EPTlol
Want to Build a Computer, but Clueless; Help? - Page 2
| Blogs > maareek |
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
lol | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On February 16 2010 17:34 maareek wrote: (Didn't post this in the "Post Your Rig" thread because it seemed like a derail). Like many others, the promise of SC2 beta any day now has started me wondering about my computer. My current rig should handle SC2 at low settings with a few minor adjustments (replace graphics card [install graphics card, really; using integrated one now] and downloading more RAM [sorry, I still laugh at that thread every time I think about it]) but I want something more. What I really want, is a computer that can run SC2 and allow me to do SC2 commentaries. Since this isn't a huge priority for my already small income, building my own seems by far better than trying to pick up a ready-made rig. However, I know next to nothing about computers, at least as far as the knowledge required for such an endeavor requires. So I was wondering if some of the obviously very knowledgeable members of tl would help me to learn. I'm not looking for "buy this, that and that," but for explanations of what I'm looking for and why I need this and not that, etc. I've never been much for following set rules, I'd rather try to understand the why so I can figure things out myself. Part of the reason I'd like this kind of information is just natural curiosity, but there's also the fact that I'll be saving up for this incrementally so I'll need the understanding to know when something I'm looking for is on sale so I can pounce instead of having to ask "is this good?" every couple of weeks. I'm hoping to have this completed as a birthday present for myself (October) so just knowing what the best thing is today isn't very efficient. Any help you're willing to give would be great - assume I have zero knowledge, because it's pretty close to the truth. Links, personal experience, sites to check out, manufacturers that are trustworthy, just anything pertaining to how to set up a good computer would be very helpful and greatly appreciated. Also, if you feel the need to wax eloquent on some points, feel free; I'd prefer information overload to a summary. As for a budget, considering the time frame there's probably going to be a lot of variation in prices now compared to prices later, but I'll just say that if I can get it done for $1k (US), I'll be quite happy. Thanks for your time! Do you have a screen or you want a new one ? If you have already a decent screen tell us your res plz because it really matters when it comes down to the GPU choice. | ||
|
dyren
United States260 Posts
| ||
|
ghermination
United States2851 Posts
On February 16 2010 20:32 Go0g3n wrote: ^ No it's not. A simple quad core is great not only for gaming, but also general OS performance and 1000 other tasks from video de/encoding to using Winrar. There's absolutely no point in saving $30 between X3BE and X4 925, because you're not gonna OC the X3 to 5 Ghz. Anything lower the 3.6Ghz X4 will be much faster, as the standard 925 vs X3BE is at least 25% faster in everywhere. As quad integration goes on the difference will increase even further. It's been stated that Starcraft is only double threaded - not quad threaded, and it is a well known fact that at most games today can utilize three cores. It almost seems a waste of money to buy a low end quad-core that will have very low utility (and will be slow) when quad cores finally become the norm for computing. Basically first you said that performance was important, and then price, and now you're saying performance again. The slower clocked and multiplier locked x4 925 will underperform (overclocked) an overclocked x3 BE 75% of the time, although not at the same clock rate. You see, they have the same amount of L3 cache, but because of the great ease in putting the x3 BE at a higher performance per core than the 925, it's a waste of money to buy such a crappy core. If you disagree with me, please provide benchmarks. It's the same kind of situation as an e8400 @ 4ghz vs. a q9550 @ 3.2+ghz. The lower number of cores at a higher speed and performance per core will just win outright, you're dramatically overstating the use of those extra cores. EDIT: Although i've gotten kind of off track. I've gotten so far away from recommending the x4 955BE that i seemed to be recommending a slower processor! I'm not. the 955BE is just great for the money. | ||
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
| ||
|
WheelOfTime
Canada331 Posts
Not including monitors, a $300 rig will run sc2 on medium settings nicely. a $500 rig will run sc2 on high settings nicely. That's all it takes really. | ||
|
maareek
United States2042 Posts
On February 16 2010 22:53 WheelOfTime wrote: Ugh. People asking to build a rig that will "run sc2". Not including monitors, a $300 rig will run sc2 on medium settings nicely. a $500 rig will run sc2 on high settings nicely. That's all it takes really. Did you even read my post? I wasn't asking for a rig that will "run sc2," I asked what I would be looking for in a system that can run sc2 and allow me to record and stream sc2/do commentaries. Different requirements, and I doubt I could efficiently do both on a $300 rig. If I wasn't planning on streaming, I'd just pick up some fairly cheap pre-built thing, slap a graphics card in it and go - Blizzard games have never been that demanding. As for those of you who did read and are trying to help: huge thanks to all of you. I've been giving the links look overs and while I still don't understand very much of what