RE: Need Computer Advice (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

Zakhal -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/17/2008 5:17:03 PM)

I would double the memory to 4GB. Only 3GB of it is usable under windows xp 32bit but memory is dirt cheap now so theres no reason not to max it (windows likes memory...yummy). 



panzers -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 12:12:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

Hers one stalker chart on 8600GT vs 8800GT 1600x1200 dynamic lights, No AA, No Anis:
Link. 8600GT gets 21 frames per second while 8800GT is 63 frames per second.

Heres the most demanding game that was released last fall - crysis. 8600GT runs the game on 7,5FPS while 8800GT is 26,7FPS. The settings are dx10 1024x768: link

Its kinda slow at 21FPS and unplayable at 7,5FPS but if you play mainly strategy games then you dont really need a decent graphics card. But if youre interested you can find more of these comparisons by googling "8600gt vs 8800gt review comparison" etc. The card might run oblivion or wow but those games are many years old now so its reasonable that it would.

The best you can do before buying anything is check reviews of each and every component on google. Atleast two reviews for each. Youll see what the pros and cons are.

They might be getting old, but WOW is constantly upgrading, and I would argue that it would match up to anything.
Ultimately, it's up to you, Gary. You just have to ask yourself: do you plan on getting a game like crysis or anything similar, or do you want to save your 100 bucks and still get to play just about anything you want. I have a 24"digital wide screen moniter with all the settings set to the max including the screen resolution to the max at 1680 by 1050, and I have never in my life seen such perfect high performance graphics. If you want to get as cheap a computer as you can with the highest bang for your buck, then I would highly suggest this one. Even if the 512 mb version is that much more graphics intensive, is it really that much more visable to the naked eye? I don't know, all I know is that I have this card and I thought it was just a shade under the 8800 gt card. So the 8600 gt card has gone down significantly. As I said earlier and I think we all agree on this one: outside of the monitor which you already have, this purchase will end up being the most costly of you're componants. Good lick, and let us know what you end up with. Hell, for $600 you might have a better computer than all of us.



Arctic Blast -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 2:43:26 AM)

I agree with Zakhal, it doesn't cost much to double up your memory, and you're already saving more than enough with your change in graphics card.

All in all, looks like a good build!



Gem35 -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 2:49:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arctic Blast

I agree with Zakhal, it doesn't cost much to double up your memory, and you're already saving more than enough with your change in graphics card.

All in all, looks like a good build!

If he is not using Vista, the 64 bit version, getting 4 GB is worthless.
Besides Windows 7 will be out sooner or later and who knows what kind of RAM requirements you will need for that.
4 GB is a waste right now.



Veldor -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 2:50:36 AM)

I'd say spending money purely on "future-proofing" these days is a waste. Especially if you'll consider 2nd hand upgrades in the future. When I bought my 8800 I decided to get an SLI setup. To get certified SLI components across the board (So as to guarantee no issues) added plenty to the price. As would buying the second 8800 later on despite the price drops. In the end I'll probably have been able to just buy a better card entirely for less total money or will simply end up upgrading the whole system before I ever go SLI. Especially since SLI support seems to only have gotten worse and not better at least in the areas of gaming I participate in.

Unless I missed something your setup is missing 2 120mm fans. I'd say thats the best future proofing you can do at the moment as without those.. In my opinion your setup may not last through the first week [:D]

If I could change brand names I'd personally probably change them all, but understanding deals and prices, I know that you can save a lot that way (Say AMD vs INTEL as an example or EVGA vs anything). But if I had to change one it would be the G.SKILL brand. Buy Kingston or anything with a more long standing proven rep yet still competitive price. They've barely even been in the US market until recently. Memory is just too important to the stability and performance of your PC IMHO. (And I do see the great feeback its gotten so.. Again it really comes down to what you feel good about. Anyone can tell you the list looks great or its not what they would buy [:D])

When you assemble the PC don't do it on the carpet and ideally get a wrist-strap or otherwise make sure you dispense static electricity first through the motherboard installation portion. After that it doesnt much matter. (It scares me to think how many products returned as DOA were really damaged by the customer unknowingly though).

Good Luck!



