Pricewatch help...

User avatar
SS5_Majin_Bebi
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
Org Profile

Post by SS5_Majin_Bebi » Wed Mar 19, 2003 2:12 am

dwchang has hit the nail right on the head there. Intel wants to please people in the short term, AMD is more interested in long term satisfaction.

User avatar
dwchang
Sad Boy on Site
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 12:22 am
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by dwchang » Wed Mar 19, 2003 2:55 am

SS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:dwchang has hit the nail right on the head there. Intel wants to please people in the short term, AMD is more interested in long term satisfaction.
Helps when you're a computer engineer at AMD :-P.

Although (and no one is going to believe me), I would say that regardless. From learning fundamental design in college, I would never want to work for Intel since they well...don't follow those fundamentals. Of course, I understand that it's a business and DAMN they made a good decision. However, I'm a scientist and just couldn't see myself designing things like that (shrug).
-Daniel
Newest Video: Through the Years and Far Away aka Sad Girl in Space

User avatar
klinky
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2001 12:23 am
Location: Cookie College...
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by klinky » Wed Mar 19, 2003 6:02 am

-_-.

Hey hey, the stages still do stuff >_> <_<. The problem is getting enough instructions in to use them :\ Sorta >_> <_< something like that.

A P4 w/ 1066RDRAM & Hyperthreading is a pretty sweet deal. Cost effective :roll: - not really.

Also Intel does have SpeedStep technology in their processors, that in the VERY RARE case your cpu fan/heatsink die, the cpu slows itself down enough so it won't burn up. AMD still has the price performance crown tho :\


Anyways here are my suggestions...

Athlon XP 1800($67):
It's really 1.53Ghz :p. AMD has their only little name game going on to keep up with Intel. Though the numbers are actually a little conservative as most Athlons are 300 - 500 "Mhz" faster then a comparable Pentium4 at the *SAME* clockspeed.

Epox 8RDA Motherboard($88):
This guy is based off the nForce2 chipset. It's the fastest AMD chipset on the market at the moment. It also supports dual-channel memory access = better performance ^_^. Oh and the onboard sound I hear is excellent.

2x 184pin SimpleTech PC2700 DDR($29ea x 2 = $58):
This is just cheap DDR memory. You're not doing any overclocking on this machine and actually the ram will be running @ PC2100 levels. PC2100 = 266Mhz, PC2700 = 333Mhz. Only some of the newer Athlons support 333Mhz(PC2700) operation. However the ram is backwards compatible, just incase you ever want to upgrade, you can just put a new CPU in, instead of having to replace PC2100 ram with PC2700. The cost is only $4 more then PC2100 so it's worth it. You need two DIMMs to take advantage of dual channel memory. That's why I got two. Also 512MB is a good amount of ram.

Western Digital 120GB 7200RPM($119):
This drive is pretty good. Hard drives are always getting cheaper and 120GB is the best price point. They don't really make 20/40GB drives anymore and they're not really worth it. This one is $119. A 40GB drive is around $70. You pay less then twice as much, for three times as much storage. It's worth it :|


Asus V7100 Magic Pure 32MB($34.99):
This card is based on the nVidia Geforce2 chipset. It's kind of old(2yrs or so), but it still performs well. I got one of these when they first came out for $180 :\. Now they're down to $35. I am stuck with mine because it still perfornace "well enough" that I can't justify buying a new card just yet. :.. O. Good card, don't expect to play the latest and greatest games though. Games from about a year back, still play well. I doubt your main interest is games anyways. So this really doesn't need much attention.

PREMIER CP0-PR-TM7673P4 Mid Tower case($33):
This is just a cheap case that I thought looked ok enough. It has a AMD approved power supply. :\


Shipping:$33.20(may be different depending on where you're at.)

Total:$ 441.19



All prices are from the best online computer parts store in the world. <a href="http://www.newegg.com">NewEgg</a>.

You can move your old DVD-ROM & CDRW into your new computer.

This would be a pretty kick ass setup. I am planning on upgrading my machine to someting similar soon. Different video card/ different case maybe. But :p I have no MONEY! :O oh dear.

Also do you just want parts, or must the system be built completely? ! :O Do you posses the power to build the machine yourself or do you have a friend who can do it for you? :O




~klinky

User avatar
klinky
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2001 12:23 am
Location: Cookie College...
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by klinky » Wed Mar 19, 2003 6:04 am

Whoops! those are 256MB dimms btw, in case you didn't know.

