Building your very own PC

Hi there, im about to go on a most magical journey called building my very first PC. Along the way i was going to go to cyberpowerpc.com and try to build one from there because i hear theyve got some good stuff there for good deals. I heard that AMD processors were better for gaming purposes, so i figured that that would be the type of processor to choose. But i have no idea what im looking at when i see all the technical terms for the AMD processors:

(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 X2 4800 CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[+650]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 X2 4600 CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[+460]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 X2 4400 CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[+296]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 X2 4200 CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[+240]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 X2 3800 CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[+116]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 FX 57 CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 FX 57 CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology)[+870]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 FX 55 CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[+640]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 4000+ CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[+156]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3800+ CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology
((939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3800+ CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology)[+110]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3500+ CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology
((939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3500+ CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology)[+0]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3200+ CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[-30]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3000+ CPU w/ HyperTransport Technology()[-74]

What does an AMD Athlon 3000 equate to in terms of regular P4 processors and whatnot?

 

3000 is roughly equivalent to a 3GHZ, though these are 64bit so in the future there may be an advantage.

Those FX and X2 are their hyperperformance ones, and probably not necessary.

 

be sure to get at least a 1 gig of ram,
and at least a 128 mb video card

 

Like Marcus said, the FX and X2 are the high end processors. An average gamer can get along just fine with a regular Athlon64. You might not get the very best graphics available as far as games go, but then again, many games these days needn't be bumped all the way up in order to get pretty good graphics out of them. Also, like the above poster said, make sure the memory and the video card of your system are suitable enough to run games. You're going to need good performance from all three in order to get a good gaming experience.

 

Make sure the socket, Bus and Cache specs match of the processor match with the motherboard you want, otherwise you are screwed.

 

The video card is usually the bottleneck in systems these days, so make sure yours is at least decent.

 

WOW! you guys are smart.........

 

Woah so a 3000 would be the equivalent of a 3.0 gigahertz pentium? Makes sence but since that was the lowest choice available i figured it was something a little under that. Well thats good. All I'd want was somewhere around there. Graphics card wise, i dont really mind how bad it is because whatever is available will probably be about 4 or 5 times better than what i got right now, so it will look a heluva lot better than games i run now. I have like a NVidia geforce 2 or something... Im gonna try to set a limit of 1050 bucks for the computer so ill see how i do. i just got another job so after i get a car, a computer is gonna be next. Thanks for clarifying stuff, you guys really DO know what youre talkin about it seems

 

You could probably get a system similar to mine (Athlon 64 3000+, Radeon 9800, 1GB RAM, 160GB HDD) for that. Even less if you didn't need a new monitor + case like I did.

 

Well i kinda do need a new monitor and case. Plus the cases they got there look pretty awesome. I might up the cpu a bit just to stay on the safe side of not falling too far behind in the whole obsolete factor because in terms of computers, you can get something top o' the line one day then teh next month theres somethin better. So the computer im gonna get i want to last me for at least 4 or 5 years before i have to get something better. And adding RAM isnt all that tough or expensive, either, and helps out loads for performance.

 

Bear in mind that you won't necessarily have to upgrade the whole machine at once; play the whole technology catch-up game to your advantage; nothing makes the price of the next big thing come plummetting down like the release of the next next big thing. There's also not much more frustrating than realising 6 months down the line that you could have bought the exact same system for 3/4 of the price.

My advice would be to concentrate on the framework that you're building and keep it as easily upgradeable as possible; make sure you've got a decent motherboard, unless you think the extra GHz/$$$ really seems worthwhile, stick to a 3000 CPU and put the extra money towards a good graphics card-although that's what does the bulk of the work in games, todays games are still catching up with the latest cards so a decent mid-range PCI-Express card should see you running with everything set to maximum detail for another 2 or 3 years yet at least (avoid AGP to ensure easy upgrades for as long as possible.) When dual core processors and 64-bit Windows have become more mainstream, the price of an "ordinary" AMD64 CPU should come down as the competition toughens up.

Also, try to keep some RAM slots free to make upgrades straightforward. For the hard drive, go for speed rather than capacity- an ideal setup would have a relatively small, fast as possible hard drive with Windows and all the system/program files on it, and then a second bigger, cheaper drive for storing all your pictures, video, music and all that kind of stuff on. So start off with a reasonably sized fast one, and then upgrade when storage space becomes an issue- like the cost of CPUs, the cost of data storage is always dropping. Or if you want to get really flashy, you can start plying with RAID arrays and stuff...

 

"When you know, you NewEgg"

I really recommend building your own. I have a computer that I got one from of those screwdriver shops, runs 25% worse than it should. They use the cheapest possible components for everything.
One thing that really is true with computers is that you really do get what you pay for.

