starts at $2500.
He'll have at least 9 years of software which there probably aren't equivalents for (and I would not want to re-purchase Photoshop if I had a licensed copy for Windows) so it's probably going to involve installing Windows 7 through Bootcamp or something.
Personally, I'm a little underwhelmed with the Mac hardware (I have a 2007-era Mac Mini with a lot of upgrades - RAM, CPU and disk), and Snow Leopard seems to have a lot of problems, especially with WiFi.
IMHO, assembling the machine himself is a good idea, though he will have to buy Windows 7 as XP has been discontinued, and the old version of Windows would have been licensed only for that machine.
Well, i would propose DIY as well. I think it might be possible to get used non-OEM Win XP on EBay as well.
Also one nice thing - for other uses than a load of gaming, two physical processors might not be bad idea.
It makes for a lower response time and much better at multitasking!
Quote from: danman on April 18, 2010, 05:17:39 PM
Well, i would propose DIY as well. I think it might be possible to get used non-OEM Win XP on EBay as well.
Unless it's shrink-wrapped and unregistered, it's not going to be very legal. See the rules :B
Quote from: Tapewolf on April 18, 2010, 05:25:09 PM
Quote from: danman on April 18, 2010, 05:17:39 PM
Well, i would propose DIY as well. I think it might be possible to get used non-OEM Win XP on EBay as well.
Unless it's shrink-wrapped and unregistered, it's not going to be very legal. See the rules :B
Unlikely , but might happen. So my advice calculatedly falls in the grey area in between, just as i intended.
I would also consider proposing linux as Wine can run most "working" programs (although, one would have to look before) but that seems to be rather frowned upon as a solution here ...
Quote from: danman on April 18, 2010, 05:58:39 PM
Unlikely , but might happen. So my advice calculatedly falls in the grey area in between, just as i intended.
Welcome to the grey area. We like rules lawyers. They make a funny squishing sound as we punt them out.
Would you care to reconsider your choices?
(Note: This is a subtle hint. It is slightly less subtle than Tapewolf's, as his seemed to go wooshing in one ear and out the other without touching anything on the way through.)
would not be too good ... i have a suspicious feeling that my original post might find itself in the abandoned mine ...
Of course if i wanted to be a rules lawyer i would point out the rules only state posting links to warez is forbidden, (most probably because of the important reason that the admins of the forum want to avoid legal problems and/or including disclaimers everywhere)
If this was a subtle hint though, then by extrapolation follows that one might not even experience a moderately obvious one due to not being around ...
You shouldn't really bother with WXP. 64-bit is THE way to go.
It's also an option to get Win7 Professional instead, as it comes with a virtualized version of XP with it, although it can't access the video hardware.
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on April 18, 2010, 07:21:14 AM
That being said...
Here's a full PC I designed for you, based on a AMD processor: http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=18673788
It will come out to around ~$1300.
I'm curious about why you fans of the same size yet different brands... Besides, I don't see a reason for extra fans unless he indends to overclock.
also, only 4GB?
Quote from: Jack McSlay on April 18, 2010, 08:22:08 PMalso, only 4GB?
Personally, I wouldn't recommend more than 4GB on a Windows machine until a few years from now, unless you know that your apps can use it. All 32-bit apps cap at 4GB, and the improvement you'll see won't be that great until you can use more than that.
I would agree that you shouldn't bother with XP. MS will stop supporting XP in 2014, and I'm not sure, but it might be a fee-based extended support by that time, as well.
Dunno how W7 handles memory for 32-bit programs, but it could be capable of giving a whole 4GB to a 32-bit app if that much is available.
Even if otherwise, under a virtualized XP, it's sure that the only ram spent will be that of the virtualized OS plus the program being run inside it, which is most definitely going to be more memory available than if he tried to run such programs directly, sharing the memory with his main os, browser, anti-virus, etc. under a 4GB system.
so I say 6GB+ and Win7 Pro to get the Virtualized Windows XP with it.
Also, Shadrok, seeing the budget has a ceiling of $2000, if might be worth looking at a LED monitor as well if you don't have one already. Seeing you want to work with graphics on it, It's a very good investment.
Quote from: Jack McSlay on April 18, 2010, 11:00:19 PMDunno how W7 handles memory for 32-bit programs, but it could be capable of giving a whole 4GB to a 32-bit app if that much is available.
Even if otherwise, under a virtualized XP, it's sure that the only ram spent will be that of the virtualized OS plus the program being run inside it, which is most definitely going to be more memory available than if he tried to run such programs directly, sharing the memory with his main os, browser, anti-virus, etc. under a 4GB system.
Hmm. I would agree inasmuch as I recommend against 2GB modules. I recently bought one even though I didn't want to. Buy one 4GB now, and more in succeeding years. Though I don't disagree with your thinking, I don't know if I'm to the point where I would recommend it.
Quote from: Jack McSlay on April 18, 2010, 11:00:19 PMAlso, Shadrok, seeing the budget has a ceiling of $2000, if might be worth looking at a LED monitor as well if you don't have one already. Seeing you want to work with graphics on it, It's a very good investment.
LEDs are awesome but expensive today, will be more awesome and less expensive in the future. It's sound advice, but it will push your budget up, especially if you're looking for 3D.
Nah, with how Windows works a program gets 2GB for its own private use in 32 bit, the other 2GB being reserved for Windows. I don't see how this could really change in virtualization with out horribly breaking everything.
I'm too drunk to be bothered to read everything in the thread, so I'll just put my own opinion out there without regard for what others have posted.
The one constant in all of your requirements is memory. Get lotses of it. You'll also want something 64 bit, so that an application can have more then 2GB of memory. This won't help much in the gaming area, since they are all 32 bit anyways. I hate game programmers, worthless bunch.
CPU is rather unimportant. Something with two cores and the fastest memory interconnect. Because your CPU is more worthless then Intel and AMD would have you believe.
