In the market for a new desktop

[GenMarshall]

Since my laptop has kicked the bucket. I have been in the market for a new desktop (NO LAPTOPS PLEASE!!! I don't want to go through the headache of having the damned thing overheat and taking out the video card and/or parts of the motherboard. This includes desktop replacement notebooks)

I have set aside a budget of US$1,500 (I plan to buy the monitor, speaker system, and a SD card reader separately at BestBuy) and going to go with Dell since my employer offers a discount to their employees if they purchase a Dell.

The system that I intend to have would be for gaming (moderately, sufficient enough to run Half Life 2 on high), surfing the internet, and image editing and digital photography. Along with the ability to upgrade and/or replace hardware.

What should I be looking for in terms of RAM? I don't want to spend too much money. Plus I am not that comfortable jumping to a 64bit OS since I am unsure about it's compadibility with 32bit programs and games.

On top of that, what is the trade off between having a Dual Core processor that would give me 3GHz or a Quad Core processor that would give me 2.4GHz?

 

[Godwynn]

That's more of a statement than a question..?

 

[GenMarshall]

That's more of a statement than a question..?

Refresh the post. I've added questions to the OP.

 

[Zelig]

Vista 64-bit doesn't have compatibility problems with 32-bit applications as compared to Vista 32-bit. The only thing you lose is 16-bit application support.

Get whatever the least amount of RAM you can is in the Dell machine, it's far cheaper to order RAM yourself if you want/need to upgrade. 8GB runs around $100 from Newegg.

Dual core 3GHz will be marginally faster in situations that use 4 cores. Quad-core 2.4 GHz will be significantly faster in situations that use 4 cores.

 

[GenMarshall]

Vista 64-bit doesn't have compatibility problems with 32-bit applications as compared to Vista 32-bit. The only thing you lose is 16-bit application support.

If I end up getting a Vista 32-bit and I upgrade over the 4GB RAM line, would I still be able to install the drivers that are provided by Dell in the Driver's CD? Because I heard that there were driver issues with a 64bit Vista.

Get whatever the least amount of RAM you can is in the Dell machine, it's far cheaper to order RAM yourself if you want/need to upgrade. 8GB runs around $100 from Newegg.

Are all RAM boards designed the same or are they different for each mother board? On top of that, how can I tell which RAM board is the right one and would be able to fit?

Dual core 3GHz will be marginally faster in situations that use 4 cores. Quad-core 2.4 GHz will be significantly faster in situations that use 4 cores.

Most of the programs and games that I play don't have the multithreading built into them (Source games IIRC does, but that's the only game that I have that supports multithreading. Unsure about Civ4 and Star Wars: Empire at War). Would a Dual Core 3GHz be a better choice, eventhough it is the cheaper (yet faster) option?

 

[Zelig]

If I end up getting a Vista 32-bit and I upgrade over the 4GB RAM line, would I still be able to install the drivers that are provided by Dell in the Driver's CD? Because I heard that there were driver issues with a 64bit Vista.

Did you mean Vista 64-bit here? If you get Vista 64-bit, you should get it with the computer, as opposed to paying for it again. Any drivers provided by Dell are obviously going to work with the computer they provide.

The 64-bit driver problem is largely a myth. In fact, Microsoft requires any product which is certified to work with vista must have both 32-bit and 64-bit drivers.

Are all RAM boards designed the same or are they different for each mother board? On top of that, how can I tell which RAM board is the right one and would be able to fit?

There are a few different types of ram, depending on the motherboard, if you ever need to upgrade, it should be easy enough to post here and figure out what you need. Large memory manufacturers (Crucial, Corsair) also have wizards on their site where you put in your computer model, and it gives you what kind and how much ram will work in your computer.

Most of the programs and games that I play don't have the multithreading built into them (Source games IIRC does, but that's the only game that I have that supports multithreading. Unsure about Civ4 and Star Wars: Empire at War). Would a Dual Core 3GHz be a better choice, eventhough it is the cheaper (yet faster) option?

I would strongly recommend the quad-core, every game currently being released has multithreading support, and multithreading isn't only about improving single application performance, it allows you do more things simultaneously.

Any games which don't support multithreading at all are very likely to be older games, and are going to be maxed at 60 frames per second regardless of which CPU you have.

 

[GenMarshall]

Did you mean Vista 64-bit here? If you get Vista 64-bit, you should get it with the computer, as opposed to paying for it again. Any drivers provided by Dell are obviously going to work with the computer they provide.

I've heard horrior stories from other gamers that Vista does not improve game play or even worse that there is a performance that is suffered when using a 64bit OS.

I would strongly recommend the quad-core, every game currently being released has multithreading support, and multithreading isn't only about improving single application performance, it allows you do more things simultaneously.