Gem35 -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 2:56:35 AM)

G.Skill has a solid reputaion in the enthusiast market. It is solid RAM no doubt.
Kingston OTOH is cheap memory, If you can buy it at wal-mart or Best Buy, don't bother.
Stay with G.Skill, solid RAM.



Veldor -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 3:51:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35

G.Skill has a solid reputaion in the enthusiast market. It is solid RAM no doubt.
Kingston OTOH is cheap memory, If you can buy it at wal-mart or Best Buy, don't bother.
Stay with G.Skill, solid RAM.


Enthusiast is a fancy name for Hobbyist, which in turn is (if not the opposite) still very far from Professional. The best reason you give to not buy something is because its sold at Best Buy? Now my plasma TV and a bunch of other stuff must be crap too! You do border at least on what I talked about earlier in terms of "My stuff is better than yours simply because you can't get it retail". The famous example being why so many believe all Bose products MUST suck. Because if any idiot can buy them at Best Buy.. well then they must be made for idiots.

So what does it mean since I can buy G.Skill in a store in Syria and other Middle East countries but not Kingston? What about those Japanese brands with nothing but a symbol on it that aren't even making it to America yet like G.Skill finally has (They must be super great if it cost $100 special import fee all the way from Japan!!!) C'mon now...

In fact much like your criteria, I have a criteria that works the opposite but speaks more to quality in my opinion.

I will liken it to western digital hard drives which I think are mostly crap. They don't show up in even low-end Storage Area Networks. There are reasons for that. Seagate and many many others do. Obviously your not buying the same drives but it speaks to the level of quality they have the inate ability to achieve. Kingston has achieved memory that is usable in high-end corporate servers where-as G.Skill never has and likely never will.

Also almost any industry insider knows there are tiers within hard drives, memory, and processors. Processors are the most publicly talked about in historical terms. The whole x number of actual speeds are made and the ones that dont perform well in tests are simply sold at lower speeds (They aren't actually made to that spec). Likewise there aren't actually 100 memory makers, there are less than half a dozen. The rest each buy the raw chips and assemble, if even that much. Different grades are bought by different companies and the price reflects that. In older days the ultra bottom of the barrel was the generics in the back of Computer Shopper that everyone got and was lucky to last the first year.

For professional organizations one thing looked at is publicly published MTBF Rates (Mean Time Between Failure). Thats a more solid basis on which to compare two brands. Note Kingston was only a quick example as I know it is cheaper but still would meet all of the above criteria. I don't even know that G.Skill publicly publishes any failure rates period but it would be interesting to see them.

One more note. So-called Enthusiasts on average are always buying new stuff. That already is a different criteria than my interpretation of what was given here. Where the idea is to build a system that will last and last and last..

Two different sides, two different opinions. I do respect yours, and have given the basis for mine.

"There are no wrong decisions, just indecisive ones" - Said someone I forgot




Gem35 -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 3:56:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35

G.Skill has a solid reputaion in the enthusiast market. It is solid RAM no doubt.
Kingston OTOH is cheap memory, If you can buy it at wal-mart or Best Buy, don't bother.
Stay with G.Skill, solid RAM.


Enthusiast is a fancy name for Hobbyist, which in turn is (if not the opposite) still very far from Professional. The best reason you give to not buy something is because its sold at Best Buy? Now my plasma TV and a bunch of other stuff must be crap too! You do border at least on what I talked about earlier in terms of "My stuff is better than yours simply because you can't get it retail". The famous example being why so many believe all Bose products MUST suck. Because if any idiot can buy them at Best Buy.. well then they must be made for idiots.

So what does it mean since I can buy G.Skill in a store in Syria and other Middle East countries but not Kingston? What about those Japanese brands with nothing but a symbol on it that aren't even making it to America yet like G.Skill finally has (They must be super great if it cost $100 special import fee all the way from Japan!!!) C'mon now...

In fact much like your criteria, I have a criteria that works the opposite but speaks more to quality in my opinion.

I will liken it to western digital hard drives which I think are mostly crap. They don't show up in even low-end Storage Area Networks. There are reasons for that. Seagate and many many others do. Obviously your not buying the same drives but it speaks to the level of quality they have the inate ability to achieve. Kingston has achieved memory that is usable in high-end corporate servers where-as G.Skill never has and likely never will.

