Building a new computer myself

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Bad Disciple, Apr 10, 2008.

  1. Bad Disciple

    Bad Disciple Guest

    Hello all,

    Last summer I posted questions about building a computer myself.
    I received a lot of feedback. Meanwhile, a serious health problem in
    the family occurred and prevented me from continuing. Now that things
    are gladly under control, I come back to my computer issue.

    Given that some time passed, I need to check if any new ideas appeared.
    To remind that my computer is to be used for home studio music recording
    and production, often using effect processing with virtual machines.
    I'm using software like Cubase SX3, Kontakt, Finale etc.

    So, my questions:

    ABOUT PROCESSORS:
    1. What about AMD's three-cores CPU with L3 cache, expected to run
    20% faster than Quads?
    2. What's better, all-cores-in-a-single-die or two-cores-on-two-dies?
    3. Is the advantage of Dual and Quad cores so big, given that
    almost NO SOFTWARE is able to use this technology?
    4. Is it wise to get a 45nm technology processor while it's just the
    beginning?

    I hesitate what to chose between these Intel models:
    Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0GHz
    (Socket 775 - 3.0GHz - Bus 1333 MHz - 65 nm - 4MB L2 cache - Intel
    Virtualization Technology)
    or
    Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz
    (Socket 775 - 2.4GHz - Bus 1066 MHz - 65 nm - 8MB L2 cache - Intel
    Virtualization Technology)?

    ABOUT MOTERBOARD:
    I hesitate what to chose between these:
    Asus P5K Deluxe
    (Socket 775 - Intel® P35 chipset ICH9R - Intel® CoreT2 Quad / CoreT2 Extreme
    / CoreT2 Duo / Pentium® Extreme / Pentium® D / Pentium® 4 Processors -
    Dual-channel DDR2 1066/800/667 MHz - 4*SATA/1*SATA on the Go/ 1394 - Gigabit
    LAN -
    8-channel HD Audio)
    or
    Asus P5PK-V
    (Socket 775 - Support Intel® next generation 45nm Multi-core CPU - Intel®
    G33 chipset
    - Dual-channel DDR2 1066/800/667 MHz - Heat Pipe - Intel® Graphics Media
    Accelerator 3100 integrated - 2x1394 - 12xUSB 2.0 - Gigabit LAN - 8-channel
    HD Audio)
    or
    Gigabyte GA-P35-DQ6
    or
    Intel D975XBX2KR Bad Axe 2 (which I'm not sure if it supports Quad CPUs
    and/or 45nm technology)

    ABOUT HARD DISCS:
    1. Now that S-ATA drives came, is it still worthy putting 2 HDs in a RAID 0
    (for OS and programs) with a separate HD for data saving, and expect that
    RAID 0 will speed operations up? (And backup the RAID 0 discs so I can
    restore my OS and programs if any crash occurs?)
    2. Is it helping speed wise if I use one physical drive only for my Windows
    OS,
    a 2nd physical drive for my Program Files and a 3d physical drive for my
    Data saving?

    ABOUT OS:
    1. I know there is a separate Windows XP available for 64-bit. What do the
    64
    bit stand for?
    2. Does the XP Pro have multi-processor capability built in?
    3. I use to hear really bad opinions about Windows Vista, that it really
    sucks when it
    comes to extended professional use. Any feedback?
    4. And again and again, the eternal question, is a Mac still more reliable
    than a PC ?

    Thank you all for feedback.
    Bad Disciple
    'EN EIDA OTI OYDEN EIDA'
    'One thing I know is that nothing I know'. (Sokrates)
     
    Bad Disciple, Apr 10, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Bad Disciple

