Building a Computer?
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,317
Likes: 0
From: Virginia Beach, VA
Do your homework on graphics cards as well, as many CAD based programs don't always run best on what might be the better gaming cards. I ran into this several times, as I did CAD type work with my sign stuff. If you can, research specifics on what programs you run, often those in the field have good first hand data.
Being everyone is out and giving opinions, I'm considering a build myself soon. Exactly what applications take advantage of the new quad processors? And while we are at it, are there any sites with differing benchmarks on the AMD dual cores vs the Intel dual cores? I'll be the first to admit I've never been convinced that Intel is always the way to go, as I had a Cyrix system back in the Pentium class days, and now have an AMD based system for our daughter which seems to hold it's own just fine. But in the long run I'm looking for bang for the buck, so I'd never rule Intel out either.
It also seems that in the area of memory that it gets really pricey as speeds increase. Does anyone have any input on where you stop noticing performance difference in terms of normal desktop use and/or very light gaming applications? Being that the bus often outperforms the memory installed it seems to be more of a long term planning consideration to me.
And on a final note: Cleaning out my desk drawers this weekend, I found an old 486/100 Overdrive chip. I've now got that, a 486 SX-25 chip, and a couple PII chips that I use as paperweights. Somewhere alone the line I either gave away or lost all the Pentium I class chips.
Being everyone is out and giving opinions, I'm considering a build myself soon. Exactly what applications take advantage of the new quad processors? And while we are at it, are there any sites with differing benchmarks on the AMD dual cores vs the Intel dual cores? I'll be the first to admit I've never been convinced that Intel is always the way to go, as I had a Cyrix system back in the Pentium class days, and now have an AMD based system for our daughter which seems to hold it's own just fine. But in the long run I'm looking for bang for the buck, so I'd never rule Intel out either.
It also seems that in the area of memory that it gets really pricey as speeds increase. Does anyone have any input on where you stop noticing performance difference in terms of normal desktop use and/or very light gaming applications? Being that the bus often outperforms the memory installed it seems to be more of a long term planning consideration to me.
And on a final note: Cleaning out my desk drawers this weekend, I found an old 486/100 Overdrive chip. I've now got that, a 486 SX-25 chip, and a couple PII chips that I use as paperweights. Somewhere alone the line I either gave away or lost all the Pentium I class chips.
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,550
Likes: 2
From: Mount Airy,MD
Originally Posted by signmaster
Being everyone is out and giving opinions, I'm considering a build myself soon. Exactly what applications take advantage of the new quad processors? And while we are at it, are there any sites with differing benchmarks on the AMD dual cores vs the Intel dual cores? I'll be the first to admit I've never been convinced that Intel is always the way to go, as I had a Cyrix system back in the Pentium class days, and now have an AMD based system for our daughter which seems to hold it's own just fine. But in the long run I'm looking for bang for the buck, so I'd never rule Intel out either.
For things like video editing and DVD making, especially for hi-def, a quad ill outperform the dual core, even if the dual core is a faster processor. That being said, I use an older Core 2 Duo and when I went from a Pentium D 3.6ghz to the Core 2 Duo 2.66ghz, I found that just about everything thing I did was done about 30% faster, even though the speed of the processor was 30% slower. This was on the same MB, so the only difference was the processor.
As for gaming, video, and CAD, you should get the best graphics card you can afford. I happen to use a BFG Tech 8800GTS with 640MB of memory. Not cheap, but they have other cards that should perform well.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
From: Off the Road, Alaska
A good Nvidia quadro would do better than 4 8800 Ultras in quad SLI for CAD. They are designed with different specs to match business solutions (pipelines, shaders, multiple cores, etc.) Going off of RAM and clock frequency is not comparing apples to apples.
Get yourself a good 45nm quad core, 3Gigs (1GB x2 and 512MB x2) in dual channel, as fast as you can afford (3 gig assuming Vista, 2GB otherwise), a quadro gfx card, and if you are doing anything really important that you want to have redundancy, 3 SATA II HD's in RAID 5.
quadros are kind of expensive, but you get what you pay for if you are serious about a CAD machine that will work in the future.