Fast hard disk drives. I don't care about capacity (I say this as I set on at least 6TB of disks <_<). Fast disk drives are what you need. I'm guessing your budget won't allow for the 10,000 RPM 3.4 milisecond seek time monstrosities that have come out recently, but shovel in something with 32MB of disk cache and you should be fine.
Then you have the graphics card. Buy this last and buy as much as you can after optimizing the rest. Go ATI if you get an AMD CPU or nVidia if you go with an Intel CPU.
I made a list on newegg. If it ever actually shows up on public I'll link it. It has nice parts. 8GB of memory, a low end CPU, a decent end graphics card, and a nice fast and big disk drive. Even has a case and 600W power supply for about $1000. Doesn't have monitor/keyboard/mouse.
Quote from: danman on April 18, 2010, 06:54:58 PM
would not be too good ... i have a suspicious feeling that my original post might find itself in the abandoned mine ...
Of course if i wanted to be a rules lawyer i would point out the rules only state posting links to warez is forbidden, (most probably because of the important reason that the admins of the forum want to avoid legal problems and/or including disclaimers everywhere)
If this was a subtle hint though, then by extrapolation follows that one might not even experience a moderately obvious one due to not being around ...
If you want to be a rules lawyer, I could point out Rule VI, Section A (http://clockworkmansion.com/main.php?page=rules#rule06a) for your edification. Or Rule VI itself, for that matter.
Or the text at the top, where it says:
QuoteAs common sense would dictate, these rules are subject to change and are not all-inclusive. There are bound to be some isolated situations that don't fall under these rules as they currently stand, but require moderator action, and we may alter the rules slightly or make additions to adapt to that as need be. Do not cry foul. Do not collect 200 dollars.
One would think that this was sufficient, but apparently not...
Honestly, despite all the opinions being given Shaddy I'm going to tell you something that I've discovered: Choosing a computer 'brand' is about as personal and subject to personal experience as buying a car. It's really something you have to get a good feel for on your own and decide what fits you best. These folks have all pointed out some good facts based on their own personal experience but in reality, it's just as likely to go sour for you as it is to go well. Given your wants and the seeming desire to stick with a brand, choose any brand but then focus on their gaming/business rigs. Most of them will be geared pretty heavily. It's still a gamble, but it's going to be a gamble that you make on your own.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on April 19, 2010, 07:29:33 AM
If you want to be a rules lawyer, I could point out Rule VI, Section A (http://clockworkmansion.com/main.php?page=rules#rule06a) for your edification. Or Rule VI itself, for that matter.
PWN3D
Is true i seem to be getting that.
Also it seems Mao will be laughing somewhere silently.... he knows why.
Quote
Or the text at the top, where it says:
QuoteAs common sense would dictate, these rules are subject to change and are not all-inclusive. There are bound to be some isolated situations that don't fall under these rules as they currently stand, but require moderator action, and we may alter the rules slightly or make additions to adapt to that as need be. Do not cry foul. Do not collect 200 dollars.
One would think that this was sufficient, but apparently not...
Oh, i see that! Because if we slightly alter the above rule it gives possibility to alter the rules
substantially BD
Now seriously - rule III's purpose seems to be to keep the forum work-safe and safe from legal action by companies (if people put in warez and police/militia (if people put in porn). My post did not as far as i understand make any of the previous a problem - in fact from this way of looking even the links in the "what are you listening now" thread pose a bigger problem
Of course is possible i am getting something by error, which then i apologise of, as i do not like to be creating problems for the forum, but otherwise it is definitely not apparent from the above.
Back to the topic at hand though. 64bit CPU's are a good investition to the future, but unlike what some folk say ,do not be all yippee into running 64bit OS simply because most of the stuff that runs still does not take too much advantage of that , so pretty much the only result often is higher memory consumption and no real speed gain (i even saw a comparison a few years ago)
On the other hand i think from experience if you have a lot of RAM fast hard disk is not so important as the stuff can be cached into RAM and worked with in there (i remember running calculation programs on a sun in such way that we copied the data onto a device mapped to a portion of the ram and ran it from there)
CPU - is still important just that you need a balance - the thing you want to avoid is bottlenecks. I would not necessarily go for low-end. but instead of getting top of line, i would make sure to get
as fast ram as you can stick in the sockets - RAM to CPU bottleneck can be a performance killer, especially for poorly written software.
Graphics cards - i would go for nVidia - they make better ,and better-supported hardware in my experience. Besides although not open, they at least bother to release drivers for unixes, unlike ATI
All in all, judge well, but do not get scared -getting good components is not such a difficult task
Quote from: danman on April 19, 2010, 08:52:30 AM
PWN3D
Is true i seem to be getting that.
Also it seems Mao will be laughing somewhere silently.... he knows why.
While I'm not *exactly* sure why, I assure you that my laughter is rarely silent. It's normally heard loudly and clearly by most in proximity.. often leading to many strange looks as I either shut up or try to explain myself.
Quote from: danman on April 19, 2010, 08:52:30 AMBack to the topic at hand though.
Back to the topic at hand, don't get XP. Problem solved.
Quote from: danman on April 19, 2010, 08:52:30 AMpretty much the only result often is higher memory consumption and no real speed gain (i even saw a comparison a few years ago)
A few years ago. Well, a few years ago, there were no 64-bit apps. Check out CNET's review of Win7 home premium (http://reviews.cnet.com/windows/microsoft-windows-7-home/4505-3672_7-33704139-2.html?tag=txt;page). Right now, the 64-bit OSes kick butt, especially in graphics. CS5 (and Windows-based CS4) are 64-bit programs, and you will get the most out of them in a 64-bit operating system.
Outside of graphics and some high-performance, data-intensive, and programming applications, a 64-bit OS is not essential today, mainly because developers have been slow to port their code. But with every new non-netbook/nettop having a 64-bit CPU, app developers are going to have every incentive to make those changes now, which means that in the next couple of years, it will be essential to have a 64-bit OS.
