# Off-Topic Discussion > The Lounge > Tech Talk >  >  Dakotahnok's computer project.

## dakotahnok

*Hello everyone! Im just starting on the project of building a computer. Right now im just reasearching parts. It will probably be a while before i get the parts. Anyway do you guys have any suggestions or advice? I plan on using this thread for all my questions and i will update you with any progress. .*

----------


## jblb2424

I heard its very difficult to build a computer from scatch. I applaud you for your effort xD The only advice i can give to you is don't give up because the end result will be so rewarding!

----------


## tommo

> I heard its very difficult to build a computer from scatch. I applaud you for your effort xD The only advice i can give to you is don't give up because the end result will be so rewarding!



 Pre-assembled chip boards are not scratch.

And it's piss easy.  They're basically self-explanatory.

What are you planning to use the computer for dakotah?  And how much money do you want to spend?

----------


## dakotahnok

*I am not doing it from scratch. XD like tommo said... its pretty easy for someone who knows a little about computers. Hell using the internet anyone could probably do it. 

I want a good computer! Haha. Im looking for a good computer for photoshop mainly. Im looking to spend up to a grand. But cheaper is better. Gaming isnt important to me.*

----------


## tommo

I could give you the specs for mine when I get back from work.
I _just_ built it and it was around $1000, including screen (which isn't the _best_,  you'd probably ideally get a better one).  It would probably be less  for you in America if you go to one of those Microcenters.  Very good  computer for games and Photoshop.

Ok, I got:
Antec 100 - Case (You can spend fuckloads on cases, but IMO it's largely  for looks, and most of them don't really look that good anyway IMO, the  airflow in this is impeccable)

Asrock z77 Pro4-M - Motherboard  (Has a few USB3 slots, which will come in handy for gigantic .psd's)

8GB Kingston (1333) - RAM (You'll probably want 16GB if you're doing  heavy Photoshop work plus other programs like Illustrator, InDesign,  Blender, move editing whatever)
Don't bother with better brands or anything, doesn't make a difference.

Intel Core i5-3570k - CPU

Sapphire HD7850 2GB GDDR5 - GPU

And the 21.5" Samsung (numbers) LED screen  ::lol:: 
Oh god why can't they come up with names for them....
Basically this one, but not exactly. http://www.samsung.com/au/consumer/p.../LS22B350HS/XY
I _highly_ recommend Samsung screens.
It's very hard to find reviews on any kind of monitor, so I'm emphasising how good their monitors are for you.
Especially for the price.
Look for a Samsung LED one and you will not be disappoint.

EDIT: Oh yeah and the HDD, I just got a Seagate Barracuda 500GB.
I don't need any more than that.  And personally I don't think SSD's are worth the money yet.
It's still around 5 times the price for the same space.



Be warned, you can go massively overboard, I mean you could get the total best specs, but it isn't worth it most of the time.
I think this computer is "just right" for your needs.  I chose the not_-too_-new components, so the prices were already reduced compared to the newest ones.
And I didn't use i7 coz nothing using that many fucking cores yet.  And by the time it does these buildable computers will probably be obsolete.

The only people who need the newest stuff are people doing 3D gaming on the newest games, which I was going to but it costs WAY too much.

Good luck  :smiley: 

Also post pics when you're done  ::D:

----------


## dakotahnok

*Thanks so much tommo. I will reply more in depth when i get my computer on. Im on my phone and half the screen doesnt work. 

What do you think of this CPU? It seems as if you like intel. So it would be nice to hear what you have to say. Newegg.com - AMD FX-4100 Zambezi 3.6GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor FD4100WMGUSBX 

And this one. Newegg.com - AMD FX-8120 Zambezi 3.1GHz Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8120FRGUBOX

With such a cheap cpu i doubt it makes full use of all 8 cores. Im leaning towards the first one.*

----------


## Lahzo

If you need any help let me know. I've built dozens of computers from scratch. If you want to PM me, I could give you my skype and I could walk you through matching the parts!  :smiley:

----------


## LieutenantCloud

Custom building PCs is actually hilariously easy nowadays. 

