Jump to content

Low Budget System Build - Opinions?


Nerwin

Recommended Posts

panorama work, you need 12GB for that, haha.

i use all 6GB when i do that and the computer comes to a halt.

just an FYI, lightroom 2.5 still doesn't run perfect even on an i7, they are still working on the program.

lightroom 3 should be smoother, i havn't really messed with that yet. no plans for GPU acceleration as far as i know.

that AMD build is quite a great budget computer though, assuming you want to go AMD.

and i find multiple monitors necessary for much of what i do (coding).

as far as photography or photoshop i normally just use one monitor.

Edited by ripken204
Link to comment
Share on other sites


panorama work, you need 12GB for that, haha.

Depends on how many shots, and at which resolution :) The more, the better for sure. The x64 version of Photoshop is great for things like this (although a lot of people use other tools like PTGui instead)

that AMD build is quite a great budget computer though, assuming you want to go AMD.

It's not as nice as the i5 system for sure, but it's nicer than the LGA775/DDR2 setup in many ways, and it's a lot cheaper. If he can't afford the extra $50 for the MUCH better i5, and also needs the new video card on top of that (more $ over his budget), then I figured he could use something more wallet-friendly. The money saved could go towards more RAM, or a Radeon 4670 (also good for games, a 4650 would be plenty though) and bigger hard drive, or most of a 4850 (if he wants to play games a lot), or if he really wants two cards then it would pay for a pair of 4650's (or the most part of a pair of 4670's), or a quad core CPU, or a lot of other things (including photo gear, or even just keeping the money)

i find multiple monitors necessary for much of what i do (coding).

as far as photography or photoshop i normally just use one monitor.

Same here. Dual monitors are great for a lot of things, but photo work wise... I really don't see the need. 1920x1200 is enough space (2560x1600 would be nicer, but 30" IPS LCDs are still on the expensive side)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I decided to wait a bit more longer and see if I can just build a whole new system. Case and all. I will try my best to get my budget as high as a I can. I need to go and figure a few things out before hand but, if I can do this it should be worth it, maybe I could even go with an i7. I don't know yet.

What would $750 bring me? (don't bother with the case, I can get that anytime.

I do want A video card, I don't need two, but would like the extra spot available for one, just in case. I would prefer I nice sound card, but I guess it depends.

I'm just trying to get a few options going in my mind. Thanks guys for helping me, I really appreciate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe I could even go with an i7

The i7 is a waste of money IMO. It's meant for very high-end stuff. The i5 750 is basically as fast as the i7 920, but it costs less, and the motherboards are cheaper too. If you plan on upgrading beyond 4 cores, beyond 16GB of RAM or something along those lines, then the i7 is for you. Just the "basic" i7 (920) and a decent board like the ASUS P6T will set you back like $550 right there, and you don't have any RAM, no video card, no hard drive or anything else yet.

What would $750 bring me?

A very fast i5 750 system, with a nice motherboard, 8GB of DDR3, a good video card like a Radeon 4670, the 640GB drive you were after, a new DVD writer... And another $100 to spend on whatever else you want (nice PSU, sound card or whatever)

does anyone have anything against Full Tower cases?

Full towers are great :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks man,

The i5 is Quad Core, correct?

I'm almost thinking to do this, even though it will cost more, but I would use it a lot more. I would most likely be more productive. I love either you listen, I already have a brand new dvd writer (sata, lightscribe, you know a good one) So I wont need that. Would a the Antec 430 watt still be enough to run the i5, Video Card, and the 8gb of ram?

I mean I would like to get a little better sound card then what I have, you know one that is like supported for Windows vista/7

With the extra money I "should" put it toward another 22inch monitor and get rid of the 17inch.

I'm hoping to sell a couple computers that I have, birthday coming up, christmas, I might have enough. I guess we will see. Anything can happen. But I totally need to build a new system, that is for a fact. Though I do need new camera lenses, webcam, condenser mic. But I could live with out it for a while I assume.

But I most likily woulden't need to upgrade for a while. But I would have that option there if I wanted to!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The i5 is Quad Core, correct?

Yes. And a very fast one at that.

I'm almost thinking to do this, even though it will cost more, but I would use it a lot more

Like I've show before, it's only like $50 extra for a i5 over your initial setup (it's not like you need to get 8GB with it right away). With 8GB each, the price almost ties. But you get an entirely different beast with a much longer usable life.

Would a the Antec 430 watt still be enough to run the i5, Video Card, and the 8gb of ram?

Depends on the video card you'd get. It should be fine with the 4670.

I would like to get a little better sound card then what I have

You haven't said yet what you have. I'm really happy with onboard Realtek audio myself: 7.1+2 channel, 192/24, with toslink and spdifs out (I'm actually using both) -- it's already overkill for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I may not need a sound card then. I would like to use digital, but I know I would need to buy new speaker system.

For the ram, I probably will get 8gigs. why not? It would be worth it. I know it will be better working with a high res images, like panoramics.

Well thanks dude, I'm going to keep this option I think, Who knows by the time I am ready to order, stuff could lower/and or have sales.

Thanks so much for your help!

Oh I am just wondering, Why the i5 is faster than the Core 2 Quad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the i5 is faster than the Core 2 Quad?

It's a new architecture altogether. It's a Nehalem based CPU, not a "Core" based CPU (next gen, already a lot better by itself). Plus, they ditch the ancient FSB bus (way overdue). And it gets on-die memory controllers too, just like AMD has. And all kinds of little things (new SIMD instruction sets, on-die PCie controller, etc)

Here's some numbers that may interest you:

19893.png

Yep, faster than the $330 Core 2 Quad Q9650 (in every single bench too). Your current P4 would be past the 100 seconds mark here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats pretty good, I don't want to get into extreme overclocking where you have to mess with the voltage. But I have only overclocked a couple times before so i'm quite new to it. My current motherboard didn't have the capabilities to be overclocked. But I have build a few machines for a few friends of mine and one was a p4 3.2ghz (about 4 years ago) and I overclocked it to like 3.8ghz and I guess it's still been running strong.

But anyways this would be cool. Cheaper, but faster CPU than the i7, in some ways I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to get into extreme overclocking

That's not extreme. Some people manage to push it beyond 4GHz.

p4 3.2ghz (about 4 years ago) and I overclocked it to like 3.8ghz

That's not much of an OC (not bad for a P4 perhaps). My current CPU OC'ed from 1.8 to 3.4 :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...