The IRS lists computers as having a class life of 5 years, meaning that businesses expect to pitch their old computers every 5 years in order to gain a benefit as a deduction. I think Intel was offering 32-bit desktop chips as recently as last year, so you'll see a rapid change between now and 2014 where pretty much every software company will make sure that their software can use 64-bit OSes to their fullest extent. It will seem to be in fits and starts at first, but by 2013, the question will be why you don't have a 64-bit OS.
If you're looking to future-proof, get a 64-bit OS now.
Quote from: danman on April 19, 2010, 08:52:30 AMOn the other hand i think from experience if you have a lot of RAM fast hard disk is not so important as the stuff can be cached into RAM and worked with in there
Well, then you'd better get a 64-bit OS, because otherwise you'll be capped at 4GB.
Quote from: danman on April 19, 2010, 08:52:30 AM
Quote
Or the text at the top, where it says:
QuoteAs common sense would dictate, these rules are subject to change and are not all-inclusive. There are bound to be some isolated situations that don't fall under these rules as they currently stand, but require moderator action, and we may alter the rules slightly or make additions to adapt to that as need be. Do not cry foul. Do not collect 200 dollars.
One would think that this was sufficient, but apparently not...
Oh, i see that! Because if we slightly alter the above rule it gives possibility to alter the rules substantially BD
Oh, we don't need rules. If you look closely, the rules boil down to "don't annoy the moderators".
See if you can guess what your wiggling about your post not technically breaching the rules is doing to me. Go on.
Technically, no, you didn't break the rules. You brushed up against them, however, and we told you to watch it. End Subject. Cease discussing. Cease prevaricating. Cease expostulating. You did it, we told you not to.
Do have a nice day, now.
Quote from: danman on April 19, 2010, 08:52:30 AM
Graphics cards - i would go for nVidia - they make better ,and better-supported hardware in my experience. Besides although not open, they at least bother to release drivers for unixes, unlike ATI
I'm sorry? Since when does ATI not make drivers for unixes? I ran ATI-supplied drivers on my desktop two years ago, when I shut it down to move house. I also ran them on it for at least the previous three years, if not more.
I don't currently run them, because said machine is still in a box, due to me not having space to plug the darn thing in.
ATI does better at making drivers available for linux, more frequently updated, and are more responsive to the linux community than NVidia, at least in part due to the way they keep different drivers for different cards, thereby making the testing of drivers easier and less time consuming, I am given to understand.
The only reason I have an NVidia now, is that I couldn't find a laptop that actually had an ATI in it.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on April 19, 2010, 10:44:12 AM
I'm sorry? Since when does ATI not make drivers for unixes? I ran ATI-supplied drivers on my desktop two years ago, when I shut it down to move house. I also ran them on it for at least the previous three years, if not more.
I don't currently run them, because said machine is still in a box, due to me not having space to plug the darn thing in.
ATI does better at making drivers available for linux, more frequently updated, and are more responsive to the linux community than NVidia, at least in part due to the way they keep different drivers for different cards, thereby making the testing of drivers easier and less time consuming, I am given to understand.
The only reason I have an NVidia now, is that I couldn't find a laptop that actually had an ATI in it.
Funnily enough i clearly remember reading just the opposite, and a load of complaints on ATI drivers on slashdot some time ago.
But as seen by the mention of 64 vs 32 bit it is possible my knowledge is somewhat obsolete.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on April 19, 2010, 10:44:12 AMATI does better at making drivers available for linux, more frequently updated, and are more responsive to the linux community than NVidia, at least in part due to the way they keep different drivers for different cards, thereby making the testing of drivers easier and less time consuming, I am given to understand.
As of a couple years ago, it was completely the opposite. I'm honestly not sure what's better these days for Linux video. Kernel support for ATI may not be to the point where it is for NVIDIA, given their enormous head start. Phoronix seems to think that NVIDIA still wins (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_atom_ionamd&num=1), though probably not for much longer.
ok it you are gonna be getting a pre built system I would suggest ibuypower.com . If you are planning to build your own I would suggest getting a barebones system, that way you can get some of what you need in one package. Also barebone systems seem to be cheaper than buying all the part seperately.
Quote from: ShadesFox on April 19, 2010, 12:07:20 AMCPU is rather unimportant. Something with two cores and the fastest memory interconnect. Because your CPU is more worthless then Intel and AMD would have you believe.
It isn't because he needs to work with graphics as well. GPU acceleration on 2d graphic editing is something slim today, and 3d programs usually make little to no use for it during renderings.
But what it depends on may not be on overall performance, he might need to check if the program he uses supports multithreading, if they doesn't, it would be ideal the processors with the best per-core performance, which may not be the best processor overall.
Hey, guys?
Just want to point out here, it's still possible to get new, unopened OEM copies of XP from various e-retailers. Just because MS has stopped producing new copies doesn't mean that the already existing copies ares going to suddenly become available.
Granted, the OEM copies require you to be the system builder, and are non transferable once installed, but they are available if you want to go that way.
Personally, I'm looking in to building a new computer, and I'm planning on putting windows 7 on it, if only to see how I like it. (The inability to make it look and function like windows 2000 will likely color my opinion. :P )
Anyways, after sobering up and finding the list on newegg, here is the parts I speced out. Not too bad considering how much booze was in me last night.
http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=14520926
Quote from: Jack McSlay on April 19, 2010, 01:35:42 PM
Quote from: ShadesFox on April 19, 2010, 12:07:20 AMCPU is rather unimportant. Something with two cores and the fastest memory interconnect. Because your CPU is more worthless then Intel and AMD would have you believe.
It isn't because he needs to work with graphics as well. GPU acceleration on 2d graphic editing is something slim today, and 3d programs usually make little to no use for it during renderings.
