Here are the specs on the computer I'm about to buy

[Herald of Light]

 

As far as I know, my ram runs at 1066mhz and the stuff you listed is 800 mhz, is that not a noticeable speed difference, or does that speed have little to do with how quick ram runs? Educate me, because I may need it!

 

 

Don't even look at that. Almost all DDR2 is EXACTLY the same chips. If you are really concerned with running it faster, then turn it up manually. There's nothing special about RAM that's sold at a faster speed, except that it costs more for no good reason.

 

You need to understand what everything means before you just go assuming a higher number is better. To put it quite simply, higher RAM clock speeds from the same type of RAM to another amount to absolutely nothing in real world desktop use.

 

Mathematically, that's only a 33% advantage in the clock speed itself, when there are MANY other factors, and compared to 4GB of RAM, it's 50% less in CAPACITY, which is far more important.

 

If you don't have enough RAM to use something, then you're just boned. You either won't be able to do it, because the program won't let you, or it will have to use your hard drive, and your computer could slow down to a crawl. 2GB is plenty, but 4GB is probably enough to do just about anything. It's just, well, dumb, to not buy 4GB of RAM today. Even cheapo laptops have 4GB of RAM, so what does that tell you? Stuff will start using it, even if many things don't.

 

On top of that, the CPU you are using only has a 266 MHz front side bus speed. The front side bus determines the total system bandwidth. It must equal half the RAM's clock speed (DDR=double data rate, divide by two) to even be able to use just the RAM at full bandwidth, and there's more to the computer than that.

 

I believe that FSB speed is about 8.5GB/s, while the RAM at only 800 MHz already takes 12.8GB/s for its full bandwidth, and at 1066 MHz, would take 17GB/s. There could still be a potential clockspeed advantage without a sufficient FSB speed, but it's already bottlenecked, on top of the fact that RAM clock speed basically doesn't even matter.

 

The new Intel Core i7s have an integrated memory controller, like AMD CPUs, and so they do not have a FSB, as they work differently and their bandwidth is much higher. Their memory is triple channel, usually at 1,066 MHz, as that's the lowest DDR3 speed, and that's what they use, so they have something like 23GB/s. And even so, IT CHANGES NOTHING. Literally, NOTHING. This is for SERVERS, not desktops, as these are server parts. The mainstream desktop ones will be dual channel and much lower bandwidth, because it serves them no purpose.

 

You can just turn the FSB up yourself, WAY up, as Intel sells CPUs that use 400 MHz stock, and a P45 board can drastically exceed that with a dual core CPU.

 

But again, if you're going to do that, then you must adjust it yourself, so just get cheaper RAM, and turn the RAM up yourself. It's still not going to do anything even at something like 500 MHz FSB and 1,200 MHz for the RAM, though.

[magentaplacenta]

1 x ($54.99) PSU ROSEWILL | RP550V2-D-SL 550W RT - Retail $54.99 1 x ($114.99) MB GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R P45 775 R - Retail $114.99 1 x ($20.99) DVD BURN LITE-ON|iHAS120-04 20X % - OEM $20.99 1 x ($119.99) CPU INTEL|C2D E7300 2.66G 775 RT - Retail $119.99 1 x ($74.99) HD 640G|WD 7K 16M WD6400AAKS % - OEM $74.99 1 x ($89.99) VGA MSI NX8800GTS-T2D320E-HD-OC RT - Retail $89.99 1 x ($33.99) MEM 1Gx2|GSK F2-8500CL5D-2GBPK R - Retail $33.99 1 x ($129.99) MNTR HANNSG|LCD19"5MS DVI HW-191DPB - Retail $129.99 Anyone see anything that could need changing? I'm not really willing to spend more, so I think it's pretty good.

 

I don't see the word "Mac" anywhere in there.

[Deicide1]

 

Speedy RAM has different advantages depending on where the bottleneck is on your system and AMD v.s Intel. But, overall, you'll probably notice more of a difference with double the RAM than the speed difference. I think it's stupid to take a chance on PSUs. Inconsistent power can wreak havoc on a system-- it's just something I don't {censored} with.