User avatar
anneke
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 7:34 am
Location: California
Contact:
Org Profile

Building..

Post by anneke » Wed Mar 19, 2003 10:37 am

I'm scared to build the computer myself. I have some people at work who are willing to help me, but I don't know. I feel bad having them help me. My father could help me but he has a habit of frying mother boards.

I would prefer to have the main pieces assembled. I know I can plug in a few drives, and the video card, but it's the whole mother board to case to fan thing and plugging in memory or what ever that freaks me.

I'm getting alot of advice help here, and I really appreciate it.

Anneke
http://www.bakadeshiproductions.com
(Stop by for a different Video each month...)

User avatar
dwchang
Sad Boy on Site
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 12:22 am
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by dwchang » Wed Mar 19, 2003 11:20 am

Hey hey, the stages still do stuff >_> <_<. The problem is getting enough instructions in to use them :\ Sorta >_> <_< something like that.
I *believe* some pipeline stages in the P4 architecture literally just move instructions to the next pipeline stage. I don't think you need a degree in Computer Architecture to realize this is a waste. All it does is let you increase you clock speed per pipeline stage (assuming you reduce flops on previous stages).
A P4 w/ 1066RDRAM & Hyperthreading is a pretty sweet deal. Cost effective :roll: - not really.

Also Intel does have SpeedStep technology in their processors, that in the VERY RARE case your cpu fan/heatsink die, the cpu slows itself down enough so it won't burn up. AMD still has the price performance crown tho :\
Oh trust me, I know Hyperthreading is pretty good. It's in its infancy, but I think it can be done well. Hell there are tons of research papers I've read on it so (shrug).

As for heat, you can always just download the hardware monitor for your respective motherboard. If you're MB company is worth anything, they'll provide a monitor where you can set things like an audible beep if there is overheating or even have it shutdown. I know my Tyan board does this and I'm sure MSI, VIA and nVidia have something as well.

I don't wanna quote that whole thing Klinky, but your suggestions are definitely good as well. I guess when it comes down to it, there are TONS of way you can build a computer under $800.00. People are usually surprised by this since Dell and Gateway computers are a lot more (for crap IMO).

A couple of things I'd like to note though are the processor and motherboard. The 1800+ is definitely sufficient for whatever editing needs Anneke has and you're definitely right on performance (esp. for something like 1.5 Ghz vs. P4 2.0 Ghz). As for the motherboard, I am somewhat ashamed I forgot about the nForce2 boards. They are excellent! Thanks for the reminder.
I would prefer to have the main pieces assembled. I know I can plug in a few drives, and the video card, but it's the whole mother board to case to fan thing and plugging in memory or what ever that freaks me.
Oh definitely! Putting in heatsinks is not an easy task. You can crack your die fairly easily if you slip. That is unless you are the master of putting equal pressure on all sides. I know I'm not. Definitely get some four pads to put on the processor corners. This helps A LOT. If you live in the CA or TX area, you can always go to a Fry's and have them do this. To most of us this is fairly trivial, but I know it can be intidimating.
-Daniel
Newest Video: Through the Years and Far Away aka Sad Girl in Space

User avatar
dwchang
Sad Boy on Site
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 12:22 am
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by dwchang » Wed Mar 19, 2003 11:32 am

Note: More technical (and off-topic) post ahead. You have been warned. Can't blame me when you fall asleep :).

To go along with my previous point about performance =/ frequency. Intel has recently published benchmarks which more or less proves the rumor (or so I thought) I mentioned earlier.

The Inquirer

(Go to the links they provide and go to "notebook" under "Performance Comparison")

Essentially, the new notebooks, the Centrino, operates at 1.6 Ghz instead of the P4's 2.4 Ghz. However, it operates much more efficiently than it's (bastard) sibling. If you are into architecture, you know that that's because they took their P3 Architecture (good arch.) and made tweaks. That's all the Centrino is...a P3. As I said earlier, the P3 is a respected and fairly efficient architecture with less pipeline stages. Since the Centrino has pretty low voltage standards (which the P4 could not attain), they went back to the P3 Architecture and modified it.

