New computer planning

[Ryudo Lee]

I'm getting some money together for a new computer.  There's nothing wrong with it, it's just that I've pretty much hit the performance ceiling on this thing, even with the most overclocking I can safely do to it.  I wonder if anyone here would like to add their $0.02

Before I get started, I gotta make a few things known.  First off, I'm an Intel person.  I've had too much bad luck with AMDs.  Too many have failed for no reason, even with no overclocking involved.  Every Pentium I've used has never failed, even after overclocking them 'til the cows come home.  I don't trust AMD, I don't want 'em, so please don't try to talk me out of Intel processors.

Secondly, for the same reason above, I don't go for ATI video cards.  I've had horrible luck with them.  Too many have burned out on me in the past.  Not a single nVidia card I've ever owned has died on me.

I already have the video cards that I'm going to SLI in this thing, they're a couple of nVidia 1024mb GeForce's.

I already have a PSU, it's an Ultra 550w.

Mouse, keyboard, speakers, printer, webcam and monitors are already covered.

That being said, let me list what I've found.

I spend some time poking around TigerDirect (I'll comparison shop at other sites later) and have come up with a pretty good, but rough, list of what I want.

Case - Ultra eTorque ULT33180 Mid-Tower ATX Case - Silver, Front USB, FireWire and Clear Side
I find that Ultra makes some darn good products.  My current frankenstein of a machine is stuffed into an Ultra case using an Ultra PSU.

120mm Case Fans - 2x Ultra Performance 120mm Case Fan - Dual Ball Bearing
I know there are cheaper fans out there, but I figure Ultra case, Ultra PSU, Ultra case fans?

Motherboard/Processor - XFX nForce 790i Ultra SLI Motherboard CPU Bundle - Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 Processor 2.66GHz OEM, OCZ SLI 2048MB PC16000 DDR3 2000MHz Memory (2 x 1024MB)
It's a combination board, processor and RAM.  I've never used XFX boards before.  Anyone have experience with them?

Extra RAM - OCZ SLI 2048MB PC16000 DDR3 2000MHz Memory (2 x 1024MB)
It's the same as what comes bundled with the board, and I want to have 4gb of RAM for once in my life.

Heat Sink - Ultra / ChillTec / Socket 939/775/AM2 / Thermal Electric CPU Cooler
I've never heard of Thermal Electric CPU coolers.  Anyone have experience with this?

Audio - Creative Labs 70SB088600002 SoundBlaster X-FI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro PCIe Sound Card
I love Creative, and this thing is just pretty.

CD/DVD/Blu-ray - Lite On IHES206-08 Blu-ray Disc Reader with DVD Writer Combo - 6x BD-ROM, 16X DVD+R, 8X DVD+RW, 16X DVD-R, 6x DVD-RW, SATA, Lightscribe
Is the Blu-ray portion worth it?  I know next to nothing about Blu-ray, much less it's use in a PC.

Diskette/Flash Card Drive - Ultra ULT40366 3.5" Floppy Drive with Multi Card Reader
I have always had a need for a diskette drive.  My sister in law got a combo drive similar to this one, and it looks very nifty.  I could just go with a simple diskette only drive though.

Hard Disk - Western Digital Caviar Green WD20EADS - 2TB, 32MB Cache, SATA 3 Gb/s
Now, I've never had problems with WD, and the one review on this particular drive says that it's fantastic.  Anyone heard anything about this particular drive, or anything bad about WD in general?

OS - WinXP SP3
I'm sticking with WinXP until Windows 7 runs the gauntlet.

All of this should cost me somewhere in the neighborhood of $1300 to $1500, depending on rebates and instant savings, and not counting shipping costs.

Thoughts?  Comments?  Obvious hardware incompatibilities that I missed?  A site with similar products and better prices?

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

Blu-Ray is simply a bigger dvd, insofar as computers go. If you want to watch movies on your pc, go for it. If you're planning on using it as a backup device, go for it. If neither matters to you, I'd say save your cash.

As for the machine, the other thing I'd point out is that you should check that the board can take 4 sticks. Which I have, and the image looks like it takes four, but it doesn't hurt to check before you cough up...

[Azlan]

As for the machine, the other thing I'd point out is that you should check that the board can take 4 sticks. Which I have, and the image looks like it takes four, but it doesn't hurt to check before you cough up...

