Options
New PC
Ric Grupe
Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
I have had it with Dell (don't ask!:rolleyes)...and doubt that I will ever deal with them again...so I'm having one made. I tried not to go overboard and configured what I felt was reasonable box for my uses.
Custom built desktop computer:
Motherboard......................................Asus P5E-VM DO
CPU..........................................Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Ram...........Kingston HyperX DDR2-800 2048MB CL4 (2)
Video Card...............Asus GeForce 9600GT 512MB Silent
Hard Drives..........Western Digital Caviar SE16 320GB (3)
CD / DVD Rom.....................Pioneer 20X DVD-RW SATA
Case .........................................Antec Mini P180 (Black)
Power Supply......................................Corsair TX 650W
CPU Cooling.................Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro (775)
Benchmarks (PC MARK 05):
System Score 8078
CPU Score 7666
Memory Score 4531
Video Score 12694
Hard Drive Score 6464
Not sure how meaningful these scores are.:dunno
This will be the first pc I've had with a clean install (just the os and necessary drivers). I'm looking forward to that!
Custom built desktop computer:
Motherboard......................................Asus P5E-VM DO
CPU..........................................Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Ram...........Kingston HyperX DDR2-800 2048MB CL4 (2)
Video Card...............Asus GeForce 9600GT 512MB Silent
Hard Drives..........Western Digital Caviar SE16 320GB (3)
CD / DVD Rom.....................Pioneer 20X DVD-RW SATA
Case .........................................Antec Mini P180 (Black)
Power Supply......................................Corsair TX 650W
CPU Cooling.................Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro (775)
Benchmarks (PC MARK 05):
System Score 8078
CPU Score 7666
Memory Score 4531
Video Score 12694
Hard Drive Score 6464
Not sure how meaningful these scores are.:dunno
This will be the first pc I've had with a clean install (just the os and necessary drivers). I'm looking forward to that!
0
Comments
All I can say is that I have a somewhat similar system but.... I'm not happy with my ASUS P5K-E Wifi motherboard and I'm on my second Corsair HX650w power supply as the first one died a smokey death after 6 months. It did die gracefully though and no harm was done to the components. I have not updated my BIOS which may resolve my motherboard issues (or may not as for several other users posting in the ASUS forums this has not been the answer).
Make sure you read everything you can on the motherboard in their user support forums, ditto for the memory. That seems to be the area where there are the most issues. Also in forums like HardOC - just Google your motherboard and the memory mfg and model #, and various enthusiast forums should pop up. I was considered motherboards from ASUS, Abit, Gigabyte, and MSI and they all had issues of some sort. Looking back I'm convinced that, regardless of choice, I'd still be dealing with some issue.
Ultimately, if you are having a local shop make the system up for you, rely on their "standard" packages or listen to their suggestions - they don't like returns any more than you do and will strive to ensure you have hardware that is compatible and reliable.
.
.
Overkill on the power supply, but if it's cheap, no big deal.
3 320GB drives is a bit odd. Price/storage deal wise, you'd be better with 2 500/750/1TB drives. IIRC 1TB is running at about $90-110 or so.
Is that 2GB of RAM or 4?
The video card is serious overkill if you aren't gaming and not so great if you are.
Value looks to be around $700-750 or so. If you're paying more than $900 for an assembled system, just learn how to do it yourself, it's actually very easy.
With 4GB of RAM, make sure you're running Vista 64. XP 64 is garbage, and Vista gets a lot more crap than it deserves (It is far from perfect, but it's nice as long as you have the hardware to run it, which is frankly not very much). Oh - getting a PC with no extra software installed when it's new is light night and day. I've used random OEM PCs that have so much crap on them that they go from being perfectly reasonable machines to being horrid.
XP Pro 32 bit...because I hate Vista (have it on a laptop):puke
One HD for OS and programs...one for file storage...one for scratch disk for CS4. I'll use an external 640gb HD in an Antec enclosure running off a eSATA port for backup. More storage than I'll ever need.
4gb memory. If I understand how CS4 runs correctly...it can use more ram even if the OS can't.
Made my decisions based on running PS CS4 after reading this article. Hopefully the authors knew what they were speaking of.
I'm also getting a 26" NEC monitor so I can run 1920X1200 res and still see the text and icons.
My thinking on the power supply was there is no such thing as too big. I'd rather run at 30% of capacity than 60%.
I don't have the skills (knowledge) or the patience or inclination to build it myself. If something goes wrong...I want an out.
I appreciate your taking the time to comment.