Also almost any industry insider knows there are tiers within hard drives, memory, and processors. Processors are the most publicly talked about in historical terms. The whole x number of actual speeds are made and the ones that dont perform well in tests are simply sold at lower speeds (They aren't actually made to that spec). Likewise there aren't actually 100 memory makers, there are less than half a dozen. The rest each buy the raw chips and assemble, if even that much. Different grades are bought by different companies and the price reflects that. In older days the ultra bottom of the barrel was the generics in the back of Computer Shopper that everyone got and was lucky to last the first year.

For professional organizations one thing looked at is publicly published MTBF Rates (Mean Time Between Failure). Thats a more solid basis on which to compare two brands. Note Kingston was only a quick example as I know it is cheaper but still would meet all of the above criteria. I don't even know that G.Skill publicly publishes any failure rates period but it would be interesting to see them.

One more note. So-called Enthusiasts on average are always buying new stuff. That already is a different criteria than my interpretation of what was given here. Where the idea is to build a system that will last and last and last..

Two different sides, two different opinions. I do respect yours, and have given the basis for mine.

"There are no wrong decisions, just indecisive ones" - Said someone I forgot



Enthisiast is for hard-core overclockers that push their products far beyond the realm of your corporate friends who don't know much about what makes hardware tick.
I can argue with you forever but the numbers don't lie, Kingston falls way short on the overclocking scale and that will always end up for me at least as a cheap product.
G.Skill outclasses Kingston my good friend.



Veldor -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 4:57:53 AM)

quote:


[Enthisiast is for hard-core overclockers that push their products far beyond the realm of your corporate friends who don't know much about what makes hardware tick.
I can argue with you forever but the numbers don't lie, Kingston falls way short on the overclocking scale and that will always end up for me at least as a cheap product.
G.Skill outclasses Kingston my good friend.

Basement Geeks are pushing products beyond the realm of corporations who process half a million credit card transactions a minute or who do millions of business AI calculations a nano-second? Any of this desktop memory would fry inside of an hour under such usage scenarios. It would be the equivelant of running your entire computer off a thumb drive... Even if you could achieve it the hardware just isn't made to withstand it.

What do you do for a living my good friend?

PS. Unless I missed something this is not a "performance system" If we were talking purely about performance (such as for overclocking) thats a lot different than durability (for lasting a long time) or value (bang for buck) or the assumed by me balance of all three. If I had to overclock it'd probably be Corsair and on a similar note SLI Certification is also a nice thing about Corsair. No G.Skill memory has ever achieved SLI certification. Do you realize how stable memory or ANY component must be to achieve SLI Certification??? Even Kingston, Crucial, many many others have SLI Certifications but not G.Skill. And that has plenty to do with Enthusiasts.

One more strike against it in my book.

Anyway.. Just saying I personally would choose just about anything else. Thank god I didn't go into any of my other preferences...



Gem35 -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 5:13:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor

quote:


[Enthisiast is for hard-core overclockers that push their products far beyond the realm of your corporate friends who don't know much about what makes hardware tick.
I can argue with you forever but the numbers don't lie, Kingston falls way short on the overclocking scale and that will always end up for me at least as a cheap product.
G.Skill outclasses Kingston my good friend.

Basement Geeks are pushing products beyond the realm of corporations who process half a million credit card transactions a minute or who do millions of business AI calculations a nano-second? Any of this desktop memory would fry inside of an hour under such usage scenarios. It would be the equivelant of running your entire computer off a thumb drive... Even if you could achieve it the hardware just isn't made to withstand it.

What do you do for a living my good friend?



I live in a basement.[:)]



Veldor -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 5:36:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
I live in a basement.[:)]


Maybe you do, maybe you don't.. But since you speak for that other crowd... What is the reason why there is no certified SLI memory by said company yet there are plenty by Corsair, Kingston, Samsung and others?

Is that an NVidia conspiracy or is there any other reason why nearly every vendor has the same opinion as me?




Gem35 -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 5:47:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
I live in a basement.[:)]


Maybe you do, maybe you don't.. But since you speak for that other crowd... What is the reason why there is no certified SLI memory by said company yet there are plenty by Corsair, Kingston, Samsung and others?