 

 

 

 

Alright, thanks for the info. I will upgrade when sometime in the near future, but for now, it's already paid for, so...maybe I can return it? I'll have to check once I get it.

[Deicide1]

 

Even if it works and it's not too noisy for you, you'll be senselessly running up your electricity bill. Don't even look at that. Almost all DDR2 is EXACTLY the same chips. If you are really concerned with running it faster, then turn it up manually. There's nothing special about RAM that's sold at a faster speed, except that it costs more for no good reason. You need to understand what everything means before you just go assuming a higher number is better. To put it quite simply, higher RAM clock speeds from the same type of RAM to another amount to absolutely nothing in real world desktop use. Mathematically, that's only a 33% advantage in the clock speed itself, when there are MANY other factors, and compared to 4GB of RAM, it's 50% less in CAPACITY, which is far more important. If you don't have enough RAM to use something, then you're just boned. You either won't be able to do it, because the program won't let you, or it will have to use your hard drive, and your computer could slow down to a crawl. 2GB is plenty, but 4GB is probably enough to do just about anything. It's just, well, dumb, to not buy 4GB of RAM today. Even cheapo laptops have 4GB of RAM, so what does that tell you? Stuff will start using it, even if many things don't. On top of that, the CPU you are using only has a 266 MHz front side bus speed. The front side bus determines the total system bandwidth. It must equal half the RAM's clock speed (DDR=double data rate, divide by two) to even be able to use just the RAM at full bandwidth, and there's more to the computer than that. I believe that FSB speed is about 8.5GB/s, while the RAM at only 800 MHz already takes 12.8GB/s for its full bandwidth, and at 1066 MHz, would take 17GB/s. There could still be a potential clockspeed advantage without a sufficient FSB speed, but it's already bottlenecked, on top of the fact that RAM clock speed basically doesn't even matter. The new Intel Core i7s have an integrated memory controller, like AMD CPUs, and so they do not have a FSB, as they work differently and their bandwidth is much higher. Their memory is triple channel, usually at 1,066 MHz, as that's the lowest DDR3 speed, and that's what they use, so they have something like 23GB/s. And even so, IT CHANGES NOTHING. Literally, NOTHING. This is for SERVERS, not desktops, as these are server parts. The mainstream desktop ones will be dual channel and much lower bandwidth, because it serves them no purpose. You can just turn the FSB up yourself, WAY up, as Intel sells CPUs that use 400 MHz stock, and a P45 board can drastically exceed that with a dual core CPU. But again, if you're going to do that, then you must adjust it yourself, so just get cheaper RAM, and turn the RAM up yourself. It's still not going to do anything even at something like 500 MHz FSB and 1,200 MHz for the RAM, though.

 

 

Thanks for that, good lesson.

 

 

 

...but also, I could buy freakin' PC2100 and turn it up? That doesn't seem right.

[JBecker]

 

Even if it works and it's not too noisy for you, you'll be senselessly running up your electricity bill. Don't even look at that. Almost all DDR2 is EXACTLY the same chips. If you are really concerned with running it faster, then turn it up manually. There's nothing special about RAM that's sold at a faster speed, except that it costs more for no good reason. You need to understand what everything means before you just go assuming a higher number is better. To put it quite simply, higher RAM clock speeds from the same type of RAM to another amount to absolutely nothing in real world desktop use. Mathematically, that's only a 33% advantage in the clock speed itself, when there are MANY other factors, and compared to 4GB of RAM, it's 50% less in CAPACITY, which is far more important. If you don't have enough RAM to use something, then you're just boned. You either won't be able to do it, because the program won't let you, or it will have to use your hard drive, and your computer could slow down to a crawl. 2GB is plenty, but 4GB is probably enough to do just about anything. It's just, well, dumb, to not buy 4GB of RAM today. Even cheapo laptops have 4GB of RAM, so what does that tell you? Stuff will start using it, even if many things don't. On top of that, the CPU you are using only has a 266 MHz front side bus speed. The front side bus determines the total system bandwidth. It must equal half the RAM's clock speed (DDR=double data rate, divide by two) to even be able to use just the RAM at full bandwidth, and there's more to the computer than that. I believe that FSB speed is about 8.5GB/s, while the RAM at only 800 MHz already takes 12.8GB/s for its full bandwidth, and at 1066 MHz, would take 17GB/s. There could still be a potential clockspeed advantage without a sufficient FSB speed, but it's already bottlenecked, on top of the fact that RAM clock speed basically doesn't even matter. The new Intel Core i7s have an integrated memory controller, like AMD CPUs, and so they do not have a FSB, as they work differently and their bandwidth is much higher. Their memory is triple channel, usually at 1,066 MHz, as that's the lowest DDR3 speed, and that's what they use, so they have something like 23GB/s. And even so, IT CHANGES NOTHING. Literally, NOTHING. This is for SERVERS, not desktops, as these are server parts. The mainstream desktop ones will be dual channel and much lower bandwidth, because it serves them no purpose. You can just turn the FSB up yourself, WAY up, as Intel sells CPUs that use 400 MHz stock, and a P45 board can drastically exceed that with a dual core CPU. But again, if you're going to do that, then you must adjust it yourself, so just get cheaper RAM, and turn the RAM up yourself. It's still not going to do anything even at something like 500 MHz FSB and 1,200 MHz for the RAM, though.