I'm reading, some of it is starting to sink in (and it gives me plenty of information on just what I need to find out). I doubt I'll be taking anything from this comp over (its stats don't really matter since if it turns out not able to run SC2 with a video card and more RAM it's not like I'm going to get a stopgap system in the interim, but it's a refurbished Dell Optiplex GX620 with a 3Ghz Pentium 4, a gig of RAM (running XP, of course) and, as I said, the integrated graphics) since I'll probably be keeping it around either for specialized self use (dedicated porn comp (;p)...or just old games [D2, etc]) or give it to my sis/nephew. Not really anything useful to a current build, anyway, I wouldn't imagine. I have a 22" Acer monitor which I'm running at 1400 x 1050 (things get screwy when I go higher; half the screen gets shifted off the left side) but if I can get this done for the amount people have been saying (600-~800), I may upgrade to a 24", which should let me upgrade to, what, 1900 x 1200? Even if it costs closer to the $1k, I'll probably upgrade to a 24" monitor eventually, anyway. On February 16 2010 22:13 CTStalker wrote: then don't build one dude. buying a pre-assembled one isn't much more expensive, and that way you probably won't fry any of your equipment Yeah, that probably would be the smarter route, but, to be honest, even if I do fry the whole kit and kaboodle I'm only out ~1k which isn't really that huge in the scheme of things (no matter how large it might seem at the time), considering the upside of a new experience and the potential of having a tailored computer I actually put the effort in to to work with. Even if I were to get an already assembled rig, I didn't really know what I'd even be looking for before and now I have a much better idea of what the needs are for my desired use so I think the gathering of ideas was definitely worth it - though I fully intend at this point to go through with trying the build myself (and/or with the assistance of a friend), unless I wuss out later at the potential economic loss. To see if I'm getting the high points so far (I'm still going to have to do a good bit of research to really get these points, I think, but still doesn't hurt to make sure I'm getting the jist): -SC2 should only need dual cores, but a quad core should be superior for video editing. -Graphics card needs to be quality, but not too expensive. -Get an established brand PSU and make sure it can power everything. -4 gigs of DDR3 RAM for now (requires 64 bit Windows, but I'll probably pick up Windows 7 for this so I should be able to take care of that) -two hard drives - one for data storage and one for running programs. I'm assuming drive speed means the rpm, and that "very fast" would be over 7,200 rpm, correct? I'd also assume therefore that the data drive could be slower than 7,200 rpm with no real concerns since those processes aren't nearly as time sensitive, right? -Seems the most important aspects of the case are to make sure it doesn't eat up too much budget and everything actually fits inside. Easy enough. -Note to self: read up on partitions while reading up on everything else. Hopefully I'm moving in the right direction here. Definitely still open to more information, if anybody has more to unload. Thanks again, all! | ||
|
johnnyspazz
Taiwan1470 Posts
| ||
|
daz
Canada643 Posts
On February 16 2010 21:33 ghermination wrote: It's been stated that Starcraft is only double threaded - not quad threaded, and it is a well known fact that at most games today can utilize three cores. It almost seems a waste of money to buy a low end quad-core that will have very low utility (and will be slow) when quad cores finally become the norm for computing. Basically first you said that performance was important, and then price, and now you're saying performance again. The slower clocked and multiplier locked x4 925 will underperform (overclocked) an overclocked x3 BE 75% of the time, although not at the same clock rate. You see, they have the same amount of L3 cache, but because of the great ease in putting the x3 BE at a higher performance per core than the 925, it's a waste of money to buy such a crappy core. If you disagree with me, please provide benchmarks. It's the same kind of situation as an e8400 @ 4ghz vs. a q9550 @ 3.2+ghz. The lower number of cores at a higher speed and performance per core will just win outright, you're dramatically overstating the use of those extra cores. EDIT: Although i've gotten kind of off track. I've gotten so far away from recommending the x4 955BE that i seemed to be recommending a slower processor! I'm not. the 955BE is just great for the money. Sure most games may use only three cores, but even if that is the case and it continues to be the case, a game will never be the only thing running on your pc. Even if you don't have any other windows open, all the background processes themself could use that other core, and most people will even have other stuff open while they game. And also if you go to any sites like tomshardware and anandtech and you take a look at gaming benchmarks, you'll notice that quadcores significantly outperform dual cores even at lower clock speeds in pretty much every game they test. | ||
|
KOFgokuon
United States14912 Posts
On February 17 2010 00:26 johnnyspazz wrote: i really disagree with getting two harddrives, it doesn't make sense to me why you would need one for storage and one for running programs. it's not like its really taxing on a harddrive to store data. people buy small SSD's or velociprators for their boot drives all of the time, so it does make sense to have 2, depending on what the second one is | ||