Is that an NVidia conspiracy or is there any other reason why nearly every vendor has the same opinion as me?



You can read books and reviews all you want.
I see for myself what hardware is capable of.
I'd rather do it hands on, my friend.[:)]
I like to help folks, not try to outsmart other people.
I offer my experience with PC hardware, let's help Gary and his magnificent PC he is going to build.[:)]



GaryChildress -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 6:36:54 AM)

Well I got two 120mm case fans installed today. I'm still waiting on most of the components to arrive including processor and motherboard. I changed to a couple sticks of Corsair memory at the last minute. Here:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145034

I'm glad I have Veldor's vote of confidence that my system will last a week. I was afraid it might explode on the first day. [:D]

So Veldor, why do you think the system will not last a week? Do I have some bad components in the mix? Which ones?

EDIT: Here's a pic of my case with the front and back fans in. Case is laying on it's back. This is just like showing slides from a family vacation. [:D]

[image]local://upfiles/17421/4B2BFD1C08174A98ACE1B8922545C563.jpg[/image]



Veldor -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 8:32:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
You can read books and reviews all you want.
I see for myself what hardware is capable of.
I'd rather do it hands on, my friend.[:)]
I like to help folks, not try to outsmart other people.
I offer my experience with PC hardware, let's help Gary and his magnificent PC he is going to build.[:)]

I haven't gone into what my job is but I asure you my feedback is based upon that and not some book or review.
If I am being honest, what I do find a little bit curious is that you lead here with a lot of suggestions and advice, yet do not really give any technical defense or other behind them.
I suppose I am use to having to defend my recommendations in depth professionally and perhaps that is why I come off the way you perceive.
I apologize if you've taken any of that the wrong way but you are quick to dismiss much of what I've stated without giving any real reasons.
I hope you'll also realize that all of us posting here that we think the config is "great" and "looks good" would not be at all helpful to him. While certainly some need to do that, if everyone did, there would be nothing for him to use to confirm or alter his choices one way or the other.
So in my opinion it is very helpful to Gary even should he stick with all his original choices, which (in my professional opinion [:D]) he probably will.



Veldor -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 8:48:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

Well I got two 120mm case fans installed today. I'm still waiting on most of the components to arrive including processor and motherboard. I changed to a couple sticks of Corsair memory at the last minute. Here:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145034

I'm glad I have Veldor's vote of confidence that my system will last a week. I was afraid it might explode on the first day. [:D]

So Veldor, why do you think the system will not last a week? Do I have some bad components in the mix? Which ones?

EDIT: Here's a pic of my case with the front and back fans in. Case is laying on it's back. This is just like showing slides from a family vacation. [:D]

[image]local://upfiles/17421/4B2BFD1C08174A98ACE1B8922545C563.jpg[/image]


I do apologize. I think you misread. I meant that I did not see any reference at all to the 120mm fans being part of your build. Without those fans there is no way it wouldn't have fried [:D] They are easy components to overlook. I thought perhaps the case came with at least one, but I checked your link and it looked like it didn't.

Corsair is a much better memory choice to me. It's still on the performance end of the spectrum but it is a brand I would purchase myself. I don't have any strong feelings against any other component (unless money wasn't a factor). They are just personal ones for those.

I do strongly prefer Intel, but recognize it comes at a price. Every now and again that philosophy proves itself such as the latest service packs that crashed on AMD machines but not Intel. But its a minor point.

EVGA I've bought myself for others systems I've built but I've not been thrilled vs say the BFG Tech one in one of my systems. Probably a good price difference still though I have to admit...

For Power Supply i prefer something with a fan not just on the back, but also the bottom of the unit. But those cost more and for the price that power supply looks like a supurb choice.

No major complaints left after the memory you've already changed. The system should run just fine now that you've gotten the 120mm fans. Just a final reminder to make sure you don't install them backwards (especially just 1 of them).

I am curious though, any particular reason you did change the memory? Did others elsewhere have similar concerns to mine or a stronger preference for Corsair??



Zakhal -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 5:29:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
If he is not using Vista, the 64 bit version, getting 4 GB is worthless.
Besides Windows 7 will be out sooner or later and who knows what kind of RAM requirements you will need for that.
4 GB is a waste right now.