But what it depends on may not be on overall performance, he might need to check if the program he uses supports multithreading, if they doesn't, it would be ideal the processors with the best per-core performance, which may not be the best processor overall.
Not really, no. No matter what you do in photoshop even the bottom line CPUs you can get today will churn through the data faster then the memory bus can possibly provide.
Quote from: ShadesFox on April 19, 2010, 08:27:21 PM
Quote from: Jack McSlay on April 19, 2010, 01:35:42 PM
Quote from: ShadesFox on April 19, 2010, 12:07:20 AMCPU is rather unimportant. Something with two cores and the fastest memory interconnect. Because your CPU is more worthless then Intel and AMD would have you believe.
It isn't because he needs to work with graphics as well. GPU acceleration on 2d graphic editing is something slim today, and 3d programs usually make little to no use for it during renderings.
But what it depends on may not be on overall performance, he might need to check if the program he uses supports multithreading, if they doesn't, it would be ideal the processors with the best per-core performance, which may not be the best processor overall.
Not really, no. No matter what you do in photoshop even the bottom line CPUs you can get today will churn through the data faster then the memory bus can possibly provide.
Photoshop, yes. Games, not
as much... Mostly because most of them still don't utilize multi-threading. Then again, I just recently got back into PC gaming, then
lost it due to crappy motherboard choice. I personally recommend Asus, but only because the Netbook I have has had not one, but two bios flashes, and took both of them well. My ECS mobo that was crashing due to a glitch with using two RAM chips. (Yeah, "glitch" is an understatement here...)
With video games it is all about how quickly you can shovel data from the hard disk to the graphics card. Nothing else really matters, the CPU only in regards to how well it can set up DMA transfers and memory management in general. Buying more then the minimum dual core CPU right now is a waste of money in any regard that isn't a synthetic benchmark.
Quote from: superluser on April 19, 2010, 11:56:04 AM
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on April 19, 2010, 10:44:12 AMATI does better at making drivers available for linux, more frequently updated, and are more responsive to the linux community than NVidia, at least in part due to the way they keep different drivers for different cards, thereby making the testing of drivers easier and less time consuming, I am given to understand.
As of a couple years ago, it was completely the opposite. I'm honestly not sure what's better these days for Linux video. Kernel support for ATI may not be to the point where it is for NVIDIA, given their enormous head start. Phoronix seems to think that NVIDIA still wins (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_atom_ionamd&num=1), though probably not for much longer.
Oh, neat. A comparison of the open source mostly-2D drivers for ATI against the closed-source 3D NVidia drivers. That makes sense. And, surprise surprise, the ATI loses. What, exactly, was the point of that? That the very latest Ubuntu, with the very latest X, doesn't yet have drivers available?
I do like that Phoronix use their own, apparently unrelated numbering schema for X. Ubuntu 10.04 uses 7.5 of X. Not 1.7, unless you're talking package versions, which are a different thing entirely.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on April 20, 2010, 05:46:27 AM
I do like that Phoronix use their own, apparently unrelated numbering schema for X. Ubuntu 10.04 uses 7.5 of X. Not 1.7, unless you're talking package versions, which are a different thing entirely.
That's the version of the actual server, I think. E.g. from /var/log/Xorg.0.log on my workstation:
X.Org X Server 1.6.0
Release Date: 2009-2-25 (I should probably upgrade that)
...not that this is really helping Shadrok choose a system builder :3
Even so, that's 1.6.0, not 1.6; a 2.6 kernel is not a 2.6 kernel, but a 2.6 _series_ kernel, and that covers everything from 2.6.0 through 2.6.32, a span of at least a year, if not two or three, of development. There are some major differences between 1.4.2 and 1.6.0 of the X.Org server, for example.
And yes, as you say, it's not helping Shadrok. It _is_ interesting information, though... ;-]
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on April 20, 2010, 06:14:35 AM
Even so, that's 1.6.0, not 1.6; a 2.6 kernel is not a 2.6 kernel, but a 2.6 _series_ kernel, and that covers everything from 2.6.0 through 2.6.32, a span of at least a year, if not two or three, of development. There are some major differences between 1.4.2 and 1.6.0 of the X.Org server, for example.
Depends how development is managed - the linux kernel isn't a great example IMHO because it's stuck at 2.6, which is fairly unusual for this kind of project.
As I remember it from before, 2.2 had major changes since 2.0, 2.4 had major changes since 2.2 and so on, but - pulling numbers out of a hat - 2.2.1 and 2.2.40 would be broadly the same with incremental improvements, so you'd refer to them as 2.2 or 2.4 and be reasonably confident that they would behave the same. That's definitely not the case with 2.6.x though.
I don't follow X development closely so I don't know what they do, but for the most part I would expect big internal differences from 1.4.0 and 1.6.0. Broadly speaking, if 1.4.0 and 1.4.2 are like chalk and cheese, it means that something has gone a bit wrong with the project management >:3
EDIT:
And this is even less useful for Shadrok >:3
http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=368&name=Operating-Systems
here folks, Operating systems, both OEM and Retail.. this has been your local search ninja, have a nice day.
Quote from: Tapewolf on April 20, 2010, 06:36:27 AM
Depends how development is managed - the linux kernel isn't a great example IMHO because it's stuck at 2.6, which is fairly unusual for this kind of project.
As I remember it from before, 2.2 had major changes since 2.0, 2.4 had major changes since 2.2 and so on, but - pulling numbers out of a hat - 2.2.1 and 2.2.40 would be broadly the same with incremental improvements, so you'd refer to them as 2.2 or 2.4 and be reasonably confident that they would behave the same. That's definitely not the case with 2.6.x though.
I'm disappointed you didn't pick 2.4.0 and 2.4.40, there. 2.4.11 had a major VM change, which meant they weren't at all similar. Also, there were a bunch of changes at one point to match with a new glibc. Not to mention the subpoints, like the various shuffling of dev devices for the HP Array Controllers, which changed three times in the 2.4 series - somewhere between 2.4.0, 2.4.4, 2.4.11, and 2.4.30 or so, as I recall.
