I'm building a new computer

If I were building a PC today, I would definitely go with a quad core.

 

STOP!

1) First, the write performance of any on-board raid 5 "solution" is UNGODLY slow. You lose 90% of all write performance. Yes, it writes at about 5MB/s. You'll be better off with a dedicated raid 5 controller... but the good ones are expensive. (I've tried it with 4 320gb seagate drives on a nforce590 chipset)


Also, to point out:
Quad core is pointless, there are barely any apps that can support dual cores right now. Unless you plan on running 4 programs that all require 100% processor power, quad core is just a sham.

 

Multi-CPU is a must for gaming, when not using Full Screen (running windowed).
So you can have & see other Apps like Ventrilo running, WinAmp, Firefox at the same time.

Some high end games run a service along with the game, so more than one CPU.

I agree with Bob64, between a High-End Dual Core and Quad Core, won't be any noticeable difference. Plus the price is too high. RAID-5 is Super Slow unless you get a dedicated PCI card.

My money would go into high quality reusable components, especially the ones that you "See", not the CPU / Mobo / Ram / HD.

My most re-used components are the screen, mouse, keyboard, power supply, casing & PSU - recommend highly Thermaltake's products.

Every year or so, I recycle the innards, and make someone within my immediate friends very happy. I always buy a mobo, video, ram, HD that are designed to work together, never the high end, not the low end.

Over the years I've found that I can upgrade twice for the same price as the highest end today. Plus your old innards will earn you money from someone.

My AMD 6400+ DC runs plenty fast.
ASUS mobo, ASUS video. Both are the "Silent" versions, less fans the better. 320 Sata-2 HD, 2Gigs Ram. Innards for less than 700$. Resell in 12 months (including installation in someone's existing casing) for 300$.

In Aug 2008 for the same 700$ I'll get a Quad Core+Mobo, better video card, 4g ram, 1TB Sata.

I don't believe at all in dual video cards SLI. Expensive and obsolete by a single video card in a year (or two).

The only caveat is reinstalling Windows XP - which is why I'm holding on dearly to my "full retail copy".
Face it - true "geeks" love reinstalling XP every year

 

Whatever you do, make sure you pimp out your rig with UV reactive cables, neon lights, multicolor LED fans, and that Corsair memory with the little LEDs on top that flash with access.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ Sep 1 2007, 10:48 PM) [snapback]505710[/snapback]</div>

As long as your local network affiliate is not stealing bandwidth for ten shopping channels, OTA digital TV broadcasts of primetime scripted TV shows should be pretty close to what the networks are sending out and a match for HDTV on C-band. Also, Dish Network has been making steady improvements on their H.264 encoders and even those of us who complained for months about crappy picture quality have to grudgingly admit that the quality on HD locals, Starz HD and a few other MPEG-4 channels is often pretty good. But often times the original content does not have good picture quality to begin with, and even the best offline encoder in the world won't improve it.

If you think that you seriously need to get a new TV. The best analog signal on C-band is at best DVD quality, and OTA digital TV in high-def is miles beyond DVD quality, and that's obvious on a good HDTV display.

I've had OTA and satellite HDTV for nearly seven years, and have six HDTVs between our main and vacation home, starting with a Pioneer Elite Pro-510HD back in 2000. I've been recording and archiving satellite and OTA HDTV for three or four years, and have 7TB of content archived.

 

Just a note for building HTPCs (Home Theater PCs)...

Unless you have a sound-deadened, ventilated cabinet, you might also want to consider building a QUIET computer. That means getting components that generates as little heat as possible.

Personally, there is nothing I hate more than a computer that sounds like a moaning Frankenstein in the room when I'm watching something on the HDTV.

My HTPC which is dead quiet:

Intel Core 2 Duo 4300 Allendale core (generates less than 40W of heat at stock speed, easy to cool quietly).
Zalman CNPS7000 CPU heatsink, running at the slowest (quietest speed)
Intel P965 motherboard
XFX 7900GT video card (a bit old, but it generates only 65W of heat and is very easy to cool quietly).
2GB DDR2 memory
Samsung 250GB HDD
Seasonic S12-330 power supply (the quietest PSU available)
Silverstone LC13 HTPC case

Originally I was hoping to get one of the AMD Athlon X2 EEs (the "EE" models are "energy efficient"), but those are hard to find so I said screw it and went for the Intel instead-- The lower-end Core 2 Duos at 40W of heat are just amazingly cool-running.

Sure, it's not a bleeding-edge system, but it's not obnoxiously loud like an overclocked SLI gaming system putting out 500W of heat that requires 20 high-speed whining fans to cool it. B)

 

Just as a point of comparison, here's the new system I just ordered (this week) to upgrade our driving simulator's main box...

1 Microstar P6N Diamond nForce 680i ATX motherboard with 4x PCIEx16 slots
3 Point Of View 8800GTS 320MB Dual-DVI
1 Point Of View 8600GT 256MB HDCP
1 Intel Core 2 Duo processor E6850 3.00GHz 4M FSB1333
1 2GB Crucial DDR2 PC2-6400 4-4-4-12
2 Western Digial Raptor® WD740ADFD 10K SATA HDD (5.3ms fast drive)
2 Seagate SATAII 320GB 7200rpm ST3320620AS 7200.10 hard drive
1 THERMALTAKE 1200W Toughpower 1200w/100a Load Cable Management
1 Thermaltake Armor Black Case CASE-VA8000BWS.
1 LiteOn LH-18A1P 18x DVD+R/18x DVD-R 8X Dual Layer (Black) DVD writer
1 Black 3.5" floppy disk drive 1.44Mb internal
1 Laser 16 in 1 USB card reader/writer black internal
1 ViewSonic VA903 19" LCD 1280X1024, black

This is in addition to the three LCD projectors and the car itself.

Not quite a games machine, but good fun nonetheless...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ Sep 4 2007, 12:22 PM) [snapback]506506[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, lots. I'll rustle one up and post it when I get back to my office in an hour or so. B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ Sep 4 2007, 12:22 PM) [snapback]506506[/snapback]</div>

Here's some photos, and some specs:
BMW314 (RHD) -- 2 USB ports & no engine!
3 angled projection surfaces located 2.42 m in front of the driver’s seat & angled back at 10 degrees
200 (horizontal) by 39 degree (vertical) forward view from the driver’s position
Projection resolution of 1280 by 1024 pixels (each surface)
Rear view via two colour LCDs at a resolution of 640 by 480
multi-body vehicle dynamics model configured as 3 litre engine (making 170 kW power), automatic transmission, and power steering.
vehicle model & display updated at minimum of 100FPS
dashboard displays accurate speed and engine RPM data
4 car speakers & sub-woofer underneath the car present realistic engine and road noise
[attachmentid=11112]
[attachmentid=11111]
[attachmentid=11110]

 

Oh yeah, it also runs colin mcrae rally just fine :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ Sep 3 2007, 08:22 PM) [snapback]506506[/snapback]</div>

According to a review by MaximumPC, the new core2 duos are much more energy efficient then the old P4 chips. Thus, they produce much less heat.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bob64 @ Sep 9 2007, 03:41 PM) [snapback]509733[/snapback]</div>

That's only been known for oh, the last fourteen months (since the first day Core 2 processors have been available to the public). Anyone who can read a data sheet knows this - you don't have to depend on a magazine to read it for you.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusenvy @ Sep 9 2007, 09:53 PM) [snapback]509805[/snapback]</div>

yeah, I know, but I added that bit just incase someone was foolish enough to challenge it with a "says who?".

I also heard that it is possible to run the core 2 without a heatsink...