I'm not too keen about sacrificing GHz speed for a Quad. Even though it's a significant improvement over the 2GHz processor in my old laptop. I'm looking for a cheaper speedy processor, not a sluggish one.

On the topic of processors, are they upgradeable in the event down the road in the future to replace an older processor with a faster one?

 

[Zelig]

I've heard horrior stories from other gamers that Vista does not improve game play or even worse that there is a performance that is suffered when using a 64bit OS.

People are sadly misinformed when it comes to Vista. Unless you're running games from pre-XP era, there very little difference between Vista 32-bit and Vista 64-bit, except for Vista 64-bit's support for more memory, and increased stability in high-memory usage scenarios.

When XP was released, it had exactly the same complaints, from the same people.

I'm not too keen about sacrificing GHz speed for a Quad. Even though it's a significant improvement over the 2GHz processor in my old laptop. I'm looking for a cheaper speedy processor, not a sluggish one.

On the topic of processors, are they upgradeable in the event down the road in the future to replace an older processor with a faster one?

In situations where the dual-core is faster, you're not going to notice the difference.

In situations where the quad-core is faster, you are going to notice the difference.

Processors are upgradeable.

 

[Genocidicbunny]

You have a budget of 1500$ US you say? Do I need to outline my rig for you? Its gonna end up costing me 1250$ or so in about 2 hours from the time of this post ( Thank you Cyber Monday)
The basic specs:
Intel Q9550
eVGA 780i SLi mobo
eVGA GTX 260+ ( The Core 216 edition)
4GB DDR2 1066mHz RAM
Corsair 750TX PSU


As Zelig said, you probably want a quad core unless you plan to upgrade in a year (or less). The intel Quad cores are very overclockable and the Q9550 which is a stock 2.83gHz can probably reach 3.5-3.6 with a decent air cooling setup. Stick some liquid cooling int here and if you're lucky, you might hit 4.0.
On the topic of Vista: Its a new PC, so get Vista.

Also, for the love of god, do not order from dell. Build your own. With holiday savings you might get a new pc for 20%+ less than from Dell. And if you need help building it, I am always on cfc chat.

 

[GoodGame]

CivGen,

How big is your discount with Dell? I'd only go with Dell if you absolutely don't want to have to touch the hardware yourself and want like a 3-year warranty. I've been pricing a 1K system as a gift, and I have to say I'm not impressed with how far that stretches in term of hardware quality.

 

[GenMarshall]

How big is your discount with Dell?

7% with the Dell Employee Purchase Program. Though I may have to add in a +$200 tolerance to my budget after looking at the basic XPS 730.

Also, I don't want to build my own computer because I am not that tech savy nor have the patience for it. Also, overclocking is out of the question since I want my hardware to last, not blow up in a China Syndrome.

 

[Mulholland]

Also, I don't want to build my own computer because I am not that tech savy nor have the patience for it.

Honestly, it's not that hard and you might learn something along the way. I built my own and have never considered myself particularly tech savvy. My biggest problem was putting the software drivers on, but that was resolved relatively quickly. There's a wealth of information on the internet and as stickciv said this forum is more than welcome to help.

 

[Genocidicbunny]

Dell XPS 730x:
Everything besides processor is slower than what I ordered. Starting price? 1800$
My system is 1250$ after rebates. Even with a 7% discount, you're still getting ripped off.
With building your own you have a lot more choices and it is good experience to have. because guess what, unless you shell out 400$ for the Dell warranty, in a year, its gonna run out. Then what will you do once your pc breaks?

Also, you can OC most intel C2D's on air cooling. You're waaay overexaggerating with the China Syndrome thing. If you're careful, at worst, you're gonna lower your heating bill cus your pc will provide a bit of that needed heat.

 

[Macha]

@OP.

Newer games will do better with quad core as will some applications such as encoding dvds. However older games and a lot of desktop software (e.g. Photoshop < CS2 or MS Office 2003 (don't know about PS CS3 or Office 07)) get little or no benefit from extra cores after dual core (unless your running them at the same time).

Compatibility problems with older games on Vista are mainly caused by the change from DirectX9.0c to DX10 rather than 32bit to 64 bit.
This will only really affect games that were either very top end, about 2-3 years before Vista's release (which will run slower than on XP because of the DX9 compatibility layer running on top of DX10, patches are probably available for most games in this category) or Windows 3.1/95 era (which you might need an emulator such as DOSbox for).

 

[GenMarshall]

Newer games will do better with quad core as will some applications such as encoding dvds. However older games and a lot of desktop software (e.g. Photoshop < CS2 or MS Office 2003 (don't know about PS CS3 or Office 07)) get little or no benefit from extra cores after dual core (unless your running them at the same time).

