Sure, should work the same as any USB thing you boot from.
-
Our friends from AlphaCentauri2.info are in need of technical assistance. If you have experience with the LAMP stack and some hours to spare, please help them out and post here.
desktop PC building guides
- Thread starter Perfection
- Start date
Sure, should work the same as any USB thing you boot from.
Perfection
The Great Head.
That's probably doable then, I kinda like the internal Blu-Ray just because it minimizes the amount of crap I have lying around, but since I so infrequently use disks, I could just as well keep it in storage and break it out when I can.
As for graphics, I will often game in dual monitors if the game supports it. Having support from graphics card would be nice. I expect to upgrade monitors in the future.
As for graphics, I will often game in dual monitors if the game supports it. Having support from graphics card would be nice. I expect to upgrade monitors in the future.
You'll probably want to do a bit of research on dual monitor gaming depending on how you want to do it.
Games that natively support dual monitors in a smart fashion are exceptionally rare (Supreme Commander is the only one I can think of) - for just spanning games across you'll be using either eyefinity, or whatever the nvidia thing is, both of which I know pretty much nothing about.
Games that natively support dual monitors in a smart fashion are exceptionally rare (Supreme Commander is the only one I can think of) - for just spanning games across you'll be using either eyefinity, or whatever the nvidia thing is, both of which I know pretty much nothing about.
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
I know that games that use mini-maps tend to be moddable for dual monitor so the 2nd monitor does the minimap. I've seen that done live for World of Tanks.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Zack
99% hot gas
Well, wanting to support healthy competition is a reason. AMD processors are mostly competitive at their pricepoints, they just don't have anything on the high end.
For my next desktop build, I'll be using whatever the next processor that either AMD or Intel releases with >4 cores and <$500.
Perfection
The Great Head.
I've been retooling to an intel chipset version that can be seen here:
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/zBbJ
Any input would be welcome.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/zBbJ
Any input would be welcome.
Zack
99% hot gas
OCZ's have a bad reputation, but it's probably not anything to get too worried about.
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
Nice that you can get an i5 (locked) that cheap. Hopefully that will meet your software computing needs for rendering and CAD.
I wonder if 500Watts will cut it. It is an energy rated PSU, so I guess it's WYSIWYG, but that video card sounds power hungry. Maybe 650 Watts would be better?
No expertise on the SSD, nor recent experience with OCZ. One bad experience usually makes me stay away a while ( few years) though.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,304
3.7 GB for the kernel‽‽‽ What OS are you running? That makes Vista look positively lightweight. I'd expect closer to 1 GB for actual OS/driver/basic software requirements in a modern OS, unless Windows 8 uses way more RAM than 7. The gig for VirtualBox is also something that most people won't have running most of the time. So that takes what I'd expect closer to 4 GB with Firefox having tons of tabs open and Photoshop using that much (no idea if that's a realistic amount as I don't use it). Which makes 8 GB seem like a sensible starting point for most purposes - although to be fair RAM is cheap these days.
The optical drive is really a matter of preference. I find it convenient to have it built-in, and not having to worry about plugging it in, having it fall off of something, etc., especially with a desktop, and they are dirt cheap. External may be nice if you'll be sharing it with another computer, but I'd only go that route if you actually plan to share it. Otherwise, it'll likely be more expensive.
I don't see anything wrong with legacy ports, and they're a bonus if you plan to use them. I can see that point that if you don't plan to use them, more up-to-the-moment ports are preferable. Basically, I'd say if you can find one that's comparable to the others but has serial, go for it - and if not, then go with the adaptor. No adaptor is simpler, so I'd break a tie in favor of the legacy port - but not go out of the way for it if it's inconvenient. No reason to hate on legacy ports, however.
I agree that the 750W PSU is likely more powerful than necessary. But, it's a solid choice, and better to overshoot than undershoot when it comes to power supplies. 500W will probably work, but I'd likely go for 600 or 650 to be safe.
For the CPU, for an extra 120 cents, you can go up to a 3570K. If you don't live close to a MicroCenter, see if you can price match this via NCIX. I was able to save $45-$50 by price-matching a MicroCenter CPU price with NCIX in late 2011. And if you do live near a MicroCenter, they're actually a really good technology store, with salespeople who are a lot smarter than your average big box electronics store salespeople.
Mac OS, 3.7GB for the kernel was was unusually high, 1-2GB is more standard. I've found Mac OS to be somewhat more demanding on RAM than Windows.
I don't actually let my hatred of legacy ports affect my recommendations for other people, it adds like $100 to the motherboard price to find one without PS/2 ports, which I can't justify to others.
I don't actually let my hatred of legacy ports affect my recommendations for other people, it adds like $100 to the motherboard price to find one without PS/2 ports, which I can't justify to others.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,304
Oh, that kind of makes sense. I have heard from multiple actual Mac users that OSX uses gobs of memory in recent versions. So I guess part of the answer to how people get by with less than 16 GB of RAM is by running Windows.