 

 

Correct. RAM speed means less than capacity.

[JBecker]

 

Thanks for that, good lesson. ...but also, I could buy freakin' PC2100 and turn it up? That doesn't seem right.

 

 

Overclocking... this is how you do it.

 

But, I wouldn't do it in a POS case without good airflow, without a real good dependable power supply.

[Deicide1]

 

Overclocking... this is how you do it. But, I wouldn't do it in a POS case without good airflow, without a real good dependable power supply.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah...but it's possible to overclock outdated {censored} like PC2100 and run it at 1066mhz?

[lndianScout]

your gunna run a 8800gts off a POS RP550V2-D-SL 550W power supply with the rest of your system??

 

not gunna happen.. sorry, never short change yourself with a cheap PSU

[M1K3999]

Code blue and Herald got their work cut out forthem, they just finished helpin me out with a computer.

[M1K3999]

I don't see the word "Mac" anywhere in there.

 

Too expensive when you can get the same thing for 1000 dollars less, only noobs buy macs

[M1K3999]

 

1 x ($54.99) PSU ROSEWILL | RP550V2-D-SL 550W RT - Retail $54.99 1 x ($114.99) MB GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R P45 775 R - Retail $114.99 1 x ($20.99) DVD BURN LITE-ON|iHAS120-04 20X % - OEM $20.99 1 x ($119.99) CPU INTEL|C2D E7300 2.66G 775 RT - Retail $119.99 1 x ($74.99) HD 640G|WD 7K 16M WD6400AAKS % - OEM $74.99 1 x ($89.99) VGA MSI NX8800GTS-T2D320E-HD-OC RT - Retail $89.99 1 x ($33.99) MEM 1Gx2|GSK F2-8500CL5D-2GBPK R - Retail $33.99 1 x ($129.99) MNTR HANNSG|LCD19"5MS DVI HW-191DPB - Retail $129.99 Anyone see anything that could need changing? I'm not really willing to spend more, so I think it's pretty good.

 

 

 

Up the memory to 4g instead of 2. It's like 10 bux more for double

 

 

 

How much is all that with shipping/tax btw?

[Herald of Light]

 

Thanks for that, good lesson. ...but also, I could buy freakin' PC2100 and turn it up? That doesn't seem right.

 

 

No, because PC2100 is DDR, not DDR2.

 

They're made differently. A lot of the difference is that the size of the chips is reduced a VERY large amount from one type to the next. Smaller and newer chips are more efficiently designed and can run higher clock speeds on lower voltages, but there is a world of other differences between them on top of that.

 

That's why I specifically said "higher RAM clock speeds from the same type of RAM to another amount to absolutely nothing in real world desktop use." They're still the same kind of RAM, in the end. Even DDR2 to DDR3 hardly changes anything, so don't expect the clock speed alone to. There are a lot of reasons for it beyond that, like the smaller chips allowing for higher density, and therefore more memory, per stick, and the fact that it uses less power, so that batteries in laptops last longer with it. Computers have gone far beyond the point of each individual little speed being significant. It's more a matter of cost and efficiency at this point.