Theoretically, however, your point stands. And yes, the project management for the Linux kernel is a bit variable, unfortunately.
Quote from: Tapewolf on April 20, 2010, 06:36:27 AM
And this is even less useful for Shadrok >:3
True. I'm gonna leave it at that, even though I've enjoyed this much. ;-]
Quote from: Drayco84 on April 19, 2010, 09:09:44 PM
Photoshop, yes. Games, not as much... Mostly because most of them still don't utilize multi-threading.
Well Photoshop and the other graphic programs (as well as the 3D) are my main concern in the build. Gaming more or less is to help me keep my sanity... or is it to release my insanity... Anyway graphics and 3D are my primary, gaming is secondary.
I just remembered that my job gives me a discount on some things, computers being one of them. :D
So after some time on HP's website I put together this (there were limits on what I could use as a starting computer)
HPE-170t series
OS___________ Windows 7 Pro 64-bit
Processor______Intel i7-860 quad-core processor [2.8GHz, 1MB L2 + 8MB shared L3 cache]
Memory_______ 16GB DDR3-1333MHz SDRAM [4 DIMMs]
Hard drive_____ 750GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s
Graphics card___ 1GB ATI Radeon HD 4850 [2 DVI, HDMI and VGA adapters]
Sound Card_____Integrated 7.1 channel sound with front audio ports
or Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio for $40 more
starting price $1,949.99
$1,543.99 after rebate
This is also without a monitor, but I can use my current one till I get another one or two.
So what do you think? Good? Bad? or just Ugly?
Quote from: Shadrok on April 20, 2010, 10:35:51 PMSo what do you think? Good? Bad? or just Ugly?
Overpriced.
I'll get you a second opinion shortly.
EDIT: Nevermind. That's a decent price for an Intel chip. What if you tried an AMD like this?
https://secure.newegg.com/WishList/MySavedWishDetail.aspx?ID=18715248
For most audio applications you won't noticed the difference a sound card makes. Unless you try recording audio, then it starts making a huge difference.
That set up would do well. I'm still not sold about how much multicore does for photoshop. Maybe see if you can't drop down to core count for a higher CPU frequency and faster memory?
Yeah, I'd prolly recommend cutting back on the processor too. Unless you plan on running a lot of applications at once, most are NOT multithreaded, and thus they can't take advantage of multiple cores. (Yes, two helps as the OS can run on one while your game/app can run on the other.) And intel does have some CPUs that use software to act like they have two cores. (Like the ATOM series, but it's less common in desktop CPUs.)
Personally, I'd be skipping the memory from HP and going to www.crucial.com to purchase memory, if only because they're usually significantly cheaper. Or at least checking if it is...
And the memory you get from HP is often Crucial memory with an HP sticker on it anyway.
And I've only once had any issue with RAM I bought from crucial, and that was an old Sun box with unusual RAM that they had to get from someone else. And even then, they had zero quibbles with taking it back "yeah, fine, ship it to us, we'll ship you a replacement now, it'll be there tomorrow" was the reaction, as I recall.
The other hundred odd wintel servers were fine...
Quote from: ShadesFox on April 21, 2010, 12:50:18 AM
For most audio applications you won't noticed the difference a sound card makes. Unless you try recording audio, then it starts making a huge difference.
That set up would do well. I'm still not sold about how much multicore does for photoshop. Maybe see if you can't drop down to core count for a higher CPU frequency and faster memory?
dualcores is about all one needs for decent performance, anyways.
a mid-range dual core running 3-4 gig of ram with an entry level DX10 card will run CS4 quite happily.
Oh, fun point about multicore processors, or multiprocessor setups - some games, especially Thief, Thief 2 and System Shock 2 will randomly deadlock if run on multicore processors.
There is a way to patch them to work around this (setting the process affinity so it can only use one CPU) but it's something to bear in mind when reinstalling your old software, since pretty much everything is multicore these days.
That may be true, but I have not seen anything -but- such (really old) games deadlock on Multicore processors.
I have to say a couple of things:
For most -anything- you do, over 4GB ram is just overkill. I have 4GB, and I'm never running into the limit.
CPU wise, I disagree. I have a quad-core 3.2ghz processor, and I see the load-meters max out on all cores during some apps starting up, though only for a second - Apps do start up lightning fast.
Also, having a quad-core does a lot for multi-tasking; If you have a single-threaded task running in the background, you can let it crunch away while doing anything you want else. With only a dual-core, things get a lot slower if you do that(personal experience).
BTW, I think you'd be a -lot- better off -not- buying from HP; I've seen a lot of HP and Dell equipment have "issues", or even just be slower than it should. Also, support is often horrible.
If you build it yourself, you get to use first-quality harddisks and motherboards; you get a higher ram speed(which equates to more performance, as several have said), and choosing high-quality components that won't die, have glitches, or "sort of" work.
If its really that big of an issue, I'd be willing to help you with it, whatever you need.
-Robbie
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on April 21, 2010, 07:50:13 AM
That may be true, but I have not seen anything -but- such (really old) games deadlock on Multicore processors.
Yes, but his computer [that is, his current computer] is from the same era as those games. I don't know what software he has on it - nor am I for a moment suggesting that he get a single-core processor - but it's a potential gotcha.
Specifically, it happened to me when I upgraded my 2001 motherboard to a 2008 one...
Kind of need to type this up quick (have to head off to work in a few minuets)
The sound I would like to record decent quality as I plan to record audio for animation as well as re-record some lines for Tapewolf (that is if he still needs me to re-record Sid's lines.)
The RAM, I've learned from my current computer that for the long road it's a good thing to have as much as you can get.