    sandy58 Guest

    On Apr 10, 9:39 am, "Bad Disciple" <> wrote:
    > Hello all,
    >
    > Last summer I posted questions about building a computer myself.
    > I received a lot of feedback. Meanwhile, a serious health problem in
    > the family occurred and prevented me from continuing. Now that things
    > are gladly under control, I come back to my computer issue.
    >
    > Given that some time passed, I need to check if any new ideas appeared.
    > To remind that my computer is to be used for home studio music recording
    > and production, often using effect processing with virtual machines.
    > I'm using software like Cubase SX3, Kontakt, Finale etc.
    >
    > So, my questions:
    >
    > ABOUT PROCESSORS:
    > 1. What about AMD's three-cores CPU with L3 cache, expected to run
    > 20% faster than Quads?
    > 2. What's better, all-cores-in-a-single-die or two-cores-on-two-dies?
    > 3. Is the advantage of Dual and Quad cores so big, given that
    > almost NO SOFTWARE is able to use this technology?
    > 4. Is it wise to get a 45nm technology processor while it's just the
    > beginning?
    >
    > I hesitate what to chose between these Intel models:
    > Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0GHz
    > (Socket 775 - 3.0GHz - Bus 1333 MHz - 65 nm - 4MB L2 cache - Intel
    > Virtualization Technology)
    > or
    > Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz
    > (Socket 775 - 2.4GHz - Bus 1066 MHz - 65 nm - 8MB L2 cache - Intel
    > Virtualization Technology)?
    >
    > ABOUT MOTERBOARD:
    > I hesitate what to chose between these:
    > Asus P5K Deluxe
    > (Socket 775 - Intel® P35 chipset ICH9R - Intel® CoreT2 Quad / CoreT2 Extreme
    > / CoreT2 Duo / Pentium® Extreme / Pentium® D / Pentium® 4 Processors -
    > Dual-channel DDR2 1066/800/667 MHz - 4*SATA/1*SATA on the Go/ 1394 - Gigabit
    > LAN -
    > 8-channel HD Audio)
    > or
    > Asus P5PK-V
    > (Socket 775 - Support Intel® next generation 45nm Multi-core CPU - Intel®
    > G33 chipset
    > - Dual-channel DDR2 1066/800/667 MHz - Heat Pipe - Intel® Graphics Media
    > Accelerator 3100 integrated - 2x1394 - 12xUSB 2.0 - Gigabit LAN - 8-channel
    > HD Audio)
    > or
    > Gigabyte GA-P35-DQ6
    > or
    > Intel D975XBX2KR Bad Axe 2 (which I'm not sure if it supports Quad CPUs
    > and/or 45nm technology)
    >
    > ABOUT HARD DISCS:
    > 1. Now that S-ATA drives came, is it still worthy putting 2 HDs in a RAID 0
    > (for OS and programs) with a separate HD for data saving, and expect that
    > RAID 0 will speed operations up? (And backup the RAID 0 discs so I can
    > restore my OS and programs if any crash occurs?)
    > 2. Is it helping speed wise if I use one physical drive only for my Windows
    > OS,
    > a 2nd physical drive for my Program Files and a 3d physical drive for my
    > Data saving?
    >
    > ABOUT OS:
    > 1. I know there is a separate Windows XP available for 64-bit. What do the
    > 64
    > bit stand for?
    > 2. Does the XP Pro have multi-processor capability built in?
    > 3. I use to hear really bad opinions about Windows Vista, that it really
    > sucks when it
    > comes to extended professional use. Any feedback?
    > 4. And again and again, the eternal question, is a Mac still more reliable
    > than a PC ?
    >
    > Thank you all for feedback.
    > Bad Disciple
    > 'EN EIDA OTI OYDEN EIDA'
    > 'One thing I know is that nothing I know'. (Sokrates)


    Go play in another playground, sonny. You can be fucking boring.
     
    sandy58, Apr 10, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Bad Disciple

    Hp Guest

    sandy58 wrote:
    >
    > On Apr 10, 9:39 am, "Bad Disciple" <> wrote:
    > > Hello all,
    > >
    > > Last summer I posted questions about building a computer myself.
    > > I received a lot of feedback. Meanwhile, a serious health problem in
    > > the family occurred and prevented me from continuing. Now that things
    > > are gladly under control, I come back to my computer issue.


    snip

    > > Thank you all for feedback.
    > > Bad Disciple
    > > 'EN EIDA OTI OYDEN EIDA'
    > > 'One thing I know is that nothing I know'. (Sokrates)



    > Go play in another playground, sonny. You can be fucking boring.



    Tisk Tisk, someone is having a bad hair day!
     
    Hp, Apr 10, 2008
    #3
  4. Bad Disciple

    Ofnuts Guest

    Bad Disciple wrote:

    > ABOUT PROCESSORS:
    > 1. What about AMD's three-cores CPU with L3 cache, expected to run
    > 20% faster than Quads?
    > 2. What's better, all-cores-in-a-single-die or two-cores-on-two-dies?


    Single die allows to share a fast cache between the cores.

    > 3. Is the advantage of Dual and Quad cores so big, given that
    > almost NO SOFTWARE is able to use this technology?


    Plenty of software can use it as long as it's not the only software
    running. When you are running that big music encoding, the other CPU is
    available for menial tasks (like, starting the task manager to kill the
    encoder which went into a tight loop) and even not-so-menial ones. And
    taking advantage of multiples CPUs is now a must-have for any CPU
    intensive programs (games and others).

    > 4. Is it wise to get a 45nm technology processor while it's just the
    > beginning?


    45 is always better than 65. What are you afraid of with 45?