- PC Parts Picker
- PC Parts Picker, UK Site

^, that site's pretty awesome if you want to get a feel for the prices of the various components, as well as compare from various online stores. It also makes sure, to some extent, that the parts you choose are compatible. (But I'd double check if I were you. )

edit: fixed link

----------


## tommo

> Thanks so much tommo. I will reply more in depth when i get my computer on. Im on my phone and half the screen doesnt work. 
> 
> What do you think of this CPU? It seems as if you like intel. So it would be nice to hear what you have to say. Newegg.com - AMD FX-4100 Zambezi 3.6GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor FD4100WMGUSBX 
> 
> And this one. Newegg.com - AMD FX-8120 Zambezi 3.1GHz Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8120FRGUBOX
> 
> With such a cheap cpu i doubt it makes full use of all 8 cores. Im leaning towards the first one.



Yeah I wouldn't get the second one.  But also the first one will only be 3.8 with overclocking.

----------


## LieutenantCloud

> Yeah I wouldn't get the second one.  But also the first one will only be 3.8 with overclocking.



You shouldn't compare solely by clock speeds. I'd choose the second, it has twice as many cores and it's maximum clock speed is 4Ghz, if overclocked. 

Plus it does significantly better in benchmarks; FX-4100 vs the FX-8120

Tbh, I'd get an Intel CPU if I were you. An Intel 2500K, or 3570k (if you want Ivy Bridge) sounds good for what you need, it's a pretty strong processor without the heavy price tag you get from i7s. Plus it's overclockable like crazy.

----------


## tommo

And the Intel Ivy Bridges are efficient too.

Anyway, I wouldn't choose the second one coz 8 cores will rarely be useful.

You don't need 4.0Ghz and 8 cores for Photoshop.  Or any graphics things really.
3D stuff maybe, but graphics cards are more important.  And the one I have does fine.
I was just using the CryEngine Sandbox when I first got this computer and it runs seamlessly.

----------


## LieutenantCloud

> You don't need 4.0Ghz and 8 cores for Photoshop.  Or any graphics things really.
> 3D stuff maybe, but graphics cards are more important.  And the one I have does fine.
> I was just using the CryEngine Sandbox when I first got this computer and it runs seamlessly.



But multiple cores, WILL be utilized by Photoshop. So it will definitely run faster. 

For $50 it's worth it for double the number of cores, and future-proofability. 

But yeah, I still agree that you should get an Intel CPU.

----------


## Spartiate

Get the intel chip.  AMD chips have a bazillion cores because their technology is severely outclassed by newer intel chips and it's the only way for them to stay competitive.  I'd recommend 16 GB of RAM for photoshop, RAM is cheap.

SSDs are getting to 1$/GB and make a HUGE performance increase for accessing and writing files (boot up, copying files, saving/opening, etc.)  They also have no moving parts and are thus much more reliable.  If you get one of those ancient spinning platter hard drives, make sure you back up your photos somewhere else.

For photography I'd recommend an IPS monitor.  It'll put you over budget (they go for about 500$ and up) but they are the standard due to their excellent colour accuracy (especially when viewed from an angle).

----------


## tommo

> But multiple cores, WILL be utilized by Photoshop. So it will definitely run faster. 
> 
> For $50 it's worth it for double the number of cores, and future-proofability. 
> 
> But yeah, I still agree that you should get an Intel CPU.



 I don't see any reason why it would use 8 cores.
It wouldn't need it.  There's no advantage.

If you were running other programs at the same time, they would use the rest of the available cores so Photoshop wouldn't slow down.

Anyway, we all agree to go Intel.  So it doesn't matter much.

Where do you get your $1/GB SSD's Spart?  Cheapest I've seen is just over $2/GB.

And yeah, if you can get that, it'll make a massive difference for huge files.  I remember having to wait up to 20 minutes for some psd's to just load or save.

----------


## LieutenantCloud

> I don't see any reason why it would use 8 cores.
> It wouldn't need it.  There's no advantage.



This is incorrect. Photoshop has taken advantage of multiple cores and proper multithreading since Photoshop 3.0. Each major update shows increases support for multiple cores. The advantage is optimisations and increase in speed, hence, the future-proof ability. 

But I guess we'll agree to disagree. Besides, at leasts we agree that Intel is preferable.  :smiley:

----------


## dakotahnok

*At lieutenantCloud I think that he knows that multiple cores will help photoshop, but he is saying that EIGHT is unnecessary. It wouldn't benefit from that many cores as opposed to four. 

I have decided on 16 gb ram, postponing the SSD until I get more money in the future, and getting an Intel CPU. I have not decided on which intel yet. 