The CPU I have a single core in my current desktop and a dual core in my laptop and it makes a difference in render time. So there's a good chance that a quad would be faster rendering then the dual.
When I get home I'll post what software I use and more on what I plan to use with the new PC.
Quote from: Shadrok on April 21, 2010, 01:55:05 PMThe RAM, I've learned from my current computer that for the long road it's a good thing to have as much as you can get.
While this is true, you also have to consider that the price of RAM will decrease with time, so it may make morse sense to buy a little now and wait until you need it to buy more.
Quote from: Shadrok on April 21, 2010, 01:55:05 PMThe sound I would like to record decent quality as I plan to record audio for animation as well as re-record some lines for Tapewolf (that is if he still needs me to re-record Sid's lines.)
In that case, get the best you can get. :)
Quote from: superluser on April 21, 2010, 04:51:28 PM
In that case, get the best you can get. :)
I think he'd need to add another zero onto the budget for that :B
For an internal card, the Asus Xonar D2X is quite nice. It's PCI-E so it should last for a while yet, and it also has a lot of RF shielding. As I understand it, they also use reasonable quality components rather than populating the board with any old cheap tat.
The main alternative these days is a USB audio interface. These are many, but finding good ones is difficult. All of the ones I've used regularly - without exception - eventually broke down and started to add USB bus noise to the audio signal. I am currently using one that I modified into a standalone converter and connect it to the computer via a fibreoptic link, but that's another story.
Ok back from work and here are the programs I'm currently using, I may upgrade some of these down the road (More then likely Flash/Photoshop and Maya).
Adobe : Photoshop CS2
Illustrator CS2
Premiere Pro 2.0
Image Ready CS2
After Effects 7.0
Encore DVD 2.0
Audition 2.0
Flash 8
Maya 6
VH Multi Cam Studio
Adacity
Out of these the main ones are Photoshop, Maya, Flash, After Effects, and Premiere. When recording audio I have used Adacity but I need to see how Audition is as I may go with it in future projects, I guess when I get some quiet time I'll do that. (That is when ever that mite be, as this house is always filled with noise.)
After Effects and Premiere I use when making 3D animations and Encore I use to put those animations to DVD so that they have a menu. As for Illustrator I've recently started using it to vector images inked in Photoshop, to put into flash. (I would draw directly in flash but I find the brush resizing when you zoom annoying.)
Over all the main goal of this new computer should be animation (rendering / drawing, putting it to video with audio, and publishing to DVD with a custom menu).
Well, sound wise, this may be taking a step backwards, but I don't trust the newer cards - They don't look like they have enough caps to do the job, which is why I stuck with my Audigy 2 ZS(Turnsky[iirc] also has one). Yes, its aging, and yet its only PCI... but it isn't hard to get a MOBO with one or more PCI slots on it still. Also, the fact that its a quality card you can get for $25 (http://shop.ebay.com/?_from=R40&_trksid=p3907.m570.l1313&_nkw=audigy+2+zs&_sacat=See-All-Categories), and Still has current drivers (http://support.creative.com/kb/showarticle.aspx?sid=61105) means quite a bit.
However, I'm pretty sure that the quality of microphone has a lot more to do with the quality of sound you get than the sound-card; I'm pretty sure you can get "good" quality audio out of an Onboard setup. And, considering almost all mobos have onboard sound, its not exactly a big deal.
I'd look for the rest of the PC first, and then, once you have things running - Then pick out a sound card, if the onboard doesn't do a good enough job.
Now, after seeing what you want it for, definitely quad-core. And, go for the highest clock-speed you can, 3.2 GHZ or better.
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on April 22, 2010, 12:24:44 AM
However, I'm pretty sure that the quality of microphone has a lot more to do with the quality of sound you get than the sound-card; I'm pretty sure you can get "good" quality audio out of an Onboard setup. And, considering almost all mobos have onboard sound, its not exactly a big deal.
Yes and no. It's usually referred to as a chain, and there is always a weakest link.
With motherboard sound it's a crapshoot, but I'd put my money on the sound card.
Most onboard sound systems are wholly unshielded and stuck right next to the USB ports with no blocking caps on it whatsoever. As a result you get the processor and USB bus splattered all over your recording, often louder than the signal itself.
You could stick a Neumann mic in it and get something that sounds nice, but is completely unusable.
There is an example here - actually of USB bus noise from a crappy external sound interface - but it's very similar to what the onboard audio sounds like on the last two motherboards I had:
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2010/04/10/review_audio_interface_m_audio_pro_tools_recording_studio/page3.html
If you're reasonably serious about doing voice work, it might be worth setting some money aside for a condenser mic and a preamp, preferably with a limiter. You can probably get something decent enough for under $200.
It's worth noting that there are USB sound interfaces which have the preamp and limiter built-in these days, however you have to be careful or you'll end up with one that leaks the USB bus into the recording too.
Quote from: Tapewolf on April 22, 2010, 03:02:33 AM
Yes and no. It's usually referred to as a chain, and there is always a weakest link.
With motherboard sound it's a crapshoot, but I'd put my money on the sound card.
Most onboard sound systems are wholly unshielded and stuck right next to the USB ports with no blocking caps on it whatsoever. As a result you get the processor and USB bus splattered all over your recording, often louder than the signal itself.
Point.
Quote from: Tapewolf on April 22, 2010, 03:02:33 AM
You could stick a Neumann mic in it and get something that sounds nice, but is completely unusable.
Wait, what? How could something sound nice, but be unusable?
-----
Off topic - I was messing around, and recorded this sample: http://robbiethe1st.afraid.org/files/audigy2zs-sample.wav
I used my Audigy2ZS for the input, a scavenged button mic + 5k resistor for the actual microphone. Recorded in Audacity.
How does that sound to you? What do you see in that recording that would make it a bad setup, or a good one(e.g. pops, clicks, noise, etc.)?
I'm curious.