|
Scorch
Austria3371 Posts
On February 17 2010 01:19 KOFgokuon wrote: people buy small SSD's or velociprators for their boot drives all of the time, so it does make sense to have 2, depending on what the second one is Storing data itself is not taxing, but accessing data from different locations is. If you want to play a game and listen to mp3s at the same time (or record a video stream in maareek's case), the disk needs to go back and forth between the two physical locations all the time. It's also a good idea to have two separate disks for backup purposes. Data security is important to me, and I wouldn't want to lose all of my data to a faulty hard disk because I was too cheap to spend 60 bucks on another HDD. Lastly, I like having a clean structure in where I store my data. If I have a separate data disk, I can easily format the system disk whenever my Windows goes on the fritz. Although admittedly, the same can be achieved with logical partitions on one physical disk. Or I can use the data drive in another computer if I buy a new one. In other words, I'd rather spend relatively cheap money on the advantages of a second HDD than on a bit more RAM or a slightly faster CPU. Hard disks typically outlast the other components. | ||
|
Undisputed-
United States379 Posts
Edit: Also make sure you buy a card that will work well with your monitor. Like if you are going to keep that 22'' Acer for instance dont go overboard on the vid card or it's just a waste of money unless you plan to upgrade your monitor. I replaced my 19'' 1024x680 dell monitor with a monster 26.5'' 1900x1200 Asus so I wasn't "wasting" the power of my radeon 5850. Edit2: If you plan to go up in monitor size make sure its 1900x1200 and can have an aspect ratio of 16:10 don't go cheap and get a 1080p you might regret it  | ||
|
Pakje
Belgium288 Posts
On February 17 2010 00:22 maareek wrote: I have a 22" Acer monitor which I'm running at 1400 x 1050 (things get screwy when I go higher; half the screen gets shifted off the left side) but if I can get this done for the amount people have been saying (600-~800), I may upgrade to a 24", which should let me upgrade to, what, 1900 x 1200? Even if it costs closer to the $1k, I'll probably upgrade to a 24" monitor eventually, anyway. That's up to you, I recently upgraded from a 17" to a 24" and it was staggering -SC2 should only need dual cores, but a quad core should be superior for video editing. Actually a triple core also helps gaming. Imagine this 2 cores for sc2 and 1 for all the background tasks/recording. If you want to record and video edite i'd surely get a quadcore even if it's a athlon II -Graphics card needs to be quality, but not too expensive. the general rule is 5770 for 19" and 5850 for 24". ofcourse if you're just going to play sc2 a 5670/5750 will suffice -Get an established brand PSU and make sure it can power everything. Indeed it should atleast have a 80+ label -4 gigs of DDR3 RAM for now (requires 64 bit Windows, but I'll probably pick up Windows 7 for this so I should be able to take care of that) -two hard drives - one for data storage and one for running programs. I'm assuming drive speed means the rpm, and that "very fast" would be over 7,200 rpm, correct? I'd also assume therefore that the data drive could be slower than 7,200 rpm with no real concerns since those processes aren't nearly as time sensitive, right? there's also something as platter size. I don't see why you need 2 disks unless you're going to use a ssd as bootdisk (which I doubt giving your budget) -Seems the most important aspects of the case are to make sure it doesn't eat up too much budget and everything actually fits inside. Easy enough. depends how much you value a silent pc and looks -Note to self: read up on partitions while reading up on everything else. I'd also read on on psu rails Hopefully I'm moving in the right direction here. Definitely still open to more information, if anybody has more to unload. Thanks again, all! | ||
|
blabber
United States4450 Posts
http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1871008 cpu, motherboard, ram, case, power supply for around $435 after mail in rebate and tax. it goes a little overboard with the high speed ram and the high quality case, but with the discount it's not bad at all (price-wise) just buy a video card, hard drive, and dvd drive and you're set | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
| ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
buy one hard drive. | ||
|
Not_Computer
Canada2277 Posts
I have a set up but it's on another computer. Just wanted to post first to see if anyone has recommendations/comments. Vaguely recalling... i5-750, 4GB ram, 750 GB WD cavier black, gigabyte mobo with USB3.0, and i haven't decided on what video card. What's a good video card that'll run SC2 and EVE Online "decently" but is not too expensive (like under $150 [after tax] if possible, but i can be flexible) | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
| ||
|
aznwolfstein
United States35 Posts
1k is a pretty huge budget for what you want to do. here's a pretty current build that I take ABSOLUTELY NO CREDIT FOR. http://i45.tinypic.com/331q4ue.jpg If you need a monitor, you can easily get a 5770 and save 120-130. Or you can get a cheaper processor like the 620 and save 80-90. If you don't need an OS, then thats another 80 or so you save and you can probably buy two monitors if you wanted | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
A good idea would be to just get the AMD P2 955, and then get a better motherboard. (785/790 chipset) | ||
| ||