I can say for fact that it does, because I've installed one of these (same deal actually) for a friend of mine.



I agree with the ATI evaluation, my current system was my first foray into ATI and Crossfire... and it will be my last I think.  The 3870 is too flaky of a card.

The Core Quad is a good choice, the i7 is much better... but the cost is very excessive.  The Core Quad is easily overclockable to 4Ghz on air cooling and remains stable (as long as you can remain reasonable air temp in the room), as a gaming friend and myself worked on overclocking both our systems.  My Phenom actually runs a tad bit cooler at 4Ghz and I use a Chilltec TEC for the CPU, but my ATI cards crash at any reasonable performance overclocking unlike my friends Nvidia 260s.

I'm not a fan of Ultra cases and PSUs, I've had a bad number of experiences.  The cases are fine, some have some odd airflow restrictions and are rather tight to work in, but I do not find them aesthetically appealing... that is personal though, so I believe the choice will work for you.

[ShadesFox]

I would pass on the blu-ray.  There really isn't anything that compelling for it in a computer.

Don't really see anything wrong with most of the options there, other then to say that 4gb of ram might not be that useful.  With the BIOS hole you will only see about 3.5GB with XP, though I'm assuming you have 32 bit XP.  If you have 64 bit XP then go for the gold and shovel in 8 gb.  I've also seen much better performance with my Phenom II over the Core 2, but I suspect the usage of my computer is very different from most anyone else here, I emulate clusters. 

I've found that the only real reason to have a discrete sound card is when you're trying to record voice.  Outside of that I've found sound cards to cost too much and provide to little.

Out side of that, since you already have the graphics cards I suppose it would be pointless for me to speak on those, but I've always found SLI/Crossfire useless.  Drop that extra money into a bigger monitor .

Speaking of which, what sort of monitor are you using?

[Cvstos]

I actually like having Blu-ray on my computer. All new movies I buy are Blu now, although the number has sharply dropped due to the increase in streaming ability.

I have a Q6600, 3GB of DDR2-800 RAM, and an 8800GT (single). So far, everything I've thrown at this computer has run real quick. If this level of performance keeps up I won't need a new machine for another couple of years at least (it's only 1.3 years old). Only thing I'd change is more HDD space, but back then a 1TB drive was real expensive so I only have 500GB. HDDs are easy and cheap to add, though.

I agree with the ATi cards. I was *so pissed* when my 9800 Pro died on me, and even more so when the X700 I got to replace it also died. From here on out I'm nVIDIA only.  I can run freaking Mass Effect at near 1080p resolutions. And that game is HARSH on PCs. Honestly this PC I have now reminds me of that Falcon Northwest Talon system I had waaaaaay back when. It had one of the first Athlons, something like 256MB of RAM (IIRC), and a Voodoo3. And it ran WinMe. And it had the longest lifespan of any PC I've owned. Even with WinMe it was rock-solid stable. It wasn't until the GF5's came out that I finally decided to upgrade it.

This PC doesn't have the stability but that's because I've been doing CRAZY with it like running the Windows 7 RC. That alone will mess things up, I think. If I restored it I'd be back to normal.

It *does*, however, have that sense of speed. Where even a year later I don't feel a need to update the core components. It's run everything I've thrown at it (except the nVIDIA Dual TV tuner drivers - I think that's a Vista issue, though, and 7 is smart enough to sense a problem and not allow them to install), with speed aplenty.

As for this PC's components, here are my thoughts:

Creative has fallen out of favor in my eyes as of late, given their AWFUL, AWFUL drivers. They're even awful in XP, but the Vista drivers can bring just about any PC to it's knees with instability.

For DDR3 memory, seek a motherboard with six RAM slots. DDR3 sticks work best in sets of 3. If you can, go for as much as 6GB or 8GB, but 4GB will work as well for now.

You could stick with XP for now, and then jump right to a 64-bit version of Windows 7. That'll unlock the extra RAM. Alternatively, keep the old PC (with it's main bits together) and use that for Windows XP and just slap the Windows 7 RC on the new system from the get-go! (You can get a free, legal copy of the Windows 7 RC From MS.) You can use the old system for legacy stuff, and anything that works in W7, put on the new, super-fast system.

[superluser]

For DDR3 memory, seek a motherboard with six RAM slots. DDR3 sticks work best in sets of 3. If you can, go for as much as 6GB or 8GB, but 4GB will work as well for now.