Not really. You might get somthing like 3,5 GB with 4GB but it seems to vary depending on hardware. I got 3GB with my windows xp pc. But upgrading to 3GB is of course the surest way - just remember to buy 2 x 512mb sticks to get the dual bandwidth mode. The price difference between 2 x 512mb and 2 x 1024mb is only 5-10 dollars though so it doesnt really matter which you choose.

And theres no such thing as too much memory! Som of the new games are allready recommending 3GB and windows will like it too. And its cheap.

quote:

They might be getting old, but WOW is constantly upgrading, and I would argue that it would match up to anything.


Wow has always had very low system requirements. I played it last xmas and imho the game looked quite ugly (they somwhat manage to hide it with the cartoony look) even with full graphics when you compare it to som of the more modern games.



Gem35 -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 5:45:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
If he is not using Vista, the 64 bit version, getting 4 GB is worthless.
Besides Windows 7 will be out sooner or later and who knows what kind of RAM requirements you will need for that.
4 GB is a waste right now.


Not really. You might get somthing like 3,5 GB with 4GB but it seems to vary depending on hardware. I got 3GB with my windows xp pc. But upgrading to 3GB is of course the surest way - just remember to buy 2 x 512mb sticks to get the dual bandwidth mode. The price difference between 2 x 512mb and 2 x 1024mb is only 5-10 dollars though so it doesnt really matter which you choose.

And theres no such thing as too much memory! Som of the new games are allready recommending 3GB and windows will like it too. And its cheap.


Regardless of hardware Windows XP can only recognize(that does not imply using it efficiently) 3.2 GB of memory.
You lost me on the use 2x512mb sticks, do you mean using one 2GB ram stick and then add the 2x512mb sticks?

If so you lose the dual channel performance(though it is only maybe a 10% boost anyway)
It is best to use ram sticks that are of all the same size and exactly the same brand.



Zakhal -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 5:49:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
Regardless of hardware Windows XP can only recognize(that does not imply using it efficiently) 3.2 GB of memory.


Might be 3.2GB or not. This says its 3.7GB:

quote:

If a computer is loaded with 4 GB of physical RAM, it may allocate 0.5 to 1.25 GB for the PCI memory address range before any RAM (physical user memory) addresses are allocated. Thus, the available addresses for RAM may be limited to 2.75 – 3.7 GB with a 32-bit OS, dependent on the AGP aperture size or PCI Express graphics RAM. To access more than 4 GB of memory the Windows client operating system (Windows XP) needs to be upgraded to the 64-bit version of Windows.
http://eu.shuttle.com/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-388/633_read-13587/



quote:


You lost me on the use 2x512mb sticks, do you mean using one 2GB ram stick and then add the 2x512mb sticks?

If so you lose the dual channel performance(though it is only maybe a 10% boost anyway)
It is best to use ram sticks that are of all the same size and exactly the same brand.


Atleast in my mobo (asus p5b deluxe) the dual bandwith is not lost if you use 2x512 and 2x1024. You just have to have "matching pairs" (same brand etc 512 <==> 512 and 1024 <==> 1024 etc). It reads so in the manual even. Might not be the same with cheaper mobos of course.



dinsdale -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 6:07:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

Not really. You might get somthing like 3,5 GB with 4GB but it seems to vary depending on hardware. I got 3GB with my windows xp pc. But upgrading to 3GB is of course the surest way - just remember to buy 2 x 512mb sticks to get the dual bandwidth mode. The price difference between 2 x 512mb and 2 x 1024mb is only 5-10 dollars though so it doesnt really matter which you choose.


Using Vista 32 I have never exceeded 2gb of memory in use. Typically I have a couple of web servers, a database, mq, two development environments and all the usual desktop crap open at once. I put 3g in and have never, ever, seen it used. Waste of money unless you consistently see that you need more memory.



Gem35 -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 6:08:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
Regardless of hardware Windows XP can only recognize(that does not imply using it efficiently) 3.2 GB of memory.


Might be 3.2GB.

quote:


You lost me on the use 2x512mb sticks, do you mean using one 2GB ram stick and then add the 2x512mb sticks?