The "no benefit from extra cores" also includes open source games and programs? However my confusion would come when I look at the system requirements at a gamebox. Take for example Left 4 Dead, The processor requirements lists "3.0 GHz P4, Dual Core 2.0 or AMD64X2 (or higher)" with no mentions of any quad core equivalent. As well as concerns that the game will be more sluggish or refuse to run on a 2.66GHz Quad processor due because of a slower GHz speed.

Compatibility problems with older games on Vista are mainly caused by the change from DirectX9.0c to DX10 rather than 32bit to 64 bit.
This will only really affect games that were either very top end, about 2-3 years before Vista's release (which will run slower than on XP because of the DX9 compatibility layer running on top of DX10, patches are probably available for most games in this category) or Windows 3.1/95 era (which you might need an emulator such as DOSbox for).

So I would have no issues on Vista while playing Half Life 2 (inc. It's episodic epantians), Garry's Mod, TF2, and any source engine game? Would I also experiance any issues when playing Star Wars: Empire at War, Microsoft Train Simulator, Civ4, Jedi Academy, and SimCity 4? What about open source games such as OpenTTD?

 

[Genocidicbunny]

Source games should run fine. Valve is good about getting their games to run on a multitude of platforms. Sim City 4 should also run fine, and OpenTTD. THe other ones, you should look up and see if there are many users complaining about Vista compatibility.

 

[Zelig]

As well as concerns that the game will be more sluggish or refuse to run on a 2.66GHz Quad processor due because of a slower GHz speed.

It won't. There are no gaming scenarios where something will be playable on the 3.0GHz dual, and unplayable on the 2.4 GHz quad.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

I recently bought a new desktop computer for £500 ($730). It has a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 and 4 GB of RAM, but it has an integrated GeForce 7050 (and came with a 19" widescreen monitor). My previous computer had a Pentium 4 2.4 GHz and 1 GB of RAM, and a dedicated GeForce 6200. Most of the games I tried, including SimCity 4, run without any slowdown problems unless it's something to do with the graphics. The only game I couldn't get to run was Black and White 2, but that might be because of the graphics. It would play, but with a low framerate even on the lowest settings, and someone I know who has a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4 with 1.5 GB of RAM, but a dedicated Radeon X300, can run the game on highest settings with a much higher framerate than what my new computer can do.

 

[Macha]

The "no benefit from extra cores" also includes open source games and programs? However my confusion would come when I look at the system requirements at a gamebox. Take for example Left 4 Dead, The processor requirements lists "3.0 GHz P4, Dual Core 2.0 or AMD64X2 (or higher)" with no mentions of any quad core equivalent. As well as concerns that the game will be more sluggish or refuse to run on a 2.66GHz Quad processor due because of a slower GHz speed.

Open Source software is too broad a category to say. It also depends on what the program is doing. AFAIK, FF has 2 threads, one for the UI and one for rendering pages, it would have no benefit from more cores than 2. On the other hand video editing/encoding software usually gets huge benefits from more cores.

If Left 4 Dead specifically checks clock speed during installation or uses all 3Ghz, it will have difficulty running. On the other hand, most games requirements leave some breathing space (e.g. I found the first game that wouldn't run on my old computer's nVidia 5200 last year with Supreme Commander, every other game I have played has worked on it, even C&C3 which specifically said in the readme that it wouldn't work with nvidia 5x00 cards.)

So I would have no issues on Vista while playing Half Life 2 (inc. It's episodic epantians), Garry's Mod, TF2, and any source engine game? Would I also experiance any issues when playing Star Wars: Empire at War, Microsoft Train Simulator, Civ4, Jedi Academy, and SimCity 4? What about open source games such as OpenTTD?

Empire at War works on Vista as is, Source should be compatible with Vista. Simcity needs a patch (or at least it did for me) which you can get from here: http://simcity.ea.com/update/index_update.php. Civ IV is hit and miss. It worked on my laptop but not on my cousins dekstop. I have a Radeon HD 3650 and she has some Intel integrated card so it could just need a proper graphics card. As for Train Simulator, I couldn't get it to run when I switched from 98 to XP so I doubt it will run on Vista.

The only game I couldn't get to run was Black and White 2, but that might be because of the graphics. It would play, but with a low framerate even on the lowest settings, and someone I know who has a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4 with 1.5 GB of RAM, but a dedicated Radeon X300, can run the game on highest settings with a much higher framerate than what my new computer can do.

Black and White 2 barely runs on integrated graphics cards. That's nothing to do with the processor or number of cores. You need a proper 256mb graphics card to play it at any reasonable speeds.

 

[Genocidicbunny]

On the topic of L4D and cpu speeds. Notice that it specifically says 3.0 gHz P4 or a Dual Core 2 ghz. Most quad cores have a faster stock speed than this, and should run the game fine. You can also consider the fact that you can, with a quad core, set the affinity for the game to Core 2 and 3 in order to have them focus only on the game, while the other two run something else, like your OS and Steam.