I've decided that any new motherboard I buy needs to support more than 4 GiB.  It doesn't matter if it only allows 6GiB (or heck, even 5GiB if they figure out how to do that), but when I bought my current mobo, it said it supported 4GiB.

Turns out it supports 4GiB minus the video RAM and whatever else the processor has to address.

Don't make the same mistake I did!  If it supports more than 4GiB, it will have to use a larger address space, and they're unlikely to use 33-bit (8GiB) addresses, but probably something more like 48 bits (256 TiB).

[Ryudo Lee]

I've heard some unpleasant things about driver support with 64-bit processors.  How much of that is true?  WinXP Pro only supports up to 4gb when running 32-bit, but 64-bit will support up to 128gb.

Also, I have a widescreen Acer flat panel monitor, and a smaller Dell flat panel monitor that was handed down from family members.  It works well as a second screen.

[Tapewolf]

I've heard some unpleasant things about driver support with 64-bit processors.  How much of that is true?  WinXP Pro only supports up to 4gb when running 32-bit, but 64-bit will support up to 128gb.

I can't speak for Vista or W7, but on an HP test machine at work, XP-64 didn't recognise the network card.  Fortunately there was a driver available (not part of the base OS) but we had to use Linux to get it.  I suspect most of my hardware at home simply doesn't have win64 drivers for it at all.

Note that unless you're buying a netbook, all desktop processors are 64-bit now.  However, they will only come into their own (and potentially cause problems) if you install a 64-bit Windows on them.
If you go that route, it's probably best to install both 32-bit XP and some flavour of Win64... that way you can dual boot back into XP if you hit problems.

[Reese Tora]

gee, I'm going to be the guy that comes in on the other side, since I use AMD and ATI stuff...

Well, I'm not going to convince you to use anything, certainly not if your mind is made up, but I think it's important to note that, for video cards, the card manufacturer is more important to stability than the chip manufacturer, and you should consider who made the video card you have trouble with before discounting the parts they used to make it.

[Tapewolf]

gee, I'm going to be the guy that comes in on the other side, since I use AMD and ATI stuff...

Well, given a choice I go for AMD myself.  Besides, they invented the 64-bit instruction set that everyone is using...

I've had good results with nVidia cards, but they are a bitch to maintain.  The ATI ones should be better for support into the future now that AMD has apparently made ATI see sense, but the cards themselves haven't been all that stable.  At the end of the day, you pays your money and you makes your choice.

[Ryudo Lee]

I've used a variety of manufacturers when it comes to ATI cards, and they all failed.  I've done the same with nVidia cards.  None have failed.

I often get told that my experiences are the opposite of others, and then there are those who say that the same has happened to them.  Either way, my experiences with ATI and AMD have turned me off to their products in their entirety, and I won't get them unless I have no choice in the matter.

I think I'm going to stick with 32-bit Windows and just eat the half gig of lost memory.  3.5gb of RAM should be more than I'll ever need, for the time being.

EDIT:

I poked around on NewEgg, and for a tiny bit less, and I would have to buy all the RAM separate, I found this combo:
Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80601920 - Retail  /  EVGA E758-TR 3-Way SLI (x16/x16/x8) LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Better deal?

[Cvstos]

I poked around on NewEgg, and for a tiny bit less, and I would have to buy all the RAM separate, I found this combo:
Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80601920 - Retail  /  EVGA E758-TR 3-Way SLI (x16/x16/x8) LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Better deal?

Yeah, that has 6 RAM slots, so I'd go with that one over the other. If you're using DDR3 and want performance (and judging by what parts you're getting, I'd say you do), then you want a motherboard that has six RAM slots and you definitely want to buy your RAM in sets of three sticks.

Even if you stick with a 32-bit OS, you might want to consider this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231247

CAS 8 latency, DDR3-1600, 6GB set, high egg rating, $100. A year ago when I made my PC that would've been a HELL of a lot more expensive. I'm running 2x1GB plus 2x512MB DDR2-800.

Even if you use the 32-bit OS and don't get all of that, when you do upgrade to Windows 7 in a year or so you'll get a HUGE boost. Heck, if I was in your shoes, I'd buy TWO of those since they're only $100. 12GB of RAM? Sign me up!