Get yourself a good 45nm quad core, 3Gigs (1GB x2 and 512MB x2) in dual channel, as fast as you can afford (3 gig assuming Vista, 2GB otherwise), a quadro gfx card, and if you are doing anything really important that you want to have redundancy, 3 SATA II HD's in RAID 5.
quadros are kind of expensive, but you get what you pay for if you are serious about a CAD machine that will work in the future.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in the Kootenays
Originally Posted by Arca_ex
Pentium CPU's are old technology, they run hot and slow. They don't even make them anymore and there's definitely a reason why lol. Even the Pentium D's are a dying technology while things going back to PIII's are rarely ever seen anymore, the last of the netburst architecture is the Pentium D's and they're no match for a Core 2 Duo, even a really low end one. Google it.
Get a low end Core 2 Duo like an E2200 or something if you're looking to go cheap, but if not look at an E8400 or something, those are the new 45nm quad cores, and a motherboard with X38 since that's the best platform to support the new Penryn Quad Cores. Going back to the less expensive route with an E2200 or something an ASUS P5K comes in a couple different editions with different features plus they have the P35 chipset which is second only to X38 at this point.
One of the most important things though, what is your price budget? I mean I could go crazy and make a $5,000 dollar list for you
Get a low end Core 2 Duo like an E2200 or something if you're looking to go cheap, but if not look at an E8400 or something, those are the new 45nm quad cores, and a motherboard with X38 since that's the best platform to support the new Penryn Quad Cores. Going back to the less expensive route with an E2200 or something an ASUS P5K comes in a couple different editions with different features plus they have the P35 chipset which is second only to X38 at this point.
One of the most important things though, what is your price budget? I mean I could go crazy and make a $5,000 dollar list for you
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in the Kootenays
Ok, I see the error in my ways now. I should have said Core2 Duo or Core2 Quad. I never even noticed the Pentium name got dropped after the dual core line. I just got the E6850 in January and didn't even notice then. Thanks for setting me straight.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 789
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
Originally Posted by Larry227
Ok, I see the error in my ways now. I should have said Core2 Duo or Core2 Quad. I never even noticed the Pentium name got dropped after the dual core line. I just got the E6850 in January and didn't even notice then. Thanks for setting me straight.
Originally Posted by signmaster
Do your homework on graphics cards as well, as many CAD based programs don't always run best on what might be the better gaming cards. I ran into this several times, as I did CAD type work with my sign stuff. If you can, research specifics on what programs you run, often those in the field have good first hand data.
Yeah the Quadro series from nVidia are more for graphical design etc. The only thing is that they can range anywhere from 50 bucks for a crappy one all the way to 3,000 which is way more than any gaming video card could ever hope to be.
Here's a link to them: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...=Quadro+series
Being everyone is out and giving opinions, I'm considering a build myself soon. Exactly what applications take advantage of the new quad processors? And while we are at it, are there any sites with differing benchmarks on the AMD dual cores vs the Intel dual cores? I'll be the first to admit I've never been convinced that Intel is always the way to go, as I had a Cyrix system back in the Pentium class days, and now have an AMD based system for our daughter which seems to hold it's own just fine. But in the long run I'm looking for bang for the buck, so I'd never rule Intel out either.
AMD is old news, Intel absolutely slaughters everything with their Dual Cores and new 45nm Quad Cores, the only one that can just barely stay in the ballpark of the competition is the AMD Phenom quad cores, which for overclockers like me are absolute crap. They can only overclock a couple hundred MHz where as an E8400 can reach 3.5GHz on the stock cooling easily. Sadly AMD has nothing going for them right now.
It also seems that in the area of memory that it gets really pricey as speeds increase. Does anyone have any input on where you stop noticing performance difference in terms of normal desktop use and/or very light gaming applications? Being that the bus often outperforms the memory installed it seems to be more of a long term planning consideration to me.
For those applications a solid 800MHz 2GB 4-4-4-12 DDR2 kit is perfect, great performance and now since DDR3 is out DDR2 prices are dropping like a rock. Keep an eye out for sales, I saw a 2GB kit of Crucial Ballistix Tracers (1066MHz @ 5-5-5-15 but I forced the timings to 4-4-4-8 no problem) for just under 100 bucks. Just a year ago they used to be pushing the upside of 300 dollars.
And on a final note: Cleaning out my desk drawers this weekend, I found an old 486/100 Overdrive chip. I've now got that, a 486 SX-25 chip, and a couple PII chips that I use as paperweights. Somewhere alone the line I either gave away or lost all the Pentium I class chips.
I could go and find my Commodore 64 if you wanna battle
Yeah the Quadro series from nVidia are more for graphical design etc. The only thing is that they can range anywhere from 50 bucks for a crappy one all the way to 3,000 which is way more than any gaming video card could ever hope to be.