    > ABOUT HARD DISCS:
    > 1. Now that S-ATA drives came, is it still worthy putting 2 HDs in a RAID 0
    > (for OS and programs) with a separate HD for data saving, and expect that
    > RAID 0 will speed operations up? (And backup the RAID 0 discs so I can
    > restore my OS and programs if any crash occurs?)
    > 2. Is it helping speed wise if I use one physical drive only for my Windows
    > OS,
    > a 2nd physical drive for my Program Files and a 3d physical drive for my
    > Data saving?


    Likely... But it will depend on your usage profile. There is no
    cost-effective, one-size-fits-all solution.


    >
    > ABOUT OS:
    > 1. I know there is a separate Windows XP available for 64-bit. What do the
    > 64
    > bit stand for?


    Biggest difference for 64 bits programs is their ability to use more
    than 4Gb of (virtual) memory. Not very useful in a "personal" computer,
    unless you are running a secret nuclear research lab or are working on
    the next Google in the garage.

    > 2. Does the XP Pro have multi-processor capability built in?


    Yes.

    > 3. I use to hear really bad opinions about Windows Vista, that it really
    > sucks when it
    > comes to extended professional use. Any feedback?


    I know a big IT company which currently gives its employees PCs where
    Vista has been removed and replaced with XP Pro. So far no intent to
    move to Vista in a near future. By contrast, in that same company, XP
    displaced W2K in a bit under one year.

    > 4. And again and again, the eternal question, is a Mac still more reliable
    > than a PC ?


    Please don't feed the trolls.
     
    Ofnuts, Apr 11, 2008
    #4
  5. Bad Disciple

    Bad Disciple Guest

    "sandy58" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    On Apr 10, 9:39 am, "Bad Disciple" <> wrote:
    > Hello all,
    >
    > Last summer I posted questions about building a computer myself.
    > I received a lot of feedback. Meanwhile, a serious health problem in
    > the family occurred and prevented me from continuing. Now that things
    > are gladly under control, I come back to my computer issue.
    >
    > Given that some time passed, ......



    Go play in another playground, sonny. You can be fucking boring.


    If I don't ask these questions here, where else should I, pumpkin?
    'Fvcking' is NOT boring, don't you know that?
    Boring is the fact that your brains seem so much reduced...
    And if this is boring to you, pass it and play you balls, this may not be
    boring for you.

    BD
     
    Bad Disciple, Apr 11, 2008
    #5
  6. Bad Disciple

    HLS Guest

    "Bad Disciple" <> wrote in message news:47fdd261$0$692
    > 3. I use to hear really bad opinions about Windows Vista, that it really
    > sucks when it
    > comes to extended professional use. Any feedback?
    > 4. And again and again, the eternal question, is a Mac still more reliable
    > than a PC ?



    Vista, IMO, sucks elephant peni.

    I used to laugh at Apple. After Vista, I would have bought an Apple except
    for (1) the price, and (2) the availability of a decent Linux machine that
    will do everything I want,
    reliably.
     
    HLS, Apr 12, 2008
    #6
  7. Bad Disciple

    roadriderob Guest

    On Apr 11, 6:48 pm, "HLS" <> wrote:
    > "Bad Disciple" <> wrote in message news:47fdd261$0$692
    > > 3. I use to hear really bad opinions about Windows Vista, that it really
    > > sucks when it
    > > comes to extended professional use. Any feedback?
    > > 4. And again and again, the eternal question, is a Mac still more reliable
    > > than a PC ?

    >
    > Vista, IMO, sucks elephant peni.
    >
    > I used to laugh at Apple. After Vista, I would have bought an Apple except
    > for (1) the price, and (2) the availability of a decent Linux machine that
    > will do everything I want,
    > reliably.


    AMD x2 (a fast one) unless you like the bleeding edge :) - MSI
    motherboard - if you gotta ask about 32 or 64 bit go with 32 !
     
    roadriderob, Apr 12, 2008
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Patriot

    Building to Building wireless

    Patriot, Nov 4, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    570
    Walter Roberson
    Nov 4, 2003
  2. Tim Jacob

    Wireless building-to-building 101

    Tim Jacob, Feb 15, 2006, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    622
    =?Utf-8?B?dGFpcGFuNTQx?=
    Feb 17, 2006
  3. Beowulf

    Building a new computer with SATA

    Beowulf, May 9, 2004, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    477
    Scott Gardner
    May 10, 2004
  4. Happybattles

    Computer repair: can i fix this myself?

    Happybattles, Sep 10, 2006, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    559
  5. Jim
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    949
    Barb Bowman
    Oct 5, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page