New PC build, thoughts?

[Phalanx]

I've been thinking about using the HD4850 from this website:

http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/s....jsp?SAP-48501

although my friend has recommended me the GTX260 from here:

http://www.eclipsecomputers.com/prod...de=GC-XNGTX260

Which one shall I go for?

Also, are there any parts someone would replace from the eBuyer build? I think I could maybe save money on the motherboard.

Thanks

(budget is around 500-550. Cheaper the better, it's going to be a computer for music mastering, rendering and the occassional game of CSS).

[jim]

I'd get the 4850 to be honest, the GTX cards haven't dropped in price enough in comparison to their ATI equivalents for my liking.

All the parts in the build look fine, but I'm virtually certain that someone will pop in to suggest that you get an AMD build to save money - and they might well be right. I just haven't kept up with the AMD technology of late.

[Phalanx]

If switching to AMD will save me money for similar performance then I'm game. Thanks

[sammorris]

The Q8200 is an excellent value chip. There's no reason to change it for an AMD. You won't lose out if you do, but you won't gain anything either. I would advise against 1GB of memory for a graphics card like the HD4850, it won't really see sufficient use. Also, never buy anything from eclipse. That said, the 1GB 4850s seem cheaper at ebuyer than the 512s for reasons I don't quite understand, so you could get this:
http://www.ebuyer.com/product/161308

or you could buy one from Scan, and use your free postage since you have more than 20 posts here at hexus, and get this:
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/512MB...VI-XXX-EDITION

[djglenn]

Just for the record a GTX260 is a much better card (216core), check out the benchmarks in the hexus GPU reviews section. It just boils down to if you can justify the price difference.

To be honest, I probably would buy a 4770 over a 4850..but thats just me.

Does the 4850 not suffer from heat & noise issues? <--I dont own one so not entirely sure.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I would think going AMD would be better for the cash than an Q8200T TBH.

I would look at getting the bits from Scan as you will get free postage with being a Hexus member with 20+ posts.

Some of the bits I will spec are from Scan's Today Only webpage and will be on there until 12 noon today.

Build

Phenom II X4 940 ~ &#163;144

http://www.scan.co.uk/TodayOnly/Index.aspx

It is between the Q9300 and Q9400 in speed and these have more cache than the Q8*** series.

Here are some reviews:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16147/9

http://www.behardware.com/articles/7...he-return.html

Look at the rendering benchmarks.


Gigabyte GA-MA770-UD3 ~ &#163;57

http://www.scan.co.uk/TodayOnly/Index.aspx

It is an Ultra Durable 3 Classic motherboad with all solid capacitors and the SB700 southbridge.

4gb PC2-8500 RAM ~ &#163;46

http://www.scan.co.uk/TodayOnly/Index.aspx

Samsung 1tb hard drive with 32mb cache ~ &#163;64

http://www.scan.co.uk/TodayOnly/Index.aspx


Enermax 525w PSU ~ &#163;70

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/525W-...uard-SafeGuard


Antec 300 ~ &#163;47

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/143854

Sony DVD writer ~ &#163;17

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/139414

HD4870 512mb ~ &#163;106

http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/s....html?SAP-4870

This has a better Sapphire cooler and you also get free postage from Novatech.


This will cost you around &#163;550.

[scaryjim]

The Q8200 is an excellent value chip. There's no reason to change it for an AMD. You won't lose out if you do, but you won't gain anything either.

Have a look at the Hexus Phenom II review - The 920 and 940 literally destroy the Q8200 - particularly in multithreaded performance. A Phenom II 940 + AMD 770 motherboard will give you a massive performance leap over a Q8200 at basically the same price. If you prefer Ebuyer you can get this ASRock motherboard and a Phenom II X4 940 for near enough £200 - the same price as your Q8200 and P45 mobo.

[sammorris]

Agreed, the Phenom II 920 and 940 are faster chips than the Q8200, but they're also more expensive. Using a cheaper board is a little skewed too... :S
The Q8200 is the way of saving a bit of money but sacrificing a reasonable amount of performance.
The Q8400 is out of stock at Scan,but at tekheads:
http://www.tekheads.co.uk/s/product?product=610441
A more equal board:
http://www.tekheads.co.uk/s/product?product=609787

tekheads aren't that much for RAM and PSUs so you could use free postage to get those at Scan:
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/500W-...-pin-120mm-Fan
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/4GB-(...d-CAS-5-5-5-18
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/1TB-W...rpm-32MB-Cache

That's about &#163;396 for that lot. Add the same case, DVDRW and GPU as Cat's build and it works out about the same.

