New Pc System

RueRue Join Date: 2002-10-21 Member: 1564Members
<div class="IPBDescription">Will it all work</div> Hiya, I'm wanting to build my own PC in the next few weeks and I've got a set of specs here. It would be great if someone could tell me if all of these components would work together and what I should change if something will not work

AMD Athlon 64 3000 (Socket 754) - OEM
Gigabyte GA-K8NNXP nForce3 150 (Socket 754) Motherboard
IBM/Hitachi Deskstar 7K250 40GB - OEM
Zalman CNPS7000A-AlCu Ultra-Quiet CPU Cooler - OEM
Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600XT 256MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Lite Retail
Samsung Original 256MB PC2700 CAS2.5
Samsung SM352-B 52x/24x/16x CD-RW/DVD Combo
CoolerMaster Centurion Case

All of these items I got from <a href='http://overclockers.co.uk/' target='_blank'>here</a>

I think this come in at just under £550GBP

Thanks in advance, Rue

Comments

  • EpidemicEpidemic Dark Force Gorge Join Date: 2003-06-29 Member: 17781Members
    I have that PC cooler myself, nice choice <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
    Anyway, are you sure 256 ram would be enough?
  • RueRue Join Date: 2002-10-21 Member: 1564Members
    I will probably get more if needed but its like £40 for 256megs and I really tried to get it under £500 <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->

    Oh and does anyone know an internet shop that ships from the US to the UK? cause certain componentsare really cheap right now
  • PulsePulse To create, to create and escape. Join Date: 2002-08-29 Member: 1248Members, Constellation
    256mb of RAM is nowhere near enough. Even Windows runs like crap with that little memory, get at <i>least</i> 512mb. Also the video card you picked doesn't really match your cpu. It's not incompatible or anything, but the video card will end up being a bottleneck, and the extra money you spent on the cpu will go to waste. I think you should either get a better video card or a slower cpu. I would get a slower cpu (and therefore a cheaper motherboard) and use the extra money to buy more ram, but you might regret that decision when it's time to upgrade.
  • Nil_IQNil_IQ Join Date: 2003-04-15 Member: 15520Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-Pulse+May 29 2004, 09:13 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pulse @ May 29 2004, 09:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Also the video card you picked doesn't really match your cpu. It's not incompatible or anything, but the video card will end up being a bottleneck, and the extra money you spent on the cpu will go to waste. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I'm no computer expert, but that can't be right, can it?

    An Althlon 3000 is about 2.6ghz, right? I thought that a Radeon 9600 XT was reasonably high-end?

    If i'm wrong, is <i>my</i> gfx card a "bottleneck"? I have a Radeon 9700 pro with a 3.06ghz processor.
  • RueRue Join Date: 2002-10-21 Member: 1564Members
    edited May 2004
    The reason I was getting a 9600XT is that a 9800XT is double the price, even a 9800pro is another £70

    Anyway that card will play most of the games comming out in the next few months.
  • PulsePulse To create, to create and escape. Join Date: 2002-08-29 Member: 1248Members, Constellation
    edited May 2004
    An AMD 2.6ghz cpu is not the same speed as an intel 2.6ghz cpu, especially an athlon 64. And a Radeon 9700 pro is <a href='http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031015/radeon9600xt-07.html#unreal_tournament' target='_blank'>much faster</a> than a 9600XT (which is not high end). So no, your 9700 is probably not a bottleneck.

    I have a 9600XT, and there are already games coming out that it cannot run on the highest settings at a decent framerate, while the only game I have played that taxes my athlon XP 2600+ is X2, and even that is bottlenecked by my video card unless I turn the details down.

    I'm not saying that the 9600XT is a bad card, far from it, it's an excellent value, but it will become a bottleneck.
  • EpidemicEpidemic Dark Force Gorge Join Date: 2003-06-29 Member: 17781Members
    Well. I'd settle for an excellent 9700pro (I think it's cheaper as well) and upgrade it time. The 9700 should still be able to run games decently and when the new X800 series' price is on the decline you can just upgrade. I'd still buy an athlon 64 <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
  • Nil_IQNil_IQ Join Date: 2003-04-15 Member: 15520Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-Pulse+May 29 2004, 09:51 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pulse @ May 29 2004, 09:51 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> An AMD 2.6ghz cpu is not the same speed as an intel 2.6ghz cpu, especially an athlon 64. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Huh? How does that work?

    I understand that Athlon have a different system of measuring clock speed (e.g, an XP1800 is actually 1533mhz), but in the end doesn't it come down to clock speed?

    I mean, I have an Intel 3.06ghz, you're saying an Althlon running at 3.06ghz is faster? How does that work??

    I'm not saying you're wrong i'm just saying there's something i'm not getting here...
  • CForresterCForrester P0rk(h0p Join Date: 2002-10-05 Member: 1439Members, Constellation
    I heard that nForce 3 boards suck. (Just word of mouth, I've never actually used one) I would ditch the 64-bit CPU, get a better motherboard (I heard nForce 2 is good) and a better hard drive. (Hitachi isn't that great. The industry leader at the moment is Maxtor, I believe. You could also get a Seagate drive.) Definitely put a little money in to more RAM. I got 1 GB of RAM and there hasn't been a day in my life where I regretted it.
  • MrPinkMrPink Join Date: 2002-05-28 Member: 678Members
    edited May 2004
    Get a cheaper case
    nForce 3 150 boards are garbage, either get a nForce 3 250 (expensive) or one of MSI's boards
    9600XT from a better company with 128MBs instead of 256
    More RAM at 3200
    Bigger HDD, I bet you can double or triple the size of the deskstar for under $10 more

    With the video card, I would try to salvage something out of your old computer to hold you over for a few months. The prices of current cards are gonna drop like bricks and new toys are going to be available.
  • Cereal_KillRCereal_KillR Join Date: 2002-10-31 Member: 1837Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-Nil_IQ+May 29 2004, 05:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nil_IQ @ May 29 2004, 05:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I understand that Athlon have a different system of measuring clock speed (e.g, an XP1800 is actually 1533mhz), but in the end doesn't it come down to clock speed? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    That's the performance rating thing. That means that from AMD's point of view, a 1800+ even though it runs at 1533mhz, should be at least as good as an 1800Mhz P4
    Also, note that different cores with same ratings don't always have the same clock speed

    2800+ (2250 Mhz) and 2800+ Barton (2083 Mhz) should perform the same. Of course, that's just what they say; you can only actually trust benchmarks.