If so you lose the dual channel performance(though it is only maybe a 10% boost anyway)
It is best to use ram sticks that are of all the same size and exactly the same brand.


Atleast in my mobo (asus p5b deluxe) the dual bandwith is not lost if you use 2x512 and 2x1024. You just have to have "matching pairs" (512 <==> 512 and 1024 <==> 1024 etc). It reads so in the manual even.

I have the same board.
Interesting that you have a board that can run in dual channel using 4 ram sticks.
Can you post a screenshot of your memory tab using cpu-z?


[image]local://upfiles/14028/BE960BB0E83C444ABA1AA45D2C4F16AA.jpg[/image]



Zakhal -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 6:21:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dinsdale
Using Vista 32 I have never exceeded 2gb of memory in use. Typically I have a couple of web servers, a database, mq, two development environments and all the usual desktop crap open at once. I put 3g in and have never, ever, seen it used. Waste of money unless you consistently see that you need more memory.


I dont know about work desktop but Ive seen multiple games for vista recommendations of atleast 3GB. Memory requirements of pc games have always grown steadily and Im 100% sure they will go to 3GB too. And its silly not to boost memory by 50% if the cost is only few percent of the total price.



Zakhal -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/18/2008 6:27:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
I have the same board.
Interesting that you have a board that can run in dual channel using 4 ram sticks.
Can you post a screenshot of your memory tab using cpu-z?
[image]local://upfiles/14028/BE960BB0E83C444ABA1AA45D2C4F16AA.jpg[/image]


What you dont believe me? I did infact check it with cpu-z when I bought the memory and yes it is dual channel. However I bought 2x1024 - not 2x512 so its no use in this case. But you can read abt the dual channel mode of 2x512 and 2x1024 from the manual. Its even in the online pdf.

EDIT:
Hers what the manual says:
quote:

You may install varying memory sizes in Channel A and Channel B. The system maps the total size of the lower-sized channel for the dual-channel configuration. Any excess memory from the higher-sized channel is then mapped for single-channel operation.


Hers the picture if you were curious:
[image]local://upfiles/2151/C287C014760B405385D86191A93A15AF.jpg[/image]



Veldor -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/19/2008 2:45:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
Regardless of hardware Windows XP can only recognize(that does not imply using it efficiently) 3.2 GB of memory.

Not true at all. All 32bit operating systems can address exactly 4 GB of address space. Since a PC needs some of that space for hardware components like the PCI Bus and even Video Memory, it reduces the remaining available address space down from 4 GB. But it is in no way a constant even if the majority of motherboards or configs end up with that number. There are plenty of hardware possibilities to get much more.

Technically 32bit O/S can have much more memory. This has been true for a decade or more for 32bit Server O/Ss and even flavors of LINUX. Thats through PAE but what is funny about that is so many people throw 16GB of memory in say a Microsoft Exchange Server and it actually can't use a bit of the extra even though the hardware and O/S recognize it. SQL is a different story. The app has to understand how to access it.

For XP I don't see as much of a point to buy more than 3GB. And 2GB should run great as 90%+ of the time your not likely to ever access that last GB. For Vista I'd still max it out and, as has been pointed out by others already, its really so cheap there isn't exactly a downside anyway to any configuration.



Gem35 -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/19/2008 3:42:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
Regardless of hardware Windows XP can only recognize(that does not imply using it efficiently) 3.2 GB of memory.

Not true at all. All 32bit operating systems can address exactly 4 GB of address space. Since a PC needs some of that space for hardware components like the PCI Bus and even Video Memory, it reduces the remaining available address space down from 4 GB. But it is in no way a constant even if the majority of motherboards or configs end up with that number. There are plenty of hardware possibilities to get much more.

Technically 32bit O/S can have much more memory. This has been true for a decade or more for 32bit Server O/Ss and even flavors of LINUX. Thats through PAE but what is funny about that is so many people throw 16GB of memory in say a Microsoft Exchange Server and it actually can't use a bit of the extra even though the hardware and O/S recognize it. SQL is a different story. The app has to understand how to access it.

For XP I don't see as much of a point to buy more than 3GB. And 2GB should run great as 90%+ of the time your not likely to ever access that last GB. For Vista I'd still max it out and, as has been pointed out by others already, its really so cheap there isn't exactly a downside anyway to any configuration.