Here's a link to them: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...=Quadro+series
Being everyone is out and giving opinions, I'm considering a build myself soon. Exactly what applications take advantage of the new quad processors? And while we are at it, are there any sites with differing benchmarks on the AMD dual cores vs the Intel dual cores? I'll be the first to admit I've never been convinced that Intel is always the way to go, as I had a Cyrix system back in the Pentium class days, and now have an AMD based system for our daughter which seems to hold it's own just fine. But in the long run I'm looking for bang for the buck, so I'd never rule Intel out either.
AMD is old news, Intel absolutely slaughters everything with their Dual Cores and new 45nm Quad Cores, the only one that can just barely stay in the ballpark of the competition is the AMD Phenom quad cores, which for overclockers like me are absolute crap. They can only overclock a couple hundred MHz where as an E8400 can reach 3.5GHz on the stock cooling easily. Sadly AMD has nothing going for them right now.
It also seems that in the area of memory that it gets really pricey as speeds increase. Does anyone have any input on where you stop noticing performance difference in terms of normal desktop use and/or very light gaming applications? Being that the bus often outperforms the memory installed it seems to be more of a long term planning consideration to me.
For those applications a solid 800MHz 2GB 4-4-4-12 DDR2 kit is perfect, great performance and now since DDR3 is out DDR2 prices are dropping like a rock. Keep an eye out for sales, I saw a 2GB kit of Crucial Ballistix Tracers (1066MHz @ 5-5-5-15 but I forced the timings to 4-4-4-8 no problem) for just under 100 bucks. Just a year ago they used to be pushing the upside of 300 dollars.
And on a final note: Cleaning out my desk drawers this weekend, I found an old 486/100 Overdrive chip. I've now got that, a 486 SX-25 chip, and a couple PII chips that I use as paperweights. Somewhere alone the line I either gave away or lost all the Pentium I class chips.
I could go and find my Commodore 64 if you wanna battle
I answered in the bold text in the quote.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
From: Delaware
Im a AMD loyalist better benchmarks in my opionin. Go with SATA and make sure when building you do it neatly for best air flow makes a big difference. While ur at it install 2 to 4 gigs of ballistic ram and you 'll be on ur way. And have atleast 700 watt power supply will come in handy on overloading time! Just my 2 cents. P.s cool glowing lights makes it a lot better machine ask anybody 
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in the Kootenays
For those applications a solid 800MHz 2GB 4-4-4-12 DDR2 kit is perfect, great performance and now since DDR3 is out DDR2 prices are dropping like a rock. Keep an eye out for sales, I saw a 2GB kit of Crucial Ballistix Tracers (1066MHz @ 5-5-5-15 but I forced the timings to 4-4-4-8 no problem) for just under 100 bucks. Just a year ago they used to be pushing the upside of 300 dollars.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,226
Likes: 42
From: So. Texas
If you are running any of the AutoCAD programs you need as much HP as you can afford. We are using the dual core AMDs and they are marginal if you are in any kind of a hurry. We use both AutoCAD and MechCAD and they are HUGE programs. Buy as much memory as you can afford too. These programs are resource hogs and if you need any other programs running in the back ground, it will be slow in coming.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
From: in the woods
Originally Posted by Labnerd
If you are running any of the AutoCAD programs you need as much HP as you can afford. We are using the dual core AMDs and they are marginal if you are in any kind of a hurry. We use both AutoCAD and MechCAD and they are HUGE programs. Buy as much memory as you can afford too. These programs are resource hogs and if you need any other programs running in the back ground, it will be slow in coming.
edit for the Mac dude:He is doing drafting not making a a movie/podcast. OWN3D
Senior Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 789
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
Originally Posted by Larry227
I got the 2x1gb kit of Crucial Ballistix DDR2 8500 for 109.00 when I bought my 6850. Very nice ram. I have it running at 4-4-4-12 and haven't tried to go better. Maybe I will later tonight.
Also, to the guy that said AMD chips bench better because you like them...
Seriously. Gimme' a break. Go look on the internet. Intel walks all over AMD, and their new Phenoms completely blow. They only overclock a couple hundred MHz, that's nothing when Intel chips can go in excess of a 1GHz overclock with liquid cooling where as a Phenom can't, and the new Penryn chips run so cool you can hit 4GHz easily on stock cooling, Penryn vs Phenom is complete rape. And watch out for the errata. Haha, I can't believe they released a defective chip in the first place. They're getting desperate.
