I suck at building comps

[Hardyz]

So I just spent like 6 hours today trying to build a new comp.  I never built one of my own but always wanted to.  It is way too much effort for me.  Then I sent what I picked to my friend and he shot it down saying its not any good.  How do you guys know what is good and what isn't?  My friend is that guy who builds comps and upgrades comps like monthly.  Its the only thing he spends money on so I know he knows his stuff.  He said that my combo for a JetWay motherboard and an AMD processor was a horrible idea.  He said it'd work but just not smart.  I dunno why.  lol.  Oh I wish it was simple lol

[TrailMyx]

The few times I've been screwed when putting together a computer is when I cheap out on the motherboard.  I generally stick with MSI, Biostar and a couple others.  I've been boned by the smaller manufacturers.  Probably AMD isn't the problem; you still get a pretty good bang for the buck with them.  But computer rig building is an artform. 

[Hardyz]

The few times I've been screwed when putting together a computer is when I cheap out on the motherboard.  I generally stick with MSI, Biostar and a couple others.  I've been boned by the smaller manufacturers.  Probably AMD isn't the problem; you still get a pretty good bang for the buck with them.  But computer rig building is an artform. 

I'm starting to realize that.  Yeah AMD is the *bleep*...I like them way better than intel.  However, he just said the brand combo w/ AMD is a bad choice.  So I guess I have to find a different mother board

[Xclio]

I personally am a hardware junkie and definitally don't want to skimp on the Mobo or the processor.  Right now intel is stomping the living crap out of AMD in the processor market.  And believe me this isn't just an Intel love affair, I actually much prefer the AMD processors but from a pure performance aspect AMD's high end barely keeps up with the lower end quad cores that Intel is putting out.

I build a new computer on a regular basis and run multiple video cards water cooling and all kinds of other ridiculousness lol.  It is fun but it is definitally costly if you ever need help getting a rig speced out let me know and I would be glad to put something together for you.  Just need a price range really

[Konesky]

Hey Hardyz,

I'm also a computer nut although I wouldn't say I upgrade all that often (every few years). Theres 2 schools of thought, get the best bang for your buck today (mid-range performance) and upgrade more frequently... or upgrade once in a blue moon and go all out buying the most expensive stuff, I subscribe to the latter. I'll just say I've spent more than $700 on a video card more than once lol. It wasn't too long ago I built my most recent machine and it seems technology changes so much you need to start your research from scratch each time you build one.

I'm a big fan of AMD, in fact the last Intel I owned was the P90 chip that had the floating point error / rounding error... since then all have been AMD chips until now. Just like Xclio pointed out, Intel is not only pulling ahead in performance but they have finally come down in price to be very competitive making your choice a difficult one. Historically AMD has been able to keep up with Intel's speed closely (not quite as fast on the top end but close) and been a LOT cheaper... thats changing now though.

The best thing i can suggest is spend lots of time on the fourms, look up shootouts, compaire prices etc. and read up on items you're thinking about getting. Sometimes there's known driver issues or conflicts with particular hardware... Look for reviews items etc. Don't skimp on your Mobo, that is where you get to really choose what "options" are on your computer. If you a value minded consumer and looking to just use the PC for word processing and an 11 year old 2d game (UO), no sense going all out, get yourself a pre-built package or at least a Mobo with integrated features... I'm generally against integrated things like video however theres no sense over-buying for what your using the computer for.


Hard Drive Speed will affect boot and load times considerably (10,000 RPM drives like the Raptor load windows very fast)
Stay away from Vista if possible and I would suggest sticking with 32 bit to keep things simple
Video Card selection can be one of the most influential things on how fast your computer seems
More Ram Is Better up to a point... Don't skimp on ram but recognize there tends to be a problem with windows handling more than 2 gigs nicely (personal experience at least)
Intel / AMD doesnt matter, go on bang versus buck and remember this dictates motherboard.
Don't skimp on a motherboard, if you cant find the right mobo for your chip, find a new chip.
Integrated sound seems to be fine, all boards are standard with decent surround sound and no sense wasting $100 on a soundcard these days


All that said, after researching like hell for a few months I've got a great rig with a problem lol. Randombly after as soon as just 1 min up to as long as 6 hours, my computer either totally freezes or BSOD's or just reboots randomly. Not sure if its a conflict, harware failure, driver issue, ram, processor, HD... I'm stumped. I've run some programs to monitor for overheating etc. but haven't been able to suss out the problem yet. lol So what the hell do I know!

[Xclio]

Actually 64bit Vista is really nice I run it on my box and run as much ram as I could want   64bit resolves the 2GB ram issues that you were having and will easily accept as much ram as you can feed it.  As for Vista vs XP it really is a preference but Vista has really evolved alot since it's release and though it is a bit of a ram hog (utilizing 1GB at idle) if you are running the 64bit OS and have 4-8GB of ram it really isn't all that big of a deal.  Running Vista is definitally intensive though and if you dont' have a system that can truely handle it then it really isn't worth at which point just pick up a 64bit version of XP.

There has been alot of confusion in the market regarding 64 vs 32 bit operating systems.  99.9% of the 32bit written software to will run just fine on any 64bit OS.  The only stuff that I have found that won't run on a 64bit OS is stuff that was written for windows 95.  Also there are some drivers that used to be a bit fical but as long as you are willing to do a bit of effort and actually download the latest drivers and not just use what shipped with the CD you will be a much happier person

[TrailMyx]

Where you have to watch out with the 64-bit operating systems is driver-level support.  If you are used to that old printer and expect it to work in Vista-64, don't hold your breath.  I'm talking 64 bits here, so you might have problems with 64-bit WinXP.  I have quite a bit of pride in the knowledge I will NOT be purchasing Vista EVER.  Everytime I've been forced to use it has been under great distress and I'm always glad to get back to Win2003/WinXP or Linux.  I may give Windows another shot when they release their next instalment since it's supposed to be smaller and faster, but for now Vista will not receive any moola from me.

As I type now, I'm running Redhat Fedora 9 with 2 Win2003 VMs running, one with development for SUO, the other with SUO/UO and on my other monitor I have WoW running.  Slick.

[Xclio]

Yeah the older printers are definitally a problem with Vista as the companies opted not to put out new drivers for their older equipment thus forcing you to buy a new printer that was supported.  This is actually with all Vista applicatiosn and not just 64bit.