Did I say Dell sucks?
My Corsair is the TX...hopefully I'll have better luck.:D
I've read until my eyeballs were hanging out of their sockets!
One thing I know for sure is that people will most certainly complain but seldom praise...so forums can be a real crap shoot when looking for solid info.
Thanks.
All in all, it sounds like you have chosen well. Enjoy your new toy. :ivar
You either posted because you wanted constructive criticism, or because you wanted to be patted on the back. My criticism is purely constructive and is offered with the intent of helping you build a better PC based on my extensive experience doing just that (building and helping people build). I don't sugar coat anything, but I'm not going to be mean or anything; just trying to help you out. I'm not complaining. In the end, the computer you have will do what you need it to do, and it won't affect me at all.
What is it that you don't like about Vista? It runs rather better on a self build (no pile of garbage software on it at all), and does need decent hardware, but once you get over the hump, it's really not bad. A modern system with Vista 64 bit and a load of RAM will do heavy multitasking a lot better than any XP system. Given inadequate hardware, it is terrible. Your computer will not be inadequate.
No.
The OS can't use the RAM because it can't address it. Simply, your computer needs to allocate a memory location so that it can find RAM. 32 bit systems have enough bits (36 bits for memory allocation, actually), which gives you a limit of 4GB of memory that the computer can access. If you have more than 4GB of memory, the computer runs out of numbers to reference the memory to, and there is simply no way to use what it can't reference.
Odds are you'll be limited to 3-3.25GB of memory that your computer can see - the 512MB from the video card, and probably a bit more for any PCI devices that need memory address space. No 32 bit program can address that much RAM, even if you're using a 64 bit OS. Paying for 4GB of RAM isn't a waste on a 32 bit system as it's like $10/GB, but you don't get the full benefit of it, so even if you want to stick with XP32, get the 4GB.
Quoted from the article you linked:
That article gives mostly very good advice, though it goes astray a couple times, once on video card memory always having helped photoshop (it hasn't, through CS3, having more than what you need to run a given resolution on a display doesn't do anything, and a bit about manually allocating memory, which there's really not much point to doing. Windows 2000/Xp/Vista or OSX all have very robust systems for allocating memory and will automatically give PS more memory up to the limit the system can take. The option to do so manually is a holdover from the Mac OS9 days. Neither Apple nor MS have had archaic OSes that can't manage memory for a long time.
I have no experience with using tremendous amounts of RAM and using a RAMdrive as a scratch disk for PS. My bet is that it would be significantly faster than using a scratch disk for very disk intense tasks... we're talking about a system with 16GB of RAM or something like that, though, if you're running <8GB, I don't think you would get anything out of it.
Is this a good NEC IPS/*VA display, or is it a TN? If it's the latter, you're going to be in for a world of hurt when editing images due to color shift.
The EA261WM is a TN panel. I made a detailed post about TNs for photo editing a couple weeks ago. I'll see if I can find it. For a bit more money, there's a very nice, big Planar that uses a very nice IPS panel, which is a fantastic value for photo editing. Model is Planar PX2611W, it costs about $900 or so. Going back to a 24" display, you can get IPS or *VA for $500-600 or so in general, or the pretty good Dell 2707 for $800 if you want to go even bigger.
Vista deals with high DPI screens *far* better than XP does. It can be adjusted to display larger text for higher resolution displays, and unlike XP, Aero is built to do it reasonably well. It isn't perfect, but on XP, you would very frequently have text that was larger than the area where the text went, whereas in Vista, everything looks fine as it is properly scaled.
CS4 does use the video card for accelerating stuff. I figured a cheaper 1GB card would be better for it, but looked at the prices, and there was nothing compelling. The one in there is fine.
Here's a comment in a review about it. I will note that the video card in his system is under 1/10 as powerful as the one in yours:
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/apps/adobe-cs4-review.ars/4
On to hard disks:
There isn't really a significant performance benefit in using a seperate hard disk for OS and applications, unless one hard disk is a lot faster than the other. For instance, instead of getting three identical drives, you could get a bigger, slower hard disk for your main system/app drive, and a high performance hard disk to use as a scratch disk for PS, such as a WD Raptor.
Larger hard disks tend to be significantly faster than smaller hard disks simply because the data is packed more densely. A 1TB 7200RPM drive will easily outperform an otherwise equivalent 320GB 7200RPM drive. The platter rotates at the same speed, but there's a lot more data that it covers as it goes over it.