    As a sidenote, Intel is going to go with performance ratings as well in their future generations of processors
  • CyndaneCyndane Join Date: 2003-11-15 Member: 22913Members
    I do not know what the exchange rate is.. but I think 550 pounds is a bit expensive for those parts listed. Although perhaps it is more expensive in the UK... I have never purchased anything computer related whie living there. ;-)
  • littlewildlittlewild Join Date: 2002-11-20 Member: 9467Members
    Get at least 512MB Ram. It is the cheapest and the most noticeable performance indicator.

    Scrape the 9600XT if you can get 9800 pro with an additional 70. 9800 pro is a better investment in the long run. If not you can always get a vanila 9800 (non-pro) with 128MB ram. It is like 5%-10% slower than the 9800 pro.
  • PulsePulse To create, to create and escape. Join Date: 2002-08-29 Member: 1248Members, Constellation
    edited May 2004
    <!--QuoteBegin-Nil_IQ+May 29 2004, 07:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nil_IQ @ May 29 2004, 07:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I understand that Athlon have a different system of measuring clock speed (e.g, an XP1800 is actually 1533mhz), but in the end doesn't it come down to clock speed?
    <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    No.
    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I mean, I have an Intel 3.06ghz, you're saying an Althlon running at 3.06ghz is faster? How does that work??<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    AMD cpus do more instructions per clock cycle. But don't take my word for it (or AMD's), take a look at some
    <a href='http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTI0' target='_blank'>benchmarks</a>. Notice that the Athlon64 3200+, which runs at 2ghz beats the Pentium 4 3.2ghz in most of the benchmarks (if only by a small margin).
  • RueRue Join Date: 2002-10-21 Member: 1564Members
    Cheers for all the feedback guys! <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

    Right I'v change a few things now

    MSI K8N nForce3 250
    AMD Athlon 64 3000
    Maxtor DiamondMax Plus8 40GB
    Crucial 512MB DDR PC2700
    Radeon 9800 128MB <- Not decided on brand

    I was thinking of waiting a few months until PCI-X cards begin to come out but I have no idea when that will be.

    Yeh the $ is really cheap at the moment that might be why the stuff looks expencive to you
  • Cereal_KillRCereal_KillR Join Date: 2002-10-31 Member: 1837Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-littlewild+May 29 2004, 07:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (littlewild @ May 29 2004, 07:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Get at least 512MB Ram. It is the cheapest and the most noticeable performance indicator.
    <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I would say get only 512 right now, the prices are abusively high. Unless you got absolute necessity for 1024, just go with one 512 stick and upgrade in a couple of months hoping prices go down...

    Whatever you do, 256 IS way too small for current systems.
  • CForresterCForrester P0rk(h0p Join Date: 2002-10-05 Member: 1439Members, Constellation
    <!--QuoteBegin-Rue+May 29 2004, 01:33 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Rue @ May 29 2004, 01:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Cheers for all the feedback guys! <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

    Right I'v change a few things now

    MSI K8N nForce3 250
    AMD Athlon 64 3000
    Maxtor DiamondMax Plus8 40GB
    Crucial 512MB DDR PC2700
    Radeon 9800 128MB <- Not decided on brand

    I was thinking of waiting a few months until PCI-X cards begin to come out but I have no idea when that will be.

    Yeh the $ is really cheap at the moment that might be why the stuff looks expencive to you <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    If I were you, I'd bump it up to an 80 GB HDD. 40 GB is getting to be too little these days.

    Also, try to get built-by-ATI. Rather than a third-party manufacturer.

    PCI-X isn't going to be too hot right now. The performance boost is almost nonexistant.
  • RueRue Join Date: 2002-10-21 Member: 1564Members
    40GB is fine for me tbh, My brother has a DVD burner that I will be able to use.

    The reason I wanted to know when they are comming out is I was hoping AGP cards would become cheaper <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
  • raz0rraz0r Join Date: 2003-07-24 Member: 18395Members
    PCI-X uses PCI slots, right?

    if it does, then what do you do with your unused AGP slot.
  • CForresterCForrester P0rk(h0p Join Date: 2002-10-05 Member: 1439Members, Constellation
    <!--QuoteBegin-raz0r+May 29 2004, 01:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (raz0r @ May 29 2004, 01:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> PCI-X uses PCI slots, right?

    if it does, then what do you do with your unused AGP slot. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    No no. PCI-X is a new slot altogether. You need to buy a new motherboard to get PCI-X slots, then you need to buy PCI-X cards.

    It's like PCI, but new, better, much more expensive and quite worthless for video cards at the moment.
  • Cereal_KillRCereal_KillR Join Date: 2002-10-31 Member: 1837Members
    First of all, PCI-X and PCI-express are both different.

    And PCI express cards will NOT be compatible with PCI. They use a new slot, also variable in size depending on the speed
    I believe that PCI-X however, (PCI extended) is backwards compatible but don't quote me on that. However, PCI-X performances are just the double of PCI I believe, so they won't be sufficient for next gen graphic cards.
Sign In or Register to comment.