[scaryjim]

Agreed, the Phenom II 920 and 940 are faster chips than the Q8200, but they're also more expensive. Using a cheaper board is a little skewed too... :S

I don't see what's wrong with using a cheaper board if it's a reputable brand and good chipset. The ASRock one is probably on the lowest end of budget I'd go to, but should be stable and is well featured. The Gigabyte one (CAT's recommendatioon) has a slightly bigger, better-known brand name behind it, as well as their UD3 branding: it should be rock solid and a good performer.

I suspect if you did a price / performance comparison on the Q8200 and X4 940 you'd find that the X4 940 provided better bang for buck. You list a Q8400, but with it's lesser L2 cache it's questionable as to whether the clock speed boost would be sufficient to catch the X4 940, given that the Q9300 (only 166MHz slower than the Q8400 and with a bigger L2 cache), can't manage that. And at that point, even with the cheaper mobo you suggest, you've caught up with the X4 940 / 770 mobo combination in price.

But if you do decide against the Phenom II, then you'll definitely be better off with a Q8400 and a cheaper mobo.

[sammorris]

You can't really compare the two that directly though as the relative price points for the motherboards don't really match. I would agree, as a CPU by itself the performance/price of the X4 940 is better than anything Intel have to offer. it's not a considerable difference though, especially to the Q8400, and in a matter of months the power usage of an AMD system is likely to bring the balance back anyway. Either system is acceptable, is what I'm trying to stress. It's not as if changing from Intel to AMD really gives you a noticeably better system for the money by itself, it's more the other component choices, the right motherboard in particular.

[Blaineoliver]

I would stump up a bit more money and go for the HD4850 x2 for &#163;138 on scan.

[scaryjim]

You can't really compare the two that directly though as the relative price points for the motherboards don't really match.

The price of the motherboards might not match, but the price for the system does, so it's a reasonable comparison. Your statement was: "The Q8200 is an excellent value chip. There's no reason to change it for an AMD." Actually, there is a reason - AMD have a number of chips that perform better at a reasonable premium, which can be compensated for by coupling them with a slightly cheaper motherboard. You can, of course, do the same with Intel's slightly more expensive chips, to a certain point: a Q8400 on an iG41 would also cost about the same, and would be a much closer competitor to the X4 940. Both of those options would be better performing than the Q8200.

I've heard the power argument trotted out so frequently in favour of Intel, but if you put it into the context of the power-draw of your whole house it's really not that significant. The power saving of a fully loaded Core 2 Quad vs Phenom II Quad is less than changing a 60W lightbulb to an energy efficient equivalent. On a realistic usage model you're talking maybe £5 a year.

What I won't argue with, is that you can get a similar price & performance to the 940 / 770 combo by using different Intel components. As I said above a Q8400 and iG41 (Gigabyte do a UD3 one) would be a better option than the Q8200 + P45, IMNSHO

[sammorris]

In concept to the whole house of course it is, but when the difference within the lifetime of the CPU at reasonable load is as much cost as the difference between it and a more expensive CPU model then it becomes relevant.
Both AMD and Intel offer superior chips that cost more but will result in the system costing the same if you buy a cheap motherboard. So long as you don't overclock, there's nothing stopping you from putting a CPU like a Q9550 in an EP31-DS3L. Likewise, you could use a budget basic 740G board for a lot of the AMD chips, except the AM3-only ones of course. Make little adjustments as far as you like, there is a sufficient compromise to match from each side all the way up into the quad cores. It's simply a matter of whether you can get along with the board required to do so.

In general I'd agree, the Q8200 is a relatively budget chip compared to the rest that Intel offer, and a higher end P45 board for it simply isn't necessary, in much the same way that a 790FX chipset board isn't necessary for a Triple core Phenom II.

[jim]

As I said above a Q8400 and iG41 (Gigabyte do a UD3 one) would be a better option than the Q8200 + P45, IMNSHO

Why would you take a G41 over a P41 in these circumstances, out of interest?

[sammorris]

It's no more expensive. An EG41MF-S2H is &#163;56 and an EP41-UD3L is &#163;58 at Scan. You can get a cheap G41 board for less than &#163;50 as well if you want.

[Cap'n Sharkbait]

I'm not super clear on the hardware of a PC yet, but I'm slowly learning, but I do feel qualified to say that is an excellent case choice, easy access, plenty of panels on the front and a handy... thing on the top for easy access to several inputs.