If you will be doing only light duty editing in PS, just load up on RAM and don't worry about getting a high performance drive to use as a scratch disk. But if you'll be pushing that limit frequently (which will occur far more often on an XP system than on a 64 bit Vista system due to the memory addressing issues), then you might want to consider something like this as a secondary/tertiary drive:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136260
They are more expensive, but they are also very, very fast.
My recommendation would still be for larger drives. I say this as a biased person with some 2TB of disk space, a good amount of it is redundant/backup space, of course. I recommend larger drives because they're so cheap. A 750GB disk costs $20 or so more than a 320GB one, and will be faster, and will last longer.
On Power supplies:
Your computer, as configured, will use at peak something like 180-220w. My system, with the same CPU, same amount of RAM, but 4 hard disks, and a video card that uses significantly more power is normally around 220w at load (in a game), and could go higher if I were in a game and for some reason all the hard disks were going simultaneously, maybe 250-260w or so. Larger power supplies run *less* efficiently when running at a very low load, which causes more heat via the AC -> DC conversion, and higher power usage. As long as a PSU is kept within its spec, and is a quality unit, there's nothing to fear in getting a smaller power supply, and is actually the preferred course of action if you want a cooler, more reliable system. I'm not saying to get a 250w model that will barely power your PC, but recommending to get, say, an efficient 400w model instead. Different power supplies vary in where they are most efficient, but there's no sense in getting something that is huge overkill. Again, though, it won't hurt you, it might not cost more money, I'm just informing you here.
Building a PC is in fact extremely easy. A couple hours to put it together, a little while to install the drivers for things if need be, and you're off. Most of the problems one encounters are with DOA hardware, and that is where troubleshooting comes in to play. Another poster here noted that sometimes there are odd incompatibilites with RAM, which I've run in to a couple of times. Literally, my PC doesn't boot with a specific stick of RAM in it. I've encountered it before, but the Asus P5B series is pretty finicky about the stuff, moreso than most boards I've used in the past (I'm using a P5B, it works, well, with almost everything) Go figure. So it can be handy to have other computers around to test parts, but the majority of the time, stuff just works. Forums and google searches are usually the best way to figure this stuff out, and MB manufacturers sometimes have lists of compatible memory.
Revised crutique:
CPU is good. Better to get faster dual than slower quad. I didn't comment on it because it was fine.
Case - Antec makes fine cases, you won't cut yourself on it.
RAM is good, though I'd go with more if I were running a 64 bit OS as it's so cheap.
I prefer Vista, and recommend it for supporting more RAM and that it scales better to high DPI displays, but if you hate it for a legitimate reason, it's not like XP is bad. I or someone else might be able to help you with specific concerns, though.
Video card is somewhat overkill even for the new PS acceleration features, but isn't that much more expensive than something else that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference from. No big deal.
Your monitor, if it is the one I think it is, is not very appropriate for critical photo editing due to the type of panel it uses. I have made a few recommendations that would be more appropriate here.
The bare parts to build a system like yours cost $700-750. Putting one together, at $75/hour, puts a reasonable asking price around $900, $1000 is pushing it. If you were local, my normal charge on a build is $200, which would include getting it set up with any software you might want on it to start with, and delivering/installing it myself. If you're paying a lot more for this, it's just a poor value.
My post on LCDs is here:
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=968134&postcount=3
With a followup here:
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=968396&postcount=9
And a link to one amongst a battery of tests that will demonstrate color shift on a TN. If you would like me to, I could set up a couple photographs this weekend that demonstrate this phenomenon occuring on my 24" TN panel and being far less of a problem on my 20" PVA panel. The difference is downright shocking for some color shades.
http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/viewing_angle.php#angle_purple
Both!
Thanks for taking the time on this posting.
The NEC monitor is the good one with H-IPS panel and the spectraview hardware and software which x-rite makes for NEC. About $1200 at B&H.
As for XP...I'm going to have to learn PS for the first time...I don't need the added load of a new OS...an easy thing to change latter if needed.
Thanks, Richard!
Good choice
NEC makes some beautiful displays. Color me jealous.
I've rained on far too many people's parades when they come home with a shiny new 24" TN and I show them the color shift. "Wow, I really can't use that for editing, I need to return it" tends to be a typical response. It's almost like I like doing it. But, seriously, the solid purple thing doesn't even look purple at all on this screen, it looks blue, unless I stand above the display. I can only get a solid purple image from the clear other side of the room, from an awkward angle and almost 10' away, and this TN panel is actually considered to be very good. My PVA panel is great as long as I'm in front of it, there's some side to side color shifting.