As I said earlier, Intel realized they couldn't push the frequency up way back when and thus the P4. Many analysists believe this was a step backwards. If they continued along the P3 route, they'd be similar to us in frequency (although a more efficient core). It looks like they realized this with their mobile products and went with the P3 since they needed the voltage standards and performance.

Regardless, I find it hilarious that they are finally admitting that Mhz =/ Performance after dogging us for so many years. I can't wait to see them use model numbers like we do.

For the fairly technical, I know some may retort with Moore's Law about doubling frequency every 1.5 years. Well first off, Moore's Law does not state anything about frequency increasing. It talks about transistor technology (namely size). Therefore, in the (near) future, I see (and hope) the frequency standard being abandoned andm true performance coming to light for the consumer (that is performance = instructions per cycle * frequency). IIRC AMD has more instructions per cycle and Intel higher frequency.
-Daniel
Newest Video: Through the Years and Far Away aka Sad Girl in Space

User avatar
jbone
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2002 4:45 am
Status: Single. (Lllladies.)
Location: DC, USA
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by jbone » Wed Mar 19, 2003 12:27 pm

SS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:O...k....jbone, if you knew your computer history you would know that AMD have been making chips as far back as the 486!! Ever heard of the AMD K6-2? My dad had one, it out-performed his equivalent Intel chip in just about everything.
I was talking about 1GHz+ CPUs, I wasn't talking about the CPU wars. Do not belittle my computer knowledge simply because you don't understand what I'm talking about.

And, cycle for cycle, a K6-2 was most definitely *not* faster than an equivalent P-II - I know because I used a K6-2/33 for a long time, and it was always outperformed by a comparable P-II in all my graphic and multimedia applications.


DWChang: I couldn't care less about architectures, about pipelining, about cache, about long-term expandability - a computer is simply a tool.

I read up on the architectures. I know what is inside each CPU. I know why one is faster than the other, and I know how I can get the best bang for the buck. There is nothing anyone here can tell me that I don't already know, or that I don't know how to find out.

I care about what I can do with the computer once it's built.

Neither an Athlon nor a P4 is any better at performing any of the tasks I'd want to do.

One may be a few percent faster. Hells, one may be significantly faster. But, in real-world applications, neither does anything that the other doesn't. And that is what I care about.
"If someone feels the need to 'express' himself or herself with a huge graphical 'singature' that has nothing to do with anything, that person should reevaluate his or her reasons for needing said form of expression, possibly with the help of a licensed mental health practitioner."

User avatar
dwchang
Sad Boy on Site
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 12:22 am
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by dwchang » Wed Mar 19, 2003 12:38 pm

jbone wrote: I read up on the architectures. I know what is inside each CPU. I know why one is faster than the other, and I know how I can get the best bang for the buck. There is nothing anyone here can tell me that I don't already know, or that I don't know how to find out.

I care about what I can do with the computer once it's built.

Neither an Athlon nor a P4 is any better at performing any of the tasks I'd want to do.

One may be a few percent faster. Hells, one may be significantly faster. But, in real-world applications, neither does anything that the other doesn't. And that is what I care about.
Oh don't get me wrong, I meant in no way to "talk down" if you felt insulted or something. If so, sorry.

In any case, you do have your points in terms of useability to the...users. Both run the same programs within some Delta of each other. Although both can do the same thing, like you said, some can do it faster ("a few percent faster"). I mean, in theory, a Pentium I 90 Mhz can do editing in Premiere, but would you want to do it that slowly? Along your lines of logic, since a P4 and a P1 can run the same application, they are to a degree equivalent (of course I am just extrapolating your statements to exaggerations and I realize that). Obviously they aren't (and like I said about my exaggerations, I realize that you know this too).

Although both will get you from point A to B (a finished video), one obviously does it significantly faster. Now along the lines of your statement ("neither does anything that the other doesn't."), this is true, but again performance.

Along the same lines, I built a Dual machine because it would be significantly faster for all applications (when multi-taking). I could have easily have gone single CPU and easily have been able to edit, but I (like many others) would like to do things as fast and efficiently as possible.