Some questions. 
Should I get a case that has a built in power supply? Or should I buy them separate. It appears like I can save some money with it built in. But I also know how important the power supply is. The built in one is 550w. 

Can photoshop run on Linux? I looked this up and found inconclusive results. 

After installing Linux how do you get rid of windows without also getting rid of Linux. They are both on the same hard drive.*

----------


## tommo

AW shit.... just lost this post trying to check which PSU I have lol  Damn power cord came out when I moved my computer.

Ok.... basically, get a case with a PSU if you KNOW it has the PSU you want.
Most of the time they just say 550W PSU built-in but don't tell you which brand or anything.
Bad PSU's can fuck the rest of your components up.  So you want a good quality one.

I can only vouch for Corsair being outstanding.  I have a Corsair CX500 V2.

Just check the wattage of all the components you're going to get (on the manufacturer website), and that will tell you what size PSU you have.  You shouldn't need over 500W unless you are going to crossfire two or more GPU's.

I've never used linux.

----------


## LieutenantCloud

> At lieutenantCloud I think that he knows that multiple cores will help photoshop, but he is saying that EIGHT is unnecessary. It wouldn't benefit from that many cores as opposed to four.



I guess I must've misunderstood then, sorry. 

As for your power supply, I suggest you don't go with case included PSUs, they can be generic brands and terrible quality. Plus PSUs don't come that expensive, so I'd definitely go with one bought separately. 

I'm not an expert on Linux, but I believe there's something called WINE, which you install on Linux that allows you to run Windows applications. I don't think there has been an officially compatible version of Photoshop released for Linux though. 

Is there any reason you want to run Linux anyway? Windows would be less troublesome.

----------


## khh

> I can only vouch for Corsair being outstanding.  I have a Corsair CX500 V2.



Yeah, Corsair has a good reputation. Personally I've got MIST, and that's been excellent as well.





> postponing the SSD until I get more money in the future



Just don't forget it. Best upgrade I gave my computer.





> Can photoshop run on Linux? I looked this up and found inconclusive results.



No. To run a recent version of Photoshop on Linux, you'll need to run it in a VM with Windows.





> After installing Linux how do you get rid of windows without also getting rid of Linux. They are both on the same hard drive.



You get rid of Windows when installing Linux. But it is possible to fix it afterwards too. Boot up a live CD, open gparted, delete the windows partition(s), expand the Linux partition(s) to fill the entire harddrive, reinstall GRUB.

----------


## ccrinbama

reddit.com/r/buildapc is also useful.

But yea, like everyone has said, building a custom pc is very, very easy these day.
The components of my current pc mostly came from newegg.com, which has some pretty good sales if you keep an eye on the site daily.

If you can hold out until cyber monday and black friday, you'll get those super discounts.

----------


## dakotahnok

*





 Originally Posted by khh



You get rid of Windows when installing Linux. But it is possible to fix it afterwards too. Boot up a live CD, open gparted, delete the windows partition(s), expand the Linux partition(s) to fill the entire harddrive, reinstall GRUB.



Its still on there though. When i boot my computer it ask if i want to run windows or ubuntu. I just want to get rid of windows completely.*

----------


## Supernova

> No. To run a recent version of Photoshop on Linux, you'll need to run it in a VM with Windows.



WineHQ - Run Windows applications on Linux, BSD, Solaris and Mac OS X

Also let me just say, anyone who can operate windows can easily learn to operate ubuntu.  You'll probably have to do some googling from time to time, but with the amount of documentation and discussion available online most questions are easy to answer.

Also, I'll leave you all with a thought:

PassMark - AMD FX-8120 Eight-Core - Price performance comparison

PassMark - Intel Core i7-3820 @ 3.60GHz - Price performance comparison

why does the i7 cost twice as much?

----------


## ccrinbama

> Its still on there though. When i boot my computer it ask if i want to run windows or ubuntu. I just want to get rid of windows completely.



Format the partition with windows on it.

----------


## khh

> WineHQ - Run Windows applications on Linux, BSD, Solaris and Mac OS X



Apparently Wine has been working on their photoshop support. When I checked last year, all after 7.0 were red.





> Its still on there though. When i boot my computer it ask if i want to run windows or ubuntu. I just want to get rid of windows completely.







> But it is possible to fix it afterwards too. Boot up a live CD, open gparted, delete the windows partition(s), expand the Linux partition(s) to fill the entire harddrive, reinstall GRUB.



