Building a computer from scratch

[Mosh]

I didn't even read any of this...I remember back in 1992 a guy telling me he could build me a system better than one you can buy...oh and that windows OP, don't use that, it sucks, we use D-R DOS....window will never run what you need, it is too slow .It was a 486DX.///Guess what, just get one from a good comp place and save your time, whatever you get is going to be slow in a year anyway! If you don't get a new comp every year you are behind the curve.

BTW computer geeks, don't even flame me cause you know in 3 months what you biuld will be old tech.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Thanks WWD,

What kind of processor do you run?

Sorry about that. Intel i5 Quad Core. I think my dad's is an i7, but don't hold me to that, I would have to look at his control panel to find out.

 

[Mosh]

My cell phone has more power than the computer I had just 10 years ago.....Thunder.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

I If you don't get a new comp every year you are behind the curve.

BTW computer geeks, don't even flame me cause you know in 3 months what you biuld will be old tech.

Not totaly true if you plan ahead. When my dad's computer was first built, he didn't have SSDs on there, now 6 months later he does. There is some flexibility, you just have to plan a head for it. For store bought computers, I would agree with you 100%, but there is some flexibility with custom computers.

 

[Custom_Grafx]

I didn't even read any of this...I remember back in 1992 a guy telling me he could build me a system better than one you can buy...oh and that windows OP, don't use that, it sucks, we use D-R DOS....window will never run what you need, it is too slow .It was a 486DX.///Guess what, just get one from a good comp place and save your time, whatever you get is going to be slow in a year anyway! If you don't get a new comp every year you are behind the curve.

BTW computer geeks, don't even flame me cause you know in 3 months what you biuld will be old tech.

Thanks Mosh - I agree and have been feeling that especially in the last year where I have grown a little and working with larger files etc.

The important thing then, is investing in something that's easy to transition from when the time comes? That's never really that hard though I guess if you just have your data organised well...

Also, if you're getting a new one every year, are you always getting the top of the line and paying accordingly, or do you go for mid range every year?

 

[Mosh]

I drop $3k in computers every year, just part of the deal to stay on top. And guess what, it is way easier than messing with some geek telling me what I need and this is better and this sucks. I donate old ones to a local charity, and they are like new to them, so I guess it is a win/win. I just hope I get all the porn all them before I give them up....

We have 4 systems going in the shop, we repalace about one a year, so our RIP only comps are 3 years old...well I guess 5 we have the office one too that is older and we don't up date it as much.....and the wharehouse one for inventory, but who cars about "Darell" and the wharehouse guys. So I guess he have 6 on the network...

 

[GAC05]

Mosh I thought you said you picked your systems up from Walmart in the same isle with the beer and shotguns. I didn't think Walmart sold anything that cost $3k,

wayne k
guam usa

 

[Mosh]

You ain't been to my Wal-Mart....it is "up-scale" ...check out Wal-mart.com, you can get about any system you want....

 

[choucove]

If you plan ahead, know what you are doing, you can spend your ideal budget (in this case you were speaking of $1,500 to $2,000) and get a new, powerful computer capable of handling all your tasks and last for the next three years. Not only that, but if you know what you're looking for, you can have the technology that is still cutting edge three years from now.

One thing to remember when you are looking at systems pre-built and off-the-shelf from stores like Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Staples, and the rest. You are getting computer systems that are at least one generation old already. You're buying old tech by going this route.

Just as an example. One business here in town that called me recently just picked up several "new" computers from Wal-Mart for their office in January. Wal-Mart told them these were the best computers in the store, and were Dell desktops with a monitor included costing $890 each. They bought three of them. Two months later they were running so slow that they called me to find out why. Came to find out these Dells were running Core 2 Duo processors (now two generations behind the most recent platform from Intel) with 3 GB of RAM on a very bloated installation of Windows 7 Home Premium. For their office tasks, 3 GB of RAM was enough, but it was all being used by the extra pre-installed junk from Dell that we just went through and did a fresh clean install of Windows 7 on each computer. For the same amount of money I could have built them a system with MUCH higher quality parts (manufacturer warranties from 3 to 7 years compared to the Dell standard 1 year), much higher performance (quad-core AMD Phenom II processor), and the latest generation instead of something that was replaced nearly three years ago.