I'm just glad the system I have has been holding up so well. I need to save up so I can buy a Mac laptop! My current one is 5 years old! A new PC is going to have to wait for a while.

Remember, when you buy a true high-end system, it's going to be useable for a long time. It won't be high-end for that long time, but it should be fast enough to do what you want for at least 3-4 years. If you buy a mid-range system, you'll need to upgrade or get a new one in 2 or so. Buy a low-end system and you'll be buying a new one every year or so.

[Dekari]

Here's my $0.02.  It looks like you have a solid system shopping list there.  Also I congratulate you for building your own and not going with something foolish like AlienWare (seriously, why would anyone want to spend $4k - $6k on a system when you can build the exact same thing on your own for $1.3k?).  However there are a few points I would like to bring up.


SLI video.   Don't do it.  There is very little out there that actually makes use of it and you will run into lock up issues and graphical glitches if you try to force it.  I tried it with my system playing WoW and had lock up issues (2x EVGA 256-P2-N761-AR GeForce 8600 GTS) .  Went to a single card and had no problems (1x EVGA 896-P3-1265-AR GeForce GTX 260).

Creative Labs sound.  Though I don't have an issue with Creative Labs, I just have to ask, why?  IMO unless your doing 7.1 surround sound on your PC, the onboard sound on the motherboard is good enough.  And if you skip it, it will save you money.

Other than that, I think your good.

[Ryudo Lee]

It seems that WinXP Pro (which I want to use) is limited to 4gb of RAM.  But if you put in 3gb, then the system won't eat up as much extra RAM as it would if you dropped in 4gb.

I've already spent the money to buy the video cards.  I'm gonna SLI anyway.  If I run into problems, I'll deal with them.

I prefer Creative over anything else.  In every system I've ever used, except for laptops, I've had a Sound Blaster.  And I have a fairly nice speaker/subwoofer setup which Creative products really seem to take advantage of.

[Cvstos]

It seems that WinXP Pro (which I want to use) is limited to 4gb of RAM.  But if you put in 3gb, then the system won't eat up as much extra RAM as it would if you dropped in 4gb.

I've already spent the money to buy the video cards.  I'm gonna SLI anyway.  If I run into problems, I'll deal with them.

I prefer Creative over anything else.  In every system I've ever used, except for laptops, I've had a Sound Blaster.  And I have a fairly nice speaker/subwoofer setup which Creative products really seem to take advantage of.

Back in the day, the Sound Blaster was the thing to have. Only the A3D systems came close, but EAX eventually surpassed that. But, Creative's awful drivers are my major problem with them now. I tried putting an X-fi in my current system and all I got were constant blue screens. On a system that, like I said, has otherwise been extremely solid.

It would take a lot for them to win me back.

[ShadesFox]

Well, part of that problem is that creative stopped updating drivers for certain (fairly recent at the time) cards.  They wanted to force people who got Windows Vista to get new cards.  Some people made a hacked up version of the drivers that worked nicely, but got lawsuit threats over it.  So i stopped buying creative cards, since I really don't think they can be trusted.  I have a Xondar card from Asus and people tell me I sound better over skype. 

On the subject of 64 bit drivers, if you are getting new hardware it shouldn't be a problem.  Granted I am mostly running Linux so I wasn't having 64 bit driver problems in the first place.  But even my Vista install looks fine.

[VSMIT]

XP 64-bit wasn't as widely used as the Vista 64-bit OSs, though.  It was much harder to get drivers for that OS than for Vista.

[superluser]

Note that unless you're buying a netbook, all desktop processors are 64-bit now.

About freakin' time.  I suspect that some of the current motherboards still only support 32-bit addresses, though.

[Reese Tora]

It seems that WinXP Pro (which I want to use) is limited to 4gb of RAM.  But if you put in 3gb, then the system won't eat up as much extra RAM as it would if you dropped in 4gb.

in general, 32 bit OSes are limited to 4 GB of RAM (2^32 = 4,294,967,296 bytes ~= 4 GB) unless they started addressing multibyte blocks of memory

XP won't see more than 3 GB of RAM, though, IIRC

with as much as RAM costs now, though, might as well buy 4 gigs and have the option of upgrading your OS to something that can use all of it (say if Windows 7 ends up being good enough to replace XP or you decide to go to linux or (why ever for)Vista)

[superluser]

in general, 32 bit OSes are limited to 4 GB of RAM (2^32 = 4,294,967,296 bytes ~= 4 GB) unless they started addressing multibyte blocks of memory

Theoretically, they could use a segmented memory model, but segments went out with the 286, and I don't think any developer wants to even consider going back to those days.