This.

----------


## tommo

> Also, I'll leave you all with a thought:
> 
> PassMark - AMD FX-8120 Eight-Core - Price performance comparison
> 
> PassMark - Intel Core i7-3820 @ 3.60GHz - Price performance comparison
> 
> why does the i7 cost twice as much?



Coz it's far superior?

----------


## Supernova

> Coz it's far superior?



Well, if passmark's tests are relatively accurate, it is slightly better - certainly not $150 better.





> Apparently Wine has been working on their photoshop support. When I checked last year, all after 7.0 were red.



Eh, well that's a bummer.  I would just use GIMP, but all I would be using it for is probably very basic in comparison, so I dont know what the difference is in terms of the quality of the more advanced functions.

----------


## dakotahnok

*@khh haha sorry. I was confused on your post until you re posted it. I think I just read it wrong. I will try that, thank you.*

----------


## tommo

> Well, if passmark's tests are relatively accurate, it is slightly better - certainly not $150 better.



Yeah, but the newest technology is always marked up extra, regardless of how _much_ better it is than the previous versions.
That's why it's rarely a good idea to buy the newest things, just buy the previous version and you save 50% and still get better and better technology every time you upgrade.
Also don't have to worry about bugs because they're mostly fixed by the time you get it.

That is, unless one wants to support an upcoming industry like solar panels for example.

----------


## Supernova

> Yeah, but the newest technology is always marked up extra, regardless of how _much_ better it is than the previous versions.
> That's why it's rarely a good idea to buy the newest things, just buy the previous version and you save 50% and still get better and better technology every time you upgrade.
> Also don't have to worry about bugs because they're mostly fixed by the time you get it.
> 
> That is, unless one wants to support an upcoming industry like solar panels for example.



Here's the only $150 intel i found on newegg, a core i3:

PassMark - Intel Core i3-2130 @ 3.40GHz - Price performance comparison

----------


## dutchraptor

The way I assemble my Computers is by just looking online for some real good computers that cost around 1500, take down a list of all the components, then buy them all my self for about 500 less. Easy and no need to start looking up compatability problems etc just assemble it like a puzzle.

Edit: I get all my components from germany because for some reason they cost 20% less than the rest of europe?

----------


## Aeolus

I built my first recently, after about a year of deciding I wanted to do it. It was good that I didn't rush into it though, I got more research done. Keep researching until you're sure you know what you're doing is right. I'm no expert now but I knew enough to make a solid build for cheap.

----------


## LieutenantCloud

> I built my first recently, after about a year of deciding I wanted to do it. It was good that I didn't rush into it though, I got more research done. Keep researching until you're sure you know what you're doing is right. I'm no expert now but I knew enough to make a solid build for cheap.



This. Don't skimp on research. With a lot of time and research, you'll have a build that's both cheaper and more appropriate for your needs.

----------


## Taosaur

Re: SSDs and HDDs, it doesn't have to be an either/or question, especially if you have a large data collection. You want the SSD for your _system drive_, where you will keep your operating system(s) and your most used programs. The reason SSDs make such a big difference in the perceived speed of a machine is that programs stored on them (including a booting OS) launch almost instantly. You get relatively little advantage from storing your actual data files on SSD. If you're not a gamer, you would probably be fine with a 128GB or even 64GB SSD. Add the installed size of your chosen OS to the size of your current Program Files folder and multiply the result by 1.2 (or 1.5 or 2 if you want room to grow) to get an idea of what you'd actually need. For your data, get a 1 or 2TB HDD.

----------


## tommo

I've found SSD's are a lot cheaper than I thought.  I'll probably get one soon too.

Also, TB HDD's, Personally I wouldn't bother with.  I got a 500GB because by the time I've got that much crap, SSD's will be cheap as chips.  Probably anyway.  Depends how much crap you have though, just the best option for me.

----------


## khh

> Re: SSDs and HDDs, it doesn't have to be an either/or question, especially if you have a large data collection. You want the SSD for your _system drive_, where you will keep your operating system(s) and your most used programs. The reason SSDs make such a big difference in the perceived speed of a machine is that programs stored on them (including a booting OS) launch almost instantly. You get relatively little advantage from storing your actual data files on SSD. If you're not a gamer, you would probably be fine with a 128GB or even 64GB SSD. Add the installed size of your chosen OS to the size of your current Program Files folder and multiply the result by 1.2 (or 1.5 or 2 if you want room to grow) to get an idea of what you'd actually need. For your data, get a 1 or 2TB HDD.