 

They all have a general range they can handle before you have to feed them so much voltage they burn up. If you will notice, you can buy 1,200 MHz DDR2. I believe there are motherboards that even have multipliers for 1,333 MHz DDR2. It's quite possible you could get it to run that.

 

But the bottom line is that it just plain doesn't matter. It's for goofballs who want to run memory bandwidth benchmarks and show off to people how high they can get it to go. If that's your thing, whatever, but that has nothing to do with what 99.99999999% of us need a computer to do.

[JBecker]

 

No, because PC2100 is DDR, not DDR2. They're made differently. A lot of the difference is that the size of the chips is reduced a VERY large amount from one type to the next. Smaller and newer chips are more efficiently designed and can run higher clock speeds, but there is a world of other differences between them on top of that. That's why I specifically said "higher RAM clock speeds from the same type of RAM to another amount to absolutely nothing in real world desktop use." They all have a general range they can handle before you have to feed them so much voltage they burn up. If you will notice, you can buy 1,200 MHz DDR2. I believe there are motherboards that even have multipliers for 1,333 MHz DDR2. It's quite possible you could get it to run that. But the bottom line is that it just plain doesn't matter. It's for goofballs who want to run memory bandwidth benchmarks and show off to people how high they can get it to go. If that's your thing, whatever, but that has nothing to do with what 99.99999999% of us need a computer to do.

 

 

The more important point, and of course this is all right, is that memory differences in RAM can be made up for by overclocking pretty easily if you have a good power supply and quality ram, and that quantity and quality count more than speed when it comes to ram.

 

And there's no reason to be cheap and not get two sticks that are twice the size of your two sticks for ten dollars more. Buying a second pair is more expensive, however.

[Herald of Light]

I don't think bothering overclocking RAM is a good idea. You just introduce potential stability issues and increase the power use of your system (even if it's not much, it will add up over time) for no benefit I've ever been able to see.

 

RAM is the easiest thing to mess up with overclocking, and the least likely to affect anything.

 

To each their own, though. There are people who will cool every component with liquid nitrogen just to see how fast it will go, even though you obviously can't USE a computer like that, so whatever.

[JBecker]

 

I don't think bothering overclocking RAM is a good idea. You just introduce potential stability issues, for no benefit I've ever been able to see. RAM is the easiest thing to mess up with overclocking, and the least likely to affect anything. To each their own, though. There are people who will cool every component with liquid nitrogen just to see how fast it will go, even though you obviously can't USE a computer like that, so whatever.

 

 

I never overclock anything, I just tend to go with the theory that if I buy all {censored} that works really well overclocked, then under normal operating stresses it's far more likely to work well, stable, and for a long time.

 

That being said, RAM speed not important. RAM latency used to be a bigger deal than speed and it was more of a big deal on AMD than Intel, but I don't think it's really as much of a deal these days.

[Herald of Light]

That's pretty much what I try to go for as well, but the thing about DDR2 is, it's OLD now, and they've had it down for quite some time now. Every vendor just uses the same chips, because they know what works, and it's dirt cheap.

 

This is the only recently "improved" DDR2 I know of, as it runs lower timings on dense modules with stock voltage, but I still doubt it's actually any different. They probably just have the manufacturing down to the point where enough of it comes out this way now:

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231219

 

DDR3 is where you have to pay attention at the moment, because it has a lot of changes coming down the pipe all the way through 2010, and huge variations in usage, voltages and clock speeds that are just going to become even more exaggerated very shortly.

[Bensbeenjamin]

Yeah if I was wanting a bigger screen I would just use 2 like 22" monitors. So maybe just get one now and one later.

[BadCompany89]

oh you've got the NX8800GTS-T2D320E-HD-OC RT and the F2-8500CL5D-2GBPK R and the C2D E7300 2.66G 775 RT and the RP550V2-D-SL 550W RT should be great....

 

[Travisaurus Rex]

don't forget to upgrage the flux capacitor.