[Ryudo Lee]

XP won't see more than 3 GB of RAM, though, IIRC

with as much as RAM costs now, though, might as well buy 4 gigs and have the option of upgrading your OS to something that can use all of it (say if Windows 7 ends up being good enough to replace XP or you decide to go to linux or (why ever for)Vista)

Good point.  I guess I'll do that.

Linux, no.  Not unless they get some major support for gaming across the board.

Windows 7, maybe if it's as good as XP.

I've also been watching ReactOS.  Just wishful thinking there.

[GabrielsThoughts]

since this seems to be the place to do it. I'm concidering getting a new laptop... I need one that will last more than two years,  and has enough storage capacity and ram to handle a suite of the latest  adobe products, maya,blender,  and Open office 3.0 without crashing  if I have more than one or more of said programs open at the same time. I want a laptop that could last ten or fifteen years without needing a replacement.

[Tapewolf]

since this seems to be the place to do it. I'm concidering getting a new laptop... I need one that will last more than two years,  and has enough storage capacity and ram to handle a suite of the latest  adobe products, maya,blender,  and Open office 3.0 without crashing  if I have more than one or more of said programs open at the same time. I want a laptop that could last ten or fifteen years without needing a replacement.

If you want a laptop that will last 15 years, your best bet is probably a Panasonic Toughbook CF-52.  They're about $2000 USD and military-spec.  You'll have to replace the battery at least once in its life, probably twice or more - Li-Ion batteries lose about 10% of their charge capacity each year, even if left on a shelf.

Bear in mind that unless progress completely stops you will be stuck running roughly the same software in 15 years time if you don't upgrade it.  While I'd love to have a totally futureproof laptop too, I'd also love to have 'Cubi powers and frankly, the two things are about as likely  

Oh.  Also, be careful in choosing the OS.  Everything Microsoft does now has to be authenticated against one of their servers and I'm not taking bets on the Vista/W7 activation servers being around by 2024.

[Cvstos]

since this seems to be the place to do it. I'm concidering getting a new laptop... I need one that will last more than two years,  and has enough storage capacity and ram to handle a suite of the latest  adobe products, maya,blender,  and Open office 3.0 without crashing  if I have more than one or more of said programs open at the same time. I want a laptop that could last ten or fifteen years without needing a replacement.

Sorry man, tech doesn't work like that. While I certainly could keep my PowerBook G4 for another 10 years (it's 5 now), I already can't run the new OS coming from Apple. And do you think any Windows machine made in 01 is going to run Vista? Nope. And that's to say nothing of Windows 7.

If you want a machine that will still be WORKING that long, it's possible with a Toughbook or Apple aluminum laptop. But 15 years from now you won't even be able to use the internet on the damn thing because bandwidth and processors will have improved so much that the media on them will bring it to a screaming halt. You will be stuck with the software released 3-4 years after you buy the system, maybe 5 years if you're really lucky. That means for a DECADE you'll be running that same stuff, and odds are it won't work with much else outside that realm.

To give you an idea of 15 years in the tech realm, this laptop was released by Apple in 1994, 15 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerBook_540

It came with a 640x480 (0.3MP) screen with a whopping 33Mhz of CPU power and a massive 4MB of RAM!

The high-end MacBook Pro (13") has a native res of 1280 by 800 (1MP), and the 17" has  1920 by 1200 (2.3MP), up to nearly 8 times the resolution.

The MacBook Pro lines comes with either 2GB or 4GB of RAM standard. At 4GB, that's ONE THOUSAND TIMES the amount of RAM.

To put that in perspective, if a normal 10cm-long (4 inches) 150-calorie twinkie was the amount of RAM in one of those old PowerBooks, then a Mac Book Pro 17" would be a twinkie approximately 3 and a quarter feet long, a foot wide, and a little over a foot tall weighing approximately 80 lbs and containing 150,000 calories.

That's a big twinkie.

In terms of processing power, modern CPUs have nearly 100 times the clock speed. Does that mean they're 100 times faster? No, they're much faster than that. Architectural improvements allow for much greater speed than what the clock speed alone indicates, and these new CPUs have dual cores. So you're looking at probably 300-500 times the speed.