Except in a laptop. There it's either or.





> I've found SSD's are a lot cheaper than I thought.  I'll probably get one soon too.
> 
> Also, TB HDD's, Personally I wouldn't bother with.  I got a 500GB because by the time I've got that much crap, SSD's will be cheap as chips.  Probably anyway.  Depends how much crap you have though, just the best option for me.



I've got 5.5 TB of storage on my computer, yet less than 1 TB of free space. You can never have too much space. Or too much crap.

But SSDs are definitively worth it.

----------


## tommo

> I've got 5.5 TB of storage on my computer, yet less than 1 TB of free space.



  ::shock:: ....
Seriously?  What the fuck do you have on there?

----------


## Taosaur

> I've got 5.5 TB of storage on my computer, yet less than 1 TB of free space. You can never have too much space. Or too much crap.



Yerp, I've got about 3TB on three drives with 800GB free. A lot of it is 720p video, and some of it is redundant backup. I use external USB drives for most of my data, and they rarely slow me down.

----------


## mcwillis

I built a PC for a friend of mine recently.  His old pc, i5 processor and 4 Gb's of DDR2 ram were not up to the job for what he wanted to do.  He is a musician and writes a lot of music and video on Nuendo so I ordered some new components.  He already had the case with two 120mm fans, one in the front and one in the back.  He could have done with a couple of new hard drives but due to a shortage of cash we used the exisitng ones.  I donated a spare, decent gfx card I had kicking around for the job as well.  We opted for buying an 8 core processor and 8 Gb's of DDR3 ram.  It is running really well now, and fast too.  When he saves up some more money I will upgrade the heatsink on the CPU and install a solid state drive for the OS and software and place all his data on a normal mechanical hard drive.  Oh and I installed a core tuner software so that he can assign certain vsti's in nuendo to certain cores to get the most out of it.  I reckon it would run a project with 16 tracks using 16 separate Spectrasonics Omnisphere synths assigned to each track  :smiley:

----------


## dutchraptor

> I built a PC for a friend of mine recently.  His old pc, i5 processor and 4 Gb's of DDR2 ram were not up to the job for what he wanted to do.  He is a musician and writes a lot of music and video on Nuendo so I ordered some new components.  He already had the case with two 120mm fans, one in the front and one in the back.  He could have done with a couple of new hard drives but due to a shortage of cash we used the exisitng ones.  I donated a spare, decent gfx card I had kicking around for the job as well.  We opted for buying an 8 core processor and 8 Gb's of DDR3 ram.  It is running really well now, and fast too.  When he saves up some more money I will upgrade the heatsink on the CPU and install a solid state drive for the OS and software and place all his data on a normal mechanical hard drive.  Oh and I installed a core tuner software so that he can assign certain vsti's in nuendo to certain cores to get the most out of it.  I reckon it would run a project with 16 tracks using 16 separate Spectrasonics Omnisphere synths assigned to each track



Woah you really think 8gb of ram can handle 16 spectrasonics omnisphere synths, I don't think so. Each one on its own is already between 50-600 megabytes, not to mention that windows uses a good 1-2 gb ram and nuendo itself. When I built my cousin a sound production pc I chose 16gb and an ssd (just for the amazing starting up speed). I picked the i7 3770k as processor, I found that with that he would probably never have to upgrade his computer  :tongue2: . Which processor did you get? 
Also I like the sound of that core tuner software, what is it, how does it function?

----------


## mcwillis

As I said I only reckon it will do it, not that it will do it, and even if it does it will be slow as hell.  You are probably right though on reflection.  My friend only had £200 to play with so we went for the AMD FX-8150.

The software is:

Ashampoo® Core Tuner 2 - Overview

----------


## dakotahnok

*Just so you guys know I am still working on this. I just need a couple hundred more dollars and I will start buying what I need. 

I think I am getting a laptop for Christmas. Will a intel core5 with turbo boost be strong enough to power photoshop and games? Personally I would say yes, but I would like your opinions.*

----------


## Taosaur

I've been thinking about building a low-power machine for my mom, possibly inside the chassis and using the power supply of the 2004 Dell I handed down to her. Does anyone have thoughts on whether there would be any compatibility issues between an older power supply and a newer board? I don't think any of those connection standards have changed, but I was never that familiar with them to begin with. On the one hand I could just add a new PSU to the budget, but the current one has been such a workhorse for 8 frigging years that I'm tempted to let it ride. 