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on April 22, 2010, 04:36:20 AM
Wait, what? How could something sound nice, but be unusable?
You can have a great performance, captured on a $3000 mic and put through a $30000 Fairchild compressor, but if it's entirely punctuated by a whining sound from the bus, it's not going to be suitable for putting in a recording.
I'm at work, I've searched around but I don't have any examples on me. If you're interested I can put together a specimen.
That said, the onboard sound on this Dell is crystal clear, and without taking it apart, your recording is good too. Maybe I've just ended up with crappy motherboards.
EDIT:
Actually - straying off-topic a bit more - if you want a generic example of how a performance can be ruined at the recording stage, albeit for different reasons:
http://tapewolf.wildernessguardians.com/dmfarp/abel71.wav.mp3
...I won't go as far as calling it a good performance, it's a couple of years old now - but I'm not sure I'd be able to do that panic attack again either way.
There are two problems - firstly Hennya, and secondly Abel was recorded at 44KHz on a then-new sound card (an old low-end Audigy, actually), and the sample-rate converter is totally borked. If you listen to Abel, particularly around the 2:53 mark you can hear it ringing slightly.
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on April 22, 2010, 04:36:20 AMWait, what? How could something sound nice, but be unusable?
Well, you could have the sound of the local Catholic station in the background of your recording because they're only a couple hundred feet away and your old motherboard decided to pick it up on the mic in line (as is the case with many of my YouTube videos).
Quote from: Tapewolf on April 22, 2010, 03:02:33 AM
If you're reasonably serious about doing voice work, it might be worth setting some money aside for a condenser mic and a preamp, preferably with a limiter. You can probably get something decent enough for under $200.
It's worth noting that there are USB sound interfaces which have the preamp and limiter built-in these days, however you have to be careful or you'll end up with one that leaks the USB bus into the recording too.
As far as voice work goes I've not given it much thought. For the most part it's been a quick solution to the problem of needing a voice for an animation.
I guess I should keep the option to upgrade the sound card if I do decide to get serious and get a decent mic too (instead of my karaoke mic)
On the other hand it mite be nice to have decent audio recording for my webcast.
Quote from: Tapewolf on April 22, 2010, 05:41:40 AM
You can have a great performance, captured on a $3000 mic and put through a $30000 Fairchild compressor, but if it's entirely punctuated by a whining sound from the bus, it's not going to be suitable for putting in a recording.
Quote from: superluser on April 22, 2010, 09:38:56 AM
Well, you could have the sound of the local Catholic station in the background of your recording because they're only a couple hundred feet away and your old motherboard decided to pick it up on the mic in line (as is the case with many of my YouTube videos).
Oh, I misunderstood what you meant. To me, that wouldn't sound "good", because of that noise.
---
I listened to the recording; I see what you mean.
---
Also, I'm curious; Those of you with mic problems, have you tried connecting the ground line of your mic directly to chassis ground/some good ground spot? Or, tried simply touching a good ground?
I know that with my last cheap mic, I was absorbing enough 60HZ radiation from the surrounding area that I'd get quite a bit of noise if I was too close to the(unshielded) cable; If I grounded myself out, much of that went away.
(My current mic has no such problem; I'm guessing it may have something to do with the cable I used).
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on April 21, 2010, 07:50:13 AMFor most -anything- you do, over 4GB ram is just overkill. I have 4GB, and I'm never running into the limit.
You have obviously never tried rendering 3d scenes with a high level of detail, nor tried editing a multi-layer A3-sized image at 300DPI/48BPP
ps.: if he's not doing recordings in a sound-tight room, I fail to see the point of worrying about bus noise
Quote from: Jack McSlay on April 25, 2010, 11:25:03 AM
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on April 21, 2010, 07:50:13 AMFor most -anything- you do, over 4GB ram is just overkill. I have 4GB, and I'm never running into the limit.
You have obviously never tried rendering 3d scenes with a high level of detail, nor tried editing a multi-layer A3-sized image at 300DPI/48BPP
Point to you. I really haven't done any -huge- editing, at least not recently.
(Well, aside from the SVG I tried to render as a ~20kX30k image in Gimp... but for some reason, Gimp decided to use its own Cache file, not using much ram at all, and overloading my install partition >.<)
Quote from: Jack McSlay on April 25, 2010, 11:25:03 AM
ps.: if he's not doing recordings in a sound-tight room, I fail to see the point of worrying about bus noise
I disagree with you: Bus noise can sometimes be quite high, to the point that its definitely noticeable, especially when dealing with a mic that doesn't put out much signal.
Quote from: Passive on April 26, 2010, 01:24:48 AM
Go to the Apple store. Buy the first thing they show you.
They'd probably give him an iPad. AFAIK there isn't a version of Photoshop compiled for ARM at the moment.
Again, that is not a helpful suggestion unless he wants to repurchase 9 years worth of very expensive software and learn a new OS, or frig it into running Windows instead (thereby wasting the cost of the MacOS license and ensuring he was to splurge out for a Windows license as well).
Hardware wise, the only ones which can have their graphics upgraded are outside his budget, and I'm not sure the others have quite enough graphics horsepower for what he needs to do.
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on April 26, 2010, 03:22:31 AMI disagree with you: Bus noise can sometimes be quite high, to the point that its definitely noticeable, especially when dealing with a mic that doesn't put out much signal.
My point is, if he wants do do serious sound editing, the very first thing to get is a decent room. If he gets an awesomely shielded sound card that gives crystal clear recordings, he'll just be wasting money if it constantly records the barking from a neighbor's dog. He said he needs it for adding audio to simple animations and record sound to his streams (which typically meanslow-quality sound anyways). That's not advanced sound recording by any means.
As far as recording goes there's a good chance that I won't be doing any soon (unless I can work out a way of sound proofing my closet and use it as a sound booth. That or till I get my own place) because when my dad isn't yelling up a storm about some idiot on TV, my nephew is running around like an uncaged monkey.