Hard drive space is a similar story. 15 years ago, getting a GB was amazing. These laptops had 750MB for the top-of-the-line model. Today, laptop drives are tipping the scales at 640GB, again nearly over 850 times the old model.

That's from 1994-2009. And I have more bad news for you. Computer speed doesn't go up linearly. It goes up EXPONENTIALLY. Which means that the difference between a 2009 and 2024 computer is going to be so much greater from 1994 and 2009 that it'll seem like comparing an ocean with a river.

The best you can hope for in a laptop is about 5 years, and that's where I'm at with my PowerBook. It's getting replaced this fall. It won't run the new OS 10.6, it's too slow to run the 10.5 OS effectively so I'm at 10.4. Most of the new software for it requires an Intel CPU. Most of the new iLife apps won't run or will have features turned off for lack of speed. Even the iLife apps I have now run super-slow. It's over. And this was Apple's best and fastest 15" laptop in December of 2004. Retail price was nearly $3k. And I loved this laptop. I still do. It's beautiful and I love the software. But after 5 years it's time for a new system, pure and simple.

[superluser]

That's from 1994-2009. And I have more bad news for you. Computer speed doesn't go up linearly. It goes up EXPONENTIALLY. Which means that the difference between a 2009 and 2024 computer is going to be so much greater from 1994 and 2009 that it'll seem like comparing an ocean with a river.

Yes and no.

The switch from 16-bit to 32-bit in the 80s was a major shift that allowed significant advancement in programming efficiency.  Likewise, the shift to 64-bit in the 90s and 2000s allows some significant advancement in graphics handling and RAM access, but we're getting close to the limit in terms of technology.

As of 2008, we had 2 billion transistors per chip.  If that keeps doubling every two years, we're going to hit an immovable wall in 74 years.  Assuming a spherical processor with a density of one transistor per 2.23e-26m**3 (the density for a fully-insulated graphene transistor 3 atoms long), Moore's law will break down fairly definitively as die size will have to grow larger than today's die size, negatively impacting processor speeds.

Beyond that, we'll start having even more fun.  If the die size in 2082 is 32.5mm, and we keep doubling that every two years, the desktop will cease to exist at about 16 years, since the processor itself would be a sphere eight meters in diameter.

RAM, however, will probably continue to double for the rest of our lifetimes.  We're at 2GiB (31 bits) recommended now for Windows 7, and if we double every two years, we've got another 66 years before we need more than 16 exbibytes of RAM.  We can certainly continue on from there, though exhausting 128 bit addressing is outside the realm of desktops.

We're probably going to hit a few walls before any of that happens, so I'd expect Moore's law to start breaking next decade.  Certainly before 2024.  The one saving grace may be the memristor, which might be able to radically reduce the transistor count in our integrated circuits.  You'll still be out of date in a few years, but it may be 7 years instead of 5.  You're not going to make it to 15 years.  Bear in mind that the price is also dropping fairly rapidly.

That said, the best way to futureproof your computer is to buy one of these.  It's a laptop with a passive backplane.  Instead of buying a new motherboard and CPU every few years, you just swap out the CPU card, which is slightly less expensive than buying a new motherboard, CPU and (depending on the form factor) case, not to mention whatever peripherals you bought that work with your old motherboard but not your new.

[Jack McSlay]

Good point.  I guess I'll do that.

Linux, no.  Not unless they get some major support for gaming across the board.

Windows 7, maybe if it's as good as XP.

I've also been watching ReactOS.  Just wishful thinking there.

I guess not. ReactOS lags behind even a Linux OS with Wine installed when it comes to compatibility. And Windows XP lacks DX10 support, which will limit some games or possibly not run at all.

Also, in my personal opinion, Blu-Ray is complete bullshit unless you totally need to watch the movies. It's barely used for anything but movies nowadays, and shows very little cost-effectiveness, as the writer's price is quite high, and the rewritable disks have, in average, a higher cost per gigabyte than SATA HDs, plus it will take up to 40 disks to backup a 2TB.
If you need a backup solution, I suggest you just buy a spare 2TB HD and maybe a SATA->USB adapter for convenience

Beyond that, we'll start having even more fun.  If the die size in 2082 is 32.5mm, and we keep doubling that every two years, the desktop will cease to exist at about 16 years, since the processor itself would be a sphere eight meters in diameter.