I was building a new AMD-based computer, but with socket 1207 in first half '06 and with that the new X2/FX's it was just too tempting not to wait. Not to meantion DDR2 support (the future standard). I really recommend doing a Google search for the AMD '06/'07 roadmaps so you can see where the tech is going. It really depends if you want a computer that you can upgrade, or one that you will just need to scrap. 939 is being fased out along with DDR1 based motherboards, so it may be wise to wait for DDR2 compatability (unless you want a worthless Pentium). I would recommend getting at least a 3500+ or even better a low-end X2. Dual core will be slow to catch on, but if you don't buy computers often it may be wise to get one so you can be prepared. Winblows won't be dual core for another 5 years (for Windows DC-Edition) but if you do alot of video editing/encoding it will be worth it.

It is up to you though. Do you want long-term compatability that will cost more, or what you can get now for cheap, but won't be upgradable in a year.

Best of luck!

TheTK421

 

Well im not going to get a computer for at least 2 months, so i have up till then to make my mind up about everything. When are the new type of motherboards coming into use? I admit that i have a fair grasp about everything technical about computers now, except for the motherboard. I dont know all its technical jargon it spews for selecting one and whatnot. But if the 939 ones are going obsolete, it might be best to wait for the newer ones to get here. How long a wait would that be?

 

They won't for the next two years, just got a new computer with a Athlon 64 3400+

 

Athlon FX-59 San Diego 3.0 GHz 1MB Socket 939 Q1'06
Athlon FX-57 San Diego 2.8 GHz 1MB Socket 939 Now
Athlon 64 X2 >=5000+ Windsor? 2.6 GHz? Socket M2 Q2'06
Athlon 64 X2 >=5000+ Toledo? 2.6 GHz? Socket 939 Q1'06
Athlon 64 X2 4800+ Windsor 2.4 GHz 1MB? Socket M2 Q2'06
Athlon 64 4000+ Orleans 2.4 GHz 1MB? Socket M2 Q2'06
Athlon 64 3800+ Orleans 2.4 GHz 512K? Socket M2 Q2'06
Athlon 64 3500+ Orleans 2.2 GHz 512K? Socket M2 Q2'06

After Q2'06 you won't be seeing a whole lot of socket 939. M2 (I think it is a 940-pin socket, but it isn't compatable with current 940 MB's) will be the standard for a few years, so I really don't think it would be a bad move to wait. 939 processors can only get cheaper anyway.

Here is one version of the roadmap I have been able to find:
[image=http://www.hardwareluxx.de/andreas/News/AMD_Roadmap2006_1.gif]

939 is on the way out, but it really depends if you think that the other features are worth the wait.

 

Get a Mac, they kick the arse off almost anything, the OS has been supportin 64 bit processing for ages, the only slight disadvantage is that at the moment there is no SLi support.

If you're on a bit of a budget, get an AMD 3800+ XP, IIRC they outperform the FX-55 and are cheaper; and a motherboard that supports SLi. Gigabyte of RAM is bare minimum, unless your doing movie editing or music recording then a 250gig hard drive should be ample. As someone stated above, Graphics Cards make or break a system these days. I've got a Vaio with an intel 3.2 gig processor and a gig of ram, but because my graphics card is a geforce fx 5200 or something, Counterstrike is almost unplayable when smoke grenades are used. So if you get the above, you could pick up a couple of Geforce 6600 GT's, and they'll be on par with a Geforce 6800 Ultra.

To demonstrate the power this can give, a pc mag recently tested a computer with two 6800 Ultra cards, an AMD FX-55 processor and 2 gigs of ram, it ran doom 3 at 100 frames per second in 1600x1200, and Far Cry in the same resolution at 74 FPS, and the reason it wasn't faster was because of a lack of processor power (The FX-55 was at that point the highest performing processor on the market). So once you've got that SLi motherboard, you should be sorted for a while, because an easy upgrade would be to buy two 6800 ultras or something, in a few years time when the price has tumbled to that of the 6600 gt's.

dont get too hung up on aesthetics of the case, all its gonna be doing is sitting under/on the desk, it's probably more worth your while getting one with a power supply with a decent wattage.

Don't get a cheap TFT/LCD flatscreen monitor, they generally suck arse, and you're much better off with a standard CRT monitor over a cheap flatscreen. IIRC Iliyama do a decent one for quite cheap, the key thing is the response time. Anything over 12ms is junk for gaming.

also, just get a middle of the road soundcard, audigy 2 zs is pretty cheap these days i think, and is brilliant. Rather than getting some expensive 7.1 speaker set that will sound junk, get a good 2.1 set up, either two decent speakers or a sub with two satellite speakers.