Phædrus2401

You could buy all the parts and try a bench test. Or maybe screw around with Linux; Ubuntu is good enough for basic web browsing even for people who have never used Linux before. Then you can write over it when you get 7.
Bench Test: How to Bench Test Your System

dduckett

Thanks for this material, this is helping out a lot, sorry about the seemingly endless questions. I have read that the processor determines whether a system can be 64-bit or not, but how can you tell from the processor's name?

Also, I ran across the Quad Core, and I was wondering what the major differences were, specifically compared to the Core Duo. For example:

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 Quad-Core Processor, 2.83 GHz, 12M L2 Cache, 1333MHz FSB, LGA775 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...nnorswebguidec

vs.

the Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale 3.16GHz 6MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...nnorswebguidec)

I take it if I put a Quad Core in my system, would it be incompatible with most everything else or is it just overkill?

It was this comment on another forum that made me wonder:
"Most games (99%) out there either use only 1 or 2 cores." How worried should I be about games all of a sudden jumping to quad cores and me being left in the dust? :-P

Phædrus2401

Virtually all modern processors, and all dual core ones, support 64 bit. With Intel, anything newer than the Pentium D will support x64, and from AMD the Athlon/Turion/Sempron 64 and newer CPUs also support 64 (to my knowledge).


Quad cores are just as compatible with everything as dual cores are.

Dual core CPUs are great for gaming because with the way game software is written it runs best on single or dual core CPUs. This is due to the way a game is written; the game engine, graphics API, AI, physics, player controls, and game logic all have to share the same information, and because of software limitations writing all of that into more than two threads is a real pain in the butt. Two threads is bad enough; writing it for four can make game development take a lot longer. So game developers are still writing games that run best on dual core CPUs. The advent of quad cores is forcing them to move to quad-threaded games, but it'll be years before it's fully adopted and a quad core is a necessity. I'd say at least three years, maybe more.


So right now a dual core with a high clock rate is the best choice for gaming. Given a 3.0GHz dual core (like the E8400) and a 3.0GHz quad core (like the Q9650) the quad, in games optimized for dual cores the quad core will only get about 0-2% more performance than the dual core. In a quad core optimized game, the quad would get 2-10% more performance. But the Q9650 costs literally more than twice as much as the E8400, and the E8500 performs as well as the Q9650 for $20 more than the E8400.

Quad cores are good for photoshop, video editing and encoding, CAD software, virtualization, and servers. Right now a dual core is the best bang-for-the-buck for games.

Phædrus2401

In answer to your PM, the Q9550 is a very nice processor and a better deal than the Q9650. It won't achieve quite the same performance in FPS games and such as the E8500, but will still work reasonably well. As for how more "future proof it is" I don't know. One thing, the staff is considering recommending Core i5 systems so that *may* be worth looking into... but only if you want to deal with possible instability issues on a brand new platform.

dduckett

So, essentially the GHz are what affects the FPS I take it, and that is as much the processor as the video card? In that case I see what you are saying now, and I'll go with the E8500. I'll just pray when games starting getting into quad cores, that there will be an option for the people left behind with dual cores.

Phædrus2401

When it comes to most modern games, yes, the exception being RTS games (like Command and Conquer and the upcoming Starcraft 2). Games primarily run on two CPU cores, and the few that run on four cores usually get little to no performance boost out of it. Thus the clock speed (GHz) is the most important factor within a given processor family (different families of processors get different amounts of performance per clock... It's kinda complicated).

The CPU actually has relatively little effect on framerate... Kind of. You need a CPU fast enough to keep up with your graphics card. A Radeon 4850 with an E5200 CPU might get 20FPS in a given game, but when paired with an E8400 might get 45fps instead. But, past that point the increase is minor; an E8600 or i5 750 or i7 920 might only get 47-50fps, even though the CPUs are noticeably faster.

Phædrus2401

I don't think games will start really using all four cores of a quad core for at least two years, probably three or four. At that point you can upgrade to a Q9550 or a faster quad (Intel is still making CPUs for the LGA775 socket, so there's still possibility of upgrade past that even). Or if you have a bit more coin you can move up to an LGA1156 mobo, DDR3 RAM, and a Core i5 CPU. But unless you want to transfer to I5 right now--which history has shown with the LGA775 Pentium Ds doesn't always mean you'll have much more room for upgrades--then I'd say an E8500 would be your best bet.

dduckett

By the way, for the PSU, do you usually add up the wattage of everything you're installing and buy the PSU based off that?

Also, I'm looking at monitors, but I'm worried I'm going to run into either bad customer support or dead pixels, anyone have suggestions? Perhaps it would be best to buy the monitor locally to make sure it's transported safely?

dduckett

Sorry about the unnecessary question above, I just now saw the Power Supply sticky.

I've purchased everything now except the RAM and processor. Not having ever done this before, I was wondering if these were the exactly the same processor:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...nnorswebguidec

vs.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115036

I saw the Wolfdale part and noticed it was identified as the Core in the Processor specifications on Newegg. However, no mention of Wolfdale is made on the Amazon page. Further reading suggested that Wolfdale is just the name for the collection of processors: E8500, E8400, and E8200. I'd like to make absolutely sure though.

Phædrus2401

They should be identical. There is the matter of stepping, which is what manufacturing die the CPUs were made on. Amazon may still be selling off the old C0 stepping version of the Wolfdale CPUs rather than the newer E0, so I'd recommend buying from newegg.com instead.

dduckett

Cool deal, and last but not least (thanks for hanging in there with me), I have decided to buy the same RAM as you have Phaedrus:

OCZ Platinum 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model OCZ2P10664GK – Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...20SDRAM%20DDR2

I made this choice because of a significant number of complaints about the Corsair RAM causing BSOD and the fans being quite loud. It seemed rather unstable and a lot of people were advising not to get that line of Corsair RAM.
That might be it until the physical building part.

Phædrus2401

It's a good set of RAM, that's for sure. It kinda sucks that they raised the price though... I got my kit for $52. But then, that's been happening with all the DDR2 RAM recently.


Anyway, good luck with your build! Glad we could help.

dduckett

With the help of a relative, I have the computer up and running Windows 7. A couple notes about the build:
-The power supply was installed upside down to keep the fan from sucking dirt off of the floor.
-Added wheels to the case to keep it further off the ground for better cooling.
-Have had a few crashes, maybe one or two, seem to be related to the video card, but perhaps to Windows 7.

When I open it up again, I'll try and post some screen shots of the inside. Thanks again Phaedrus (and shotgn), you're the man!