Thanks for clearing that up, boy was I way off.
So Windows XP can use 4 GB of memory but it can't.
It can only use about 3.2 GB of memory.



Veldor -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/19/2008 4:03:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35


quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
Regardless of hardware Windows XP can only recognize(that does not imply using it efficiently) 3.2 GB of memory.

Not true at all. All 32bit operating systems can address exactly 4 GB of address space. Since a PC needs some of that space for hardware components like the PCI Bus and even Video Memory, it reduces the remaining available address space down from 4 GB. But it is in no way a constant even if the majority of motherboards or configs end up with that number. There are plenty of hardware possibilities to get much more.

Technically 32bit O/S can have much more memory. This has been true for a decade or more for 32bit Server O/Ss and even flavors of LINUX. Thats through PAE but what is funny about that is so many people throw 16GB of memory in say a Microsoft Exchange Server and it actually can't use a bit of the extra even though the hardware and O/S recognize it. SQL is a different story. The app has to understand how to access it.

For XP I don't see as much of a point to buy more than 3GB. And 2GB should run great as 90%+ of the time your not likely to ever access that last GB. For Vista I'd still max it out and, as has been pointed out by others already, its really so cheap there isn't exactly a downside anyway to any configuration.

Thanks for clearing that up, boy was I way off.
So Windows XP can use 4 GB of memory but it can't.
It can only use about 3.2 GB of memory.

The range for 32bit systems can be as low as 2.8 GB or thereabouts and as high as 3.75 GB as others posted.



Veldor -> RE: Nice Power Supply (6/19/2008 4:10:52 AM)

For anyone looking for a good Power Supply one neat alternative are Power Supplies such as the NeoPower from Antec. They have customizable cable attachments so you don't have all that clutter. You only connect the types and quantities of cables needed. I've used them before for others with no issues though I generally buy higher end ones for my own machines (At the time they didn't offer any).



[image]local://upfiles/8250/F54B052FD8CA425F9945B90EE3D66D92.jpg[/image]



panzers -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/19/2008 8:23:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35
If he is not using Vista, the 64 bit version, getting 4 GB is worthless.
Besides Windows 7 will be out sooner or later and who knows what kind of RAM requirements you will need for that.
4 GB is a waste right now.


Not really. You might get somthing like 3,5 GB with 4GB but it seems to vary depending on hardware. I got 3GB with my windows xp pc. But upgrading to 3GB is of course the surest way - just remember to buy 2 x 512mb sticks to get the dual bandwidth mode. The price difference between 2 x 512mb and 2 x 1024mb is only 5-10 dollars though so it doesnt really matter which you choose.

And theres no such thing as too much memory! Som of the new games are allready recommending 3GB and windows will like it too. And its cheap.

quote:

They might be getting old, but WOW is constantly upgrading, and I would argue that it would match up to anything.


Wow has always had very low system requirements. I played it last xmas and imho the game looked quite ugly (they somwhat manage to hide it with the cartoony look) even with full graphics when you compare it to som of the more modern games.

Interesting, because the 8600GT is the absolute lowest end card you can get to have that kind of performance and even then, every once in a while my framerates diminish every once in a while. So, for a very low end graphics, it sure seems to to take an awful lot of memory. Also the last upgrade in graphics was about 2 months ago. It was a significant upgrade. Have you played your WOW recently?



GaryChildress -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/26/2008 4:53:56 AM)

Woohoo! Computer is up and running. Windows installed, printer installed, CPU running at 39-40 degrees C. Connected to Internet. Connected to wireless network.

Now I just need to install about 100 more programs and games and I'll be back to where I was before! [:D]



Arctic Blast -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/27/2008 1:51:51 AM)

Glad to hear it, Gary. And, yeah, having to sit there and re-install EVERYTHING takes a bit of the glee away from a new machine. [>:]



Valkyrie -> RE: Need Computer Advice (6/27/2008 2:34:55 AM)

Ah, but I find the reloading of selected favorite programs onto a virgin drive to be a beautiful experience of refreshing renewal. The time when you finally dump those old programs that you haven't used in years, but could never quite bring yourself to delete them. [;)]



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.890625