|
Sorry for not having an actual starter build for you to critique right off the bat. I'm still in early planning stages. Since I've used laptops as main computers for the last 7 years or so, I haven't really kept track of motherboard, case, etc. trends. As such, many of you know much more than me in these areas.
The computer is actually for my brother and not me. He has an ancient desktop so old that it has a GeForce2 MX graphics card. For the sake of efficiency, he continues to use Windows 2000 rather than XP, and he has every single Windows service disabled that can be disabled. Consequently, it only takes 80 MB RAM to boot, lol. The machine still runs very smoothly--it's just really old.
Aside from trivial tasks like running Emacs, MS Office, or Firefox (v.1.5 lol), the computer would be used for light gaming and maybe occasional encoding. He doesn't play any retail computer games, though. Instead he plays mostly emulated arcade and console games as well as some doujin shmups. I think emulating relatively modern consoles (e.g. PS2 and DC) would be the most stressful task required of the computer. In case you're unaware, emulating console games is relatively much more CPU-intensive rather than GPU-intensive compared with running PC games. Also, most all emulators only make use of one or two cores.
He doesn't store all that many files, so a single TB or so HDD should suffice.
His rationale for holding out on buying a new computer is that he wanted to wait for USB 3.0. Aside from USB 3.0 support, he's probably looking for a very stable system that will last for the next several years. Is there any budget or reasonably-priced motherboard that supports USB 3.0, or is it just the higher-end models that support USB 3.0?
He's already got a mouse, keyboard, and monitor. Software is cheap and easy to get through school, so that's taken care of as well. However, he has some decent 80 ohm beyerdynamic DT 770 headphones, so I think a suitable discrete sound card is in order. Or does motherboard headphone out sound really that amazing these days?
Budget is...whatever, but there's no need for more powerful components than are necessary. Based on the above (hopefully it wasn't too much information), I was thinking that an i3-530 CPU and ATI HD 4650 GPU would be sufficient. What about other parts?
Recap:- Want USB 3.0 support
- Parts should be reliable and last a long time
- CPU more important than GPU, probably not much use for quad core
|
If he wants a cheap USB 3.0 board, the least he'll have to pay is around $150
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131634
is an example of a fully capable usb 3.0 board for LGA 1156, which is the socket he needs for an i3
i3 is definitely a good cpu for him to use, esp if he isn't doing anything super intensive. The good thing about buying a gpu like the 4650 is that it's pretty cheap, so it doesn't hurt him too much if he feels that he needs to upgrade in the future.
A case like this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119047&cm_re=cooler_master-_-11-119-047-_-Product
is good, has two fans (one in the front one in the back) so you'll have decent circulation
If he's really gonna run a 4650 and not upgrade to anything too power draining, he probably only needs a 500W or less power supply, something like
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817341016
bronze certified, so you'll have pretty high efficiency
ummmmm, nowadays onboard sound is supposed to be really good, so he should be fine without a sound card
that's a starter, i'm a little drunk so hopefully what i said isn't complete nonsense
|
The problem with USB 3.0 is that neither Intel nor AMD are making chipsets that support USB 3.0 natively (and don't plan to until around 2011) so what we have are 'pseudo USB 3.0' controllers that are achieved either by stealing slots away from the PCIe 2.0 pathways or by combining existing PCIe 1.0 pathways (in the case of Intel P55). They are not controlled by the chipset itself, but rather by a chip put on the motherboard elsewhere which results in an inefficient controller.
With mid/low end, you can go either Intel or AMD. I would actually suggest AMD if you do not plan to overclock because even though emulators don't use more than 1 or 2 cores, encoding definitely does!
I would say that your 4650 is overkill. If you do not plan on doing any retail games, then you can just use onboard graphics. However, with Intel, you need to buy a H55/H57 board to use the IGP
+ Show Spoiler [Intel] +
+ Show Spoiler [AMD] +With AMD you have an amazing amount of stuff to choose from, so I will stick with Gigabyte products, since they are the most cost-effective mobo maker out there  Gigabyte 890GX $140 This is the most expensive board I will recommend because it is the pinnacle of AMD chipsets at the moment. It provides onboard support for SATA 3, but not USB 3.0. However, it does have the extra chip that allows USB 3.0 to be used! At $140, it is only $5 more than the P55 boards, but it does have more upgradeability. This board has onboard graphics so you do not need to buy a video card. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128435Gigabyte 790X $125 This is another fairly expensive board. It offers much of the same features as the GX, but it does not offer on-chipset SATA 3 support. This is an older board and if you choose this, it should be for the fact that it is 'tried and true'. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128427Gigabyte 785G $95 This is a cheaper board that offers USB 3.0 and SATA 3. It lacks the features of the above two, but it is still a capable board, and if you do not want to buy an additional graphics card, this board has decent onboard graphics. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128432Gigabyte 770G $90 At $5 cheaper than the 785G it only misses the onboard graphics. If you want to buy the 4650, then go for this. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128431As far as CPUs go, Athlon II X4 635 @ 2.9ghz $120 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103702decently high power quad core. I like it. Athlon II X4 630 @ 2.8ghz $100 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103704a bit less GHz, but much cheaper. I like this one more! There are also dual cores and triple cores to choose from, but the quad cores are better in general.
|
Forget the graphics card entirely, just use the onboard GPU of the i3-530.
If he doesn't play retail games, there's no need to have it at all.
Even in the worst case scenario the integrated gpu is fine for playing games on low settings.
|
|
|
Whatever you do choose stay the hell away from Intel integrated graphics they've had more than enough time(years) to fix thier graphics drivers and yet there is still a huge list of games that are either incompatible or virtually unplayable just because thier drivers are not up to scratch, that said AMD's onboard 4200/4290 graphics chips are more than adequate and can even handle light 3D gaming while getting continued monthly driver support.
For a CPU I'd go for any Athlon II X2 Regor with 2x1MB L2 cache for around $60 or if you want to get fancy an Athlon II X4 630 Propus will be the best price/performance at this moment for what you need.
Hope that helped some.
|
|
|
Hm, interesting suggestions and quick responses. Thanks guys.
I would be more open to an AMD route, but I anticipate very very infrequent potential use of more than two cores so all the nicely-priced X3 and X4 CPUs are not so competitive. I probably shouldn't have mentioned encoding as a significant task. Upon some more thinking, probably sticking with integrated graphics for the moment is the best choice. Upgrading later if necessary wouldn't be a big issue, if perhaps performance isn't enough or drivers/support really sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