I'm looking at a build with one of AMD's combined CPU + GPU processors on a micro ATX board with all modern interface standards and a smaller SSD. As long as it's not starved for RAM, it should be more than enough machine for her Facebook games, browsing, and occasional streaming.

----------


## dutchraptor

> I've been thinking about building a low-power machine for my mom, possibly inside the chassis and using the power supply of the 2004 Dell I handed down to her. Does anyone have thoughts on whether there would be any compatibility issues between an older power supply and a newer board? I don't think any of those connection standards have changed, but I was never that familiar with them to begin with. On the one hand I could just add a new PSU to the budget, but the current one has been such a workhorse for 8 frigging years that I'm tempted to let it ride. 
> 
> I'm looking at a build with one of AMD's combined CPU + GPU processors on a micro ATX board with all modern interface standards and a smaller SSD. As long as it's not starved for RAM, it should be more than enough machine for her Facebook games, browsing, and occasional streaming.



I would keep in the old one, I've always found psu's the most reliable part of the computer. Good choice on the AMD cpu, don't really see the point in the ssd, you always want at least 40gb for the OS partition and such a large ssd would only be a waste of money if you are using it for facebook games.





> Just so you guys know I am still working on this. I just need a couple hundred more dollars and I will start buying what I need. 
> 
> I think I am getting a laptop for Christmas. Will a intel core5 with turbo boost be strong enough to power photoshop and games? Personally I would say yes, but I would like your opinions.



In general yes, my old cpu and radeon saphire 4870 are still playing modded skyrim at 35 fps and photoshop without any lag so no problem there.

----------


## Taosaur

> I would keep in the old one, I've always found psu's the most reliable part of the computer. Good choice on the AMD cpu, don't really see the point in the ssd, you always want at least 40gb for the OS partition and such a large ssd would only be a waste of money if you are using it for facebook games.



Well, I'm thinking the build will be SSD-only and wanted to leave some headroom. My mom doesn't really download or install much of anything, but with anything smaller than 64GB it would only take one or two large applications (say my sister or I wanted to install a real PC game while we were visiting) to run up against the ceiling. Still, most of the games I'd put on there are classics like SMAC or HoMM3 which don't take up much space... It just depends what my budget looks like when it comes build time. There's not that huge of a price difference between the really small SSDs and something around 100GB.

----------


## dutchraptor

> Well, I'm thinking the build will be SSD-only and wanted to leave some headroom. My mom doesn't really download or install much of anything, but with anything smaller than 64GB it would only take one or two large applications (say my sister or I wanted to install a real PC game while we were visiting) to run up against the ceiling. Still, most of the games I'd put on there are classics like SMAC or HoMM3 which don't take up much space... It just depends what my budget looks like when it comes build time. There's not that huge of a price difference between the really small SSDs and something around 100GB.



There is little use in having an ssd for general applications other than a quick startup speed, there is however a great hard drive by seagate, part ssd and part hdd Newegg.com - Seagate Momentus XT ST95005620AS 500GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache 2.5&#34; SATA 3.0Gb&#47;s with NCQ Solid State Hybrid Drive -Bare Drive
Roughly the same price as a ssd but with 500gb extra space. I personally don't see the point in getting a ssd only build as it really has little advantage over a normal build.

----------


## Taosaur

> There is little use in having an ssd for general applications other than a quick startup speed,



Which is a huge advantage in terms of user experience. Depending on the application, you'll see a lot of "loading" time eliminated after startup, too. You absolutely want your browser and most played games on SSD, for instance. There are also noise and power considerations vs. HDD. For someone with modest storage needs, there's no real reason to drop a HDD into the mix, except maybe as a backup drive. The only advantage of HDD is $/GB, which becomes less relevant as fewer $s and GBs are involved.

That hybrid drive is basically just a marked-up HDD with a 4GB thumb drive strapped on. Hopefully the software is a little more sophisticated than Windows Ready Boost, but it's the same basic principle.