Again, I realize you may not have meant it to the degree at which I'm exaggerating it, but along an argument standpoint the rebuttal was in order. I realize that a P1 vs. P4 comparison is quite out there, but again, the statement was in order since the statement is faulty.
-Daniel
Newest Video: Through the Years and Far Away aka Sad Girl in Space

User avatar
SS5_Majin_Bebi
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
Org Profile

Post by SS5_Majin_Bebi » Wed Mar 19, 2003 6:39 pm

jbone wrote:
SS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:O...k....jbone, if you knew your computer history you would know that AMD have been making chips as far back as the 486!! Ever heard of the AMD K6-2? My dad had one, it out-performed his equivalent Intel chip in just about everything.
I was talking about 1GHz+ CPUs, I wasn't talking about the CPU wars. Do not belittle my computer knowledge simply because you don't understand what I'm talking about.

And, cycle for cycle, a K6-2 was most definitely *not* faster than an equivalent P-II - I know because I used a K6-2/33 for a long time, and it was always outperformed by a comparable P-II in all my graphic and multimedia applications.


DWChang: I couldn't care less about architectures, about pipelining, about cache, about long-term expandability - a computer is simply a tool.

I read up on the architectures. I know what is inside each CPU. I know why one is faster than the other, and I know how I can get the best bang for the buck. There is nothing anyone here can tell me that I don't already know, or that I don't know how to find out.

I care about what I can do with the computer once it's built.

Neither an Athlon nor a P4 is any better at performing any of the tasks I'd want to do.

One may be a few percent faster. Hells, one may be significantly faster. But, in real-world applications, neither does anything that the other doesn't. And that is what I care about.
So you'd use a shitbox computer, because you dont really care about it, cause its only a tool? You're a tool if you think like that. And that AMD K6-2 i was talking about OUT-PERFORMED my fathers P2. Speed isn't everything you know. Why would you get a chip thats more prone to overheating and crashing, just because its faster? AMD is also more efficient, so your system will be that much more stable.

But if you want to ask advice and then talk shit to the people who are giving it, fuck off and get whatever the hell you want, because in the long run, it doesnt matter to us here does it.

User avatar
kthulhu
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: At the pony stable, brushing the pretty ponies
Org Profile

Post by kthulhu » Wed Mar 19, 2003 6:55 pm

The K6-2 was an "OK" value chip, but one could consider it to be nothing more than a really souped up Pentium-level chip (no offense to dwchang's employer). Hey, it's called the K6-2, meaning it's a second version of the K6 (AMD's Pentium MMX comparable chip), in a sense.

Still, not bad for the money compared to other chips in its league (especially the Cyrix ones). A P-II or Athlon of the time would've still pretty much blown it away.
I'm out...

User avatar
dwchang
Sad Boy on Site
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 12:22 am
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by dwchang » Wed Mar 19, 2003 7:02 pm

kthulhu wrote:The K6-2 was an "OK" value chip, but one could consider it to be nothing more than a really souped up Pentium-level chip (no offense to dwchang's employer). Hey, it's called the K6-2, meaning it's a second version of the K6 (AMD's Pentium MMX comparable chip), in a sense.

Still, not bad for the money compared to other chips in its league (especially the Cyrix ones). A P-II or Athlon of the time would've still pretty much blown it away.
You don't see me defending the K6 do you? Heh :-P. I've also only been with the company....8 months :), so I'll mostly be a fanboy about recent things (although I'm trying to make my arguments from a purely scientific/design standpoint).
-Daniel
Newest Video: Through the Years and Far Away aka Sad Girl in Space

User avatar
kthulhu
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: At the pony stable, brushing the pretty ponies
Org Profile

Post by kthulhu » Wed Mar 19, 2003 7:15 pm

Back in the day, I would've killed for a K6. Or even a damn K5.

All me and klinky had was a sad 486DX2-66 :cry: .

Now we're an all AMD house.
I'm out...

User avatar
dwchang
Sad Boy on Site
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 12:22 am
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by dwchang » Wed Mar 19, 2003 9:11 pm

kthulhu wrote: Now we're an all AMD house.
Trust me, I appreciate it. This engineer still has a job because of some of you :)
-Daniel
Newest Video: Through the Years and Far Away aka Sad Girl in Space

User avatar
kthulhu
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: At the pony stable, brushing the pretty ponies
Org Profile

Post by kthulhu » Wed Mar 19, 2003 10:33 pm

Can I get my endorsement check now?
I'm out...

Locked

Return to “Hardware Discussion”