Phx $200 PC

Check it out here

"This computer could turn out to be a very big deal. Not so much because it?s the first under-$200 new PC to hit the marketplace or because it runs a version of Linux which can run some Windows programs..."



If you know Linux, this might be the deal you're looking for.

 

Linux good...Cyrix BAD...

 

Cyrix Very bad. AMD not so bad. Intel Good!


I have to say that! although what's not to like about 2+GHz

 

Who said Cyrix ? Are they even still alive ????? There's a company that needs to be put out of our misery.

It's good to see that Linux is inching forward at least.

 

Void, I read the full article on the "PC". The original used an AMD Duron chip, but the newest incarnation is wielding the new almighty *cough* Cyrix 800MHz processor.

I really thought that company had gone the way of the dodo, and for good reason.

 

While I am somewhat Computer literate, I am not as much as some of you. May you be so kind to explain? Why Cyrix, bad? AMD, Bad too?

 

Okay,

Cyrix is the "Yugo" of computer chips. It works...mostly. Some hardware (like sound cards and video cards) won't even work with a Cyrix processor because it's so slipshod of design. They also have never been able to keep up power wise with the Intel chips...they tried advertising their chips by what speed it was equvilant to, but that didn't work well. The only reason that some companies even sell it is for people who can't afford AMD processors.

Intel vs AMD

This is another religious war out there(chevy vs ford, etc), I'm pro-Intel so read this with that bias in mind.

In the past AMD didn't have the funding that Intel had to design their own chips, so their design and production quality was very low, they'd get less than half the silicon wafer to produce usable chips, and these chips also didn't work with some hardware (such as some soundblaster designs). Then they finally scrapped their own designs and licensed the DEC alpha chip and tweaked it a bit to run x86 (Microsoft style) programs. This was the first Athlon which surprised everybody (especially Intel) with its speed and power. Using the designs that Digital Equipment Corp made instead of their own, they were out powering the pentium series...and AMD has always sold at lower prices than Intel...so their market went big, which was good because they were 2 quarters away from bankruptcy.

They kept up and scared Intel with their performance until Intel figured out that they had to actually work now to keep their dominance in the market. They also focused on getting the most performance out of lower quality items like memory to push into the market further instead of building for higher end/more powerful gear like Intel did. They would release the 133 mhz bus first when Intel was just getting to it. Then they used a common technology called double edged cycling to double the speed and advertise 200/266 mhz motherboards.

But now Intel has gotten off their buts and their chips are back in front to a clock speed that AMD can't keep up with, so they have also taken to advertising there chips as an "AMD Athlon 2100+" saying that it REALLY is the equal of an Intel 2.1 ghz chip even though it only runs around 1.8 ghz or so. They're stressing that clock speed isn't the only way to measure a chip's performance...and they're right (Look at Apple, Alpha, and HP-RISC). But when the chips have to do identical tasks and instructions, clock speed is the major factor in power no matter what they want to say.

Okay, Intel was a monopoly...got complacent...and paid for it with a hard loss in market share and prestige. Then they started releasing Pentiums for their new memory style, Rambus, only !!!! Big mistake as it was so much more expensive and proprietary. It let the Pentium out power AMD but only when using the very expensive parts. Some companies started producing motherboards that let it use the older SDRAM that AMD was using though it couldn't keep up performance wise to the AMD chips with this jury rigging. Eventually Intel released a true 200 mhz motherboard and then double edge clocked it to 400 mhz. They redesigned the Pentium 4 from its release version to squeeze alot more power out of it and has now has it running on 533 mhz motherboards using the SDRAM, where AMD is still stuck at 266 mhz.

So that's the developmental and technology differences between them. One general rule is that the AMD chips are always cheaper than the Intel chips for nearly the same performace, whether its Pentiums/Athlons or the budget Celerons/Durons. For somebody wanting a budget system then even I suggest AMD and build it for them. But I personally believe that Intel is back in the lead and superior to AMD.

There you go. Any questions ? Anything to add from the AMD camp ? (I see you out there with the rope and makeup bag)

 

Thanks Void!

 

Tiger direct has a refurb toshiba PIII 500 w/ 64Mb RAM and a 6Gb HDD- all for 249 credits - they have to be republic dataris tho - unless you think you're some kind of Jedi.... waving your hand around like that... (tigerdirect.com)

 

ha! i had a cyrix 133 chip a LONG time ago...then the CPU decided it couldn't do math anymore...freaking cyrix!

 

I would like to buy a new computer. So I am asking for help on what I should be looking for. Obviously I like to be able to converse with you all, get music and video, play some games on it. Like to do this rather quickly without waiting too long. Suggestions Pleeease. Apple or PC?

 

Apple has the power, quality, and mainstream software support (office suites, utilities, applications), but not the support in the games arena..so if that's what you want then you gotta go PC for the most part.

Step 1) establish a budget

Once we got that then I (or the other teammates) can build you a system. Get with me on it and I'll be glad to spec you out on something.

 

The other thing to remember when it comes to building a computer - is that there are three factors involved, as an absolute rule...

#1) Good
#2) Fast
#3) Cheap

You can have any two of those, i.e. you can have good and fast, it ain't gonna be cheap.

or

You can have fast and cheap, it ain't gonna be good...

You get the idea. It is not neccessarily cheaper to build your own box - After all, Dell sells a pretty good box, complete with an OS for around $800 - the only real advantage to building a box on your own, or having one built is that YOU get to pick what components go into it. I.E. If you think a fast video card is essential, you can drop $500 and buy a kick ass video card... (Hi there Geefwee!!)

The other advantage to building your own box, is that if you are like the vast majority of us, you can save up and buy good components one piece at a time...

That's my $.02 worth...

Any takers to argue??

 

Go PC. The Mac is not what they make it out to be.

I have custom configured 5 PCs just in the past month and can always find the best deal for a new comp.

It all depends on your budget & what you want to be able to do with it now AND down the road.

 

Mac is definitely alot more expensive, and, like Void said, there's not nearly the software available, in tems of games and other fun stuff. There's also the issue of a Mac's virtually nonexistant upgradability...

Void and I would be more than happy to custom build you a system, just let us know.

 

You guys are just too good to me. Wahhh!

Seriously, guys. Thanks alot for the offer. As soon as I get a spec on what I am looking for, you all will be the first people I call. Thanks so much.

 

Buy a MAC.

 

Write down what you want to do, wht you think you might like to do. Then find what you need to serve that purpose.

 

Dave is right... If you are not into digital art, or movie making, then buy a PC.

 

But if you are into digital art or moviemaking, then buy a mac...