On the subject of self built or factory built from what I've been looking at, it looks that the factory built ones leave little room for upgrades. As for building it myself I don't know. It would make it where I decide what goes in the install and not have to deal with trial programs that I'll never use.
I guess what has me unsure of doing it is; way back when I was in middle school I had a computer repair class, and the teacher told us how easy it is to fry a motherboard with a static charge and how the amount need for us to feel the shock was more then what was needed to fry the board. I guess it has always made me a bit weary about working with circuit boards and such due to this.
Over all the other parts of putting together a computer don't bug me as much as the motherboard install, as I've replaced my current PC's hard drive and installed another DVD drive with no problems.
These days, I'm thinking the risk is a bit lower than it used to be - I haven't taken any -specific- precautions(other than touching the grounded case during my work), and I haven't had a single bit of kit die on me.
Really, just touch grounded bits first; touch the case and say the metal pieces of any add-on cards etc and you should be fine.
I've taken out a number of motherboards, built a number of brand new machines with no issues; its really just the same as an add-on card, but you have to screw it into place in the back of the PC. Not that big a deal.
The hardest part, I would say, is trying to keep the cables neat. That takes up more time and energy for me than anything else as far as a hardware-build goes.
Quote from: Shadrok on May 05, 2010, 12:06:18 AMI guess what has me unsure of doing it is; way back when I was in middle school I had a computer repair class, and the teacher told us how easy it is to fry a motherboard with a static charge and how the amount need for us to feel the shock was more then what was needed to fry the board. I guess it has always made me a bit weary about working with circuit boards and such due to this.
Meh. Just make sure to ground yourself and all the tools you're working with and...what Robbie said.
I can tell you from experience. I once had dust bunnies in my DEC Alpha's heat sink, and in order to get the processor to work, I had to remove it from the motherboard periodically and clean the heat sink. After doing this once, I discovered that it wouldn't start. I removed the processor again, and discovered that I had bent one of the pins.
So I bent the pin back into place, and it worked fine. Computers are a lot sturdier than people claim, though the scare stories are probably good for keeping people from doing stupid stuff.
My advice? Make sure you connect your USB connectors to the motherboard properly. I *have* fried USB devices because the case managed to bundle the connectors upside down.
Quote from: superluser on May 05, 2010, 08:35:15 AM
My advice? Make sure you connect your USB connectors to the motherboard properly. I *have* fried USB devices because the case managed to bundle the connectors upside down.
Yeah. I have a cheap USB MIDI interface that doesn't work with Linux and I always use that to verify the USB ports after a motherboard replacement or similar upgrade, since if it does get fried, it's expendable. Assuming the light comes on, I can then check the USB ID via lsusb to make sure it's attached correctly.
FWIW, it _used_ to be that IBM, I'm told, would blame static charge for any memory faults, since it couldn't be IBM kit. IBM kit was reliable...
There used to be a small risk. Most more recent hardware is much more able to deal with static charges, and unless you go out of your way to break it, you're not likely to find any problems.
Don't wear a woolen jersey, shuffle your feet on the carpet, etc, and you will, in 98% of cases, be just fine.
If you're really concerned about static, go to your local electronics store and buy an anti-static wrist strap.
They're not expensive, and they are a good investment.
Quote from: LionHeart on May 06, 2010, 06:04:42 AMThey're not expensive, and they are a good investment.
Depends on the strap. Have I shared the grounding story with you, yet (http://www.milk.com/true-stories/grounding_story.html)? (SFW, but some adult situations are background elements to the story)
Quote from: superluser on May 06, 2010, 11:22:30 AM
Quote from: LionHeart on May 06, 2010, 06:04:42 AMThey're not expensive, and they are a good investment.
Depends on the strap. Have I shared the grounding story with you, yet (http://www.milk.com/true-stories/grounding_story.html)? (SFW, but some adult situations are background elements to the story)
*Falls out his chair laughing.*
Quote from: superluser on May 06, 2010, 11:22:30 AM
Quote from: LionHeart on May 06, 2010, 06:04:42 AMThey're not expensive, and they are a good investment.
Depends on the strap. Have I shared the grounding story with you, yet (http://www.milk.com/true-stories/grounding_story.html)? (SFW, but some adult situations are background elements to the story)
This is almost as good as the workings of a heavy machinegun!
Awesome!
I've been weighing my decisions and...
On one hand building the PC sounds best as it allows for the best options in upgrading but as this will be the first build so I'm a bit uneasy.
On the other hand there's the pre-built PC that will not be as upgradeable but will be ready to go on arrival and have the OS and such installed (including the unwanted demo programs)
I'm starting to lean towards the custom build the more I think about it, but there's still some concerns (though this could just be me being nervous due to it being a first build).
So I guess what I need to do is look into what is needed and where to start. Then just build the thing and stop second guessing myself.
On a side note I'll be on vacation next week so I mite not be able to respond to posts till I get back.
You can probably buy the parts, go to a local computer store and ask them to build them for you, anyway.
Newegg has pretty much everything you'll need, plus reviews to give you the heads up on consistently cruddy products.
I'm leery of local computer stores. The closest I have is Best Buy, and due to their higher prices, poor selection, crummy service, and inability to carry Anime DVD collections that WORK, I stay away from them.
The second closest (Half hour drive via freeway.) I have is Computer Success, and their selection still isn't as good as Newegg's.
Yeah, there's still a few horror stories on The Consumerist about Newegg, but these are usually few and far between. Compared to LOTS of issues with Best Buy, it seems like a safer bet to me and they haven't been terrible to me. Well, not yet anyway.
Quote from: Jack McSlay on May 13, 2010, 08:09:32 AM
You can probably buy the parts, go to a local computer store and ask them to build them for you, anyway.
I mite have to look into that and see if Fry's Electronics offers the option.
If not, well I guess I learn to build one myself. :mowdizzy