[DirtyBird]

 

I don't think bothering overclocking RAM is a good idea. You just introduce potential stability issues and increase the power use of your system (even if it's not much, it will add up over time) for no benefit I've ever been able to see. RAM is the easiest thing to mess up with overclocking, and the least likely to affect anything. To each their own, though. There are people who will cool every component with liquid nitrogen just to see how fast it will go, even though you obviously can't USE a computer like that, so whatever.

 

 

Very rarely does overclocking cause permanent damage to anything unless temperatures get out of control. I've never seen overclocking cause RAM to fail. It will error, sure, but you dont run it at a speed where it will error, you run it at a speed where it is stable. The voltages are what will kill ram, not the clock speed, and it's true you can fry them if you keep pumping more and more juice into them, but I think some people are entirely too paranoid about overclocking.

 

Other than that, I agree, RAM gives you the least benefit. Latency and size and speed are all I would say equally important within a certain median range, and the first thing I would sacrifice is speed to get more data storage at lower latencies.

[bigdaddyd]

how long ago did you start this thread? lol

[guitarbilly74]

 

Get a better monitor. 19" is tiny these days. Even though for those prices you can't get anything but crap monitors (poor panels that cause poor viewing angles, poor color reproduction etc), you should still be able to get a 20-22" crap widescreen monitor pretty cheap. Also get 4 GB RAM, it's cheap. Never heard of the power supply, would invest more in that as well. No-name power supplies are usually terrible.

 

 

this is really good advice, listen to it.

[OverDriven]

Get a better monitor. 19" is tiny these days. Even though for those prices you can't get anything but crap monitors (poor panels that cause poor viewing angles, poor color reproduction etc), you should still be able to get a 20-22" crap widescreen monitor pretty cheap. Also get 4 GB RAM, it's cheap. Never heard of the power supply, would invest more in that as well. No-name power supplies are usually terrible.

 

Deicide asked me to put a system together for him with monitor for around $600. This is what I came up with, and I guarantee it is absolutely the most computer you can buy for that money. I mean WITH a monitor for around $600!? I didn't think I would be able to do it. In all honesty, this came out just a tad above the $600 target, but it was close.

 

 

BTW...too many people here commenting on stuff they have no idea about. The PSU is great and rated plenty high. If you haven't heard of Rosewill, I don't know what to tell you. And buy PC2100 and overclock it!? LMAO. I'm not even going to ask where that came from.

[JBecker]

Deicide asked me to put a system together for him with monitor for around $600. This is what I came up with, and I guarantee it is absolutely the most computer you can buy for that money. I mean WITH a monitor for around $600!? I didn't think I would be able to do it. In all honesty, this came out just a tad above the $600 target, but it was close. BTW...too many people here commenting on stuff they have no idea about. The PSU is great and rated plenty high. If you haven't heard of Rosewill, I don't know what to tell you. And buy PC2100 and overclock it!? LMAO. I'm not even going to ask where that came from.

Not from us. I only said good ram could be over clocked.

 

That PSU is not "this thing doens't {censored} around, will give good consistent juice to your processor, graphics, and mobo for eternity" kind of PSU. A huge chunk of why I build is I can put in a better PSU and mobo with better cooling. This system knocks out two of the three...

 

That being said, making a system for 600 I think you did well-- but it's time to go to 640 and get a 22" monitor and double the ram to say the least. I would be pretty unhappy with 2x80mm fan in my power supply, fwiw.

[guitarbilly74]

 

Deicide asked me to put a system together for him with monitor for around $600. This is what I came up with, and I guarantee it is absolutely the most computer you can buy for that money. I mean WITH a monitor for around $600!? I didn't think I would be able to do it. In all honesty, this came out just a tad above the $600 target, but it was close.

 

 

Frankly I think you did a great job and I agree that this is the most computer he can get for that $$.... but I also think he could save up a little more and get a LOT more computer for not so much more money. The 4Gb upgrade will make a huge difference and the bigger monitor is definitely a good idea.

 

So my criticism wasn't really directed at you, as I think you really did your best with the budget you were given, but I think he should save up a little more and get something that is much better in the end.