That is highly unfeasible, an 8m-diameter processor would not be an effective one because achieve frequencies any greater than ~18,75mhz, which is how many times light can go back and forward in an 8m-wide sphere. Meaning future computers will be parallel computers - miniaturized clusters each with their own processors, ram and maybe even persistent data device (which will presumably be Flash memory instead of HDs by then)

But yes, computer speeds may be locked for some time if they don't invent quantum computers before reaching such limit.

[Tapewolf]

If you need a backup solution, I suggest you just buy a spare 2TB HD and maybe a SATA->USB adapter for convenience

True, but a BluRay disk won't be destroyed if it's dropped 18 inches.  A hard disk will.  They're also liable to be considerably more stable long-term.  I'm certainly considering Blu-Ray for archival purposes as I simply don't trust my current backup regime of two external drives.

[Jack McSlay]

Not sure about the BR durability, but by checking the prices on amazon, it shows BD-RE disks having a cost per memory nearly 4x as large as 2TB HDs, plus the cost of the writer.

At such massive difference, I think building a backup-dedicated computer in a fixed location (with a redundancy RAID even) is a potentially more cost-effective solution, and far more practical than buying a BD-RE drive and the huge ammount of disks you'll need to back all this up.

Heat Sink - Ultra / ChillTec / Socket 939/775/AM2 / Thermal Electric CPU Cooler
I've never heard of Thermal Electric CPU coolers.  Anyone have experience with this?

Nobody else commented on this so I will.

I haven't seen a computer using them, but I have seen one in action and it's pretty nifty. The thermal electric component basically takes the heat away frow the processor more effectively than a regular cooler because it can remove the heat electrically instead of mechanically. It's a good call, specially if you're going for an overclock.
There's an Wikipedia article about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoelectric_cooling

Case - Ultra eTorque ULT33180 Mid-Tower ATX Case - Silver, Front USB, FireWire and Clear Side
I find that Ultra makes some darn good products.  My current frankenstein of a machine is stuffed into an Ultra case using an Ultra PSU.

Is this really neccesary or are you planning on selling your old comp as whole afterwards?

Diskette/Flash Card Drive - Ultra ULT40366 3.5" Floppy Drive with Multi Card Reader
I have always had a need for a diskette drive.  My sister in law got a combo drive similar to this one, and it looks very nifty.  I could just go with a simple diskette only drive though.

I would recommend going for an external USB floppy drive instead. Not only you gain the practicity of being able to take it anywhere and open it on a comp that doesn't have the floppy drive (and you know that by a HUGE margin, most new and semi-new computers nowadays don't, specially OEMs) and will be more forward-compatible, as floppy support is likely to dissapeear from desktop motherboards real soon.
Or else, assuming you have a floppy drive on your current computer, just slap your old drive on your new computer. It's highly unlikely the presence/absence of a floppy drive will affect the selling price case you want to sell the old PC anyway.

[Ryudo Lee]

Thank you for your input on the heat sink, and I believe Az mentioned something on it too.  I've never seen 'em in action, so it's good to get the opinion of someone's who's seen it.

Looking back at that CD/DVD/BR, I think you guys are right and I'll have to find me a non-BR drive.

I'm not disassembling the old computer.  I may be using it as a secondary storage unit (offline) or I may give it to my sister, for a price.. so yes, the case is necessary.

For me, the internal floppy is one of those things that I just gotta have.  I've always had 'em, I've always had a use for 'em.  Heck, if I didn't have an internal floppy, I would've had a heck of a time getting my current computer running at all.  It required third-party drivers to be loaded during Windows Setup, otherwise it blue-screened right as soon as it got to copying files.  Will Windows Setup recognize a USB floppy drive?

Also, ReactOS is still in Alpha development, so of course it's lagging behind Linux w/Wine.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

If you need a backup solution, I suggest you just buy a spare 2TB HD and maybe a SATA->USB adapter for convenience

True, but a BluRay disk won't be destroyed if it's dropped 18 inches.  A hard disk will.  They're also liable to be considerably more stable long-term.  I'm certainly considering Blu-Ray for archival purposes as I simply don't trust my current backup regime of two external drives.

Be aware that writeable cdroms last about 5 years or less. I have some back from NZ that I simply can't read now, because they've decayed enough. :-/

BluRay may well suffer from the same issue.