There is a thread on here discussed not too long ago that answers a lot of your questions, Custom_Grafx, including recommendations on design computer systems within a range of budgets. The link to the discussion is here:

http://www.signs101.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77757

 

[Custom_Grafx]

If you plan ahead, know what you are doing, you can spend your ideal budget (in this case you were speaking of $1,500 to $2,000) and get a new, powerful computer capable of handling all your tasks and last for the next three years. Not only that, but if you know what you're looking for, you can have the technology that is still cutting edge three years from now.

One thing to remember when you are looking at systems pre-built and off-the-shelf from stores like Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Staples, and the rest. You are getting computer systems that are at least one generation old already. You're buying old tech by going this route.

Just as an example. One business here in town that called me recently just picked up several "new" computers from Wal-Mart for their office in January. Wal-Mart told them these were the best computers in the store, and were Dell desktops with a monitor included costing $890 each. They bought three of them. Two months later they were running so slow that they called me to find out why. Came to find out these Dells were running Core 2 Duo processors (now two generations behind the most recent platform from Intel) with 3 GB of RAM on a very bloated installation of Windows 7 Home Premium. For their office tasks, 3 GB of RAM was enough, but it was all being used by the extra pre-installed junk from Dell that we just went through and did a fresh clean install of Windows 7 on each computer. For the same amount of money I could have built them a system with MUCH higher quality parts (manufacturer warranties from 3 to 7 years compared to the Dell standard 1 year), much higher performance (quad-core AMD Phenom II processor), and the latest generation instead of something that was replaced nearly three years ago.

There is a thread on here discussed not too long ago that answers a lot of your questions, Custom_Grafx, including recommendations on design computer systems within a range of budgets. The link to the discussion is here:

http://www.signs101.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77757

Thanks for your time and for the link Choucove - will check it out

 

[phototec]

UEFI is more user friendly..)

That is pretty interesting, I spent Sunday afternoon with my son-in-law in Austin, who works at Dell, and he was just telling me about UEFI. He has been in training on it for the last week, he says, this is going to be pretty big, and much more user friendly then BIOS. I can't say much more right now, companies like DELL don't want to be stuck with older computers, so they try and keep the lid on what they are working on until they can move the old stock, if you know what I mean.

 

[Custom_Grafx]

Thanks again Choucove, I had a look at the thread and am putting together my shopping list.

My supplier has 2 brands of SSD below;

Kingston 2.5” SNV125 30G / SV100S2 64G / 128G
Patriot PS-100 64M Buffer 32G / 64G / 128G

The Patriot is around $100 more on the 128G.

Is there a noticable difference there with performance?

Thanks again.

 

[choucove]

Unfortunately, both of those SSD drive types are older models (no longer being manufactured or sold by major distributors) and both have been known for poor performance and reliability.

I haven't used either of the Kingston or Patriot brands personally, but from comparisons, benchmarks, and reviews over the past couple years these drives just aren't worth the money. The Patriot drives are known for being a little faster than the Kingston drives (which are not any faster than a good quality standard hard drive) but have known issues for failures.

Not all SSD drives are created equal, and in a market with such new technology like this I can only recommend sticking with the newer generation of drives (which rectify a lot of problems that the older generation of drives have), have more support and higher quality standards, and offer several times more performance than older generation drives. The only two brands of drives that I have used personally are the top two brands in SSD storage technology today, and that is Intel and OCZ. Both have a proven track record with quality and support, and both are going to offer the best performance and compatibility and support available. There are other brands that make some good drives, too, such as Crucial and Kingston, but it can be harder to pick through the lines of what's available to really find the ones that work best and have the best track record and which ones are cheap low-performance drives. On the other hand, with OCZ pretty much anything in the Vertex or Agility line is going to give you unbeatable performance and quality. Intel also has several high-performance drives out there that offer great performance.

When it comes down to it, if the two drive types you have listed here are your only option, I'd say don't even do it. You'd probably end up spending money on old generation parts that would give you more of a headache or disappointment than putting the money into more RAM, a better power supply, a better processor, etc. that will make a better system. I'd recommend then instead to go with the Western Digital Black 640GB SATAIII 7,200rpm 64MB Cache hard drive. It's about $70 through newegg and I've used them on dozens of computers, they offer not only great performance (up to 135MB/sec throughput which is better than the Kingston SSD you listed above) but more capacity and a 5 year warranty.