----------


## dutchraptor

> Which is a huge advantage in terms of user experience. Depending on the application, you'll see a lot of "loading" time eliminated after startup, too. You absolutely want your browser and most played games on SSD, for instance. There are also noise and power considerations vs. HDD. For someone with modest storage needs, there's no real reason to drop a HDD into the mix, except maybe as a backup drive. The only advantage of HDD is $/GB, which becomes less relevant as fewer $s and GBs are involved.
> 
> That hybrid drive is basically just a marked-up HDD with a 4GB thumb drive strapped on. Hopefully the software is a little more sophisticated than Windows Ready Boost, but it's the same basic principle.



Whatever you want man, if you don't need the space then the ssd will do fine, probably better for the environment anyways.

----------


## khh

> Whatever you want man, if you don't need the space then the ssd will do fine, probably better for the environment anyways.



If you meet the ceiling with an SSD, it's easy to buy an HDD and tuck in there for more storage.

----------


## Taosaur

> If you meet the ceiling with an SSD, it's easy to buy an HDD and tuck in there for more storage.



Yep, or I could hand down one of the HDDs I've outgrown. But again, my mom never installs or downloads anything, so even a 64GB SSD would probably be adequate. I'd just rather spend the $20 to $50 and not have to worry about it. I saw a 120GB SSD for $80 on Newegg yesterday, and almost pulled the trigger on a 256GB one @$150 for myself.

----------


## tommo

> Just so you guys know I am still working on this. I just need a couple hundred more dollars and I will start buying what I need. 
> 
> I think I am getting a laptop for Christmas. Will a intel core5 with turbo boost be strong enough to power photoshop and games? Personally I would say yes, but I would like your opinions.



What the hell is turbo boost?  Marketing gimmick?





> I've been thinking about building a low-power machine for my mom, possibly inside the chassis and using the power supply of the 2004 Dell I handed down to her. Does anyone have thoughts on whether there would be any compatibility issues between an older power supply and a newer board? I don't think any of those connection standards have changed, but I was never that familiar with them to begin with. On the one hand I could just add a new PSU to the budget, but the current one has been such a workhorse for 8 frigging years that I'm tempted to let it ride.



Only problem I can think of is it might die or break in some way and fry the whole computer.  8 years is a fairly long life for a PSU iirc, it may be ready to kick it.  PSU's are pretty cheap really, and the new ones are far more energy efficient, just get a really small Corsair?
Up to you I spose, I'd probably get a new one though.

----------


## Taosaur

> Only problem I can think of is it might die or break in some way and fry the whole computer.  8 years is a fairly long life for a PSU iirc, it may be ready to kick it.  PSU's are pretty cheap really, and the new ones are far more energy efficient, just get a really small Corsair?
> Up to you I spose, I'd probably get a new one though.



Yeah, I'm actually moving away from the idea of reusing the case just because of logistics--my mom is one state over and it would be much easier to build the machine at my place and bring it to her intact, rather than disassemble and reassemble her current PC on Christmas day. I'm looking at a case that includes a PSU, but just because the case looks quality for the price. I might still want a separate PSU.

----------


## dutchraptor

> What the hell is turbo boost?  Marketing gimmick?



Basically it's just a little program intel wrote which automatically overclocks your CPU when you need the power, it aint really special and I heard some people got better speeds just overclocking it themselves. Just a fancy name so they can get some extra dollars.

----------


## Taosaur

Final loadout on Mom's new PC for anyone who's interested: AMD 2nd gen A8 APU (CPU+GPU) on a lower end AsRock board. I sacrificed a second pair of RAM slots and HDMI-out to get a combo deal and keep costs down, and because they applied more to speculative future uses than how my mom actually uses her PC now. Also, I could always throw in a discrete GPU or tuner card for HDMI later. I went with a different case from the same manufacturer, and found a lot of positive reviews of their included PSUs so I'll just roll with that. RAM will be 8GB of 1600 speed with average latencies--about the same as what I have in my own machine. I'm still hoping to get a good deal on a 120ish GB SSD, but I missed Newegg's $50 (and then $65) deal on a Kingston HyperX by minutes, and TigerDirect's $60 deal on the same drive by an hour or two. I did score a 240GB HyperX for my own system, so I may just hand down my current 500GB HDD system drive. The whole near-instant-boot thing sure does add some wow-factor, though :/ 

I'm thinking I'll bring home the 8-yr-old P4 system to set up as a Linux box, which I'm presently lacking.

----------

