Jump to content

New budget PC


Menace
 Share

Recommended Posts

If your budget is very strict, then this baby could pull you out of the soup:

 

ASRock 775Dual-VSTA for Conroe (Core2) with both AGP/PCI-E and DDR1/DDR2 support

 

Its a conroe ready board, with can take both AGP/PCI-E and DDR1/DDR2

 

Can be had for £30, and people rate it.

 

Intel Core 2 DUO E6300 "LGA775 Allendale" 1.86GH

 

Is the cheapest C2D, can be had around £110 mark.

 

GeIL 1GB (2x512MB) PC5300 667MHz Value DDR2 Dual Channel Kit

 

For £90.

 

so that bundle would be £230, all you need is a case & dvd player, £60 should see you get both, £10 for del.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://snipurl.com/13ye4 cpu = £70.44

http://snipurl.com/13yen mobo = £55.17

http://snipurl.com/13ye6 ram = £62.22

http://snipurl.com/13ye7 250gb ide hd = £49.64

http://snipurl.com/13ye8 case + 350w psu = £36.37

http://snipurl.com/13ye9 dvd r/rw £21.09

 

What you think of that?

 

That's a website from my local PC shop, so if you find stuff on that, that you recommend that would be good considering I can just go and pick it up.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://snipurl.com/13ye4 cpu = £70.44

http://snipurl.com/13yen mobo = £55.17

http://snipurl.com/13ye6 ram = £62.22

http://snipurl.com/13ye7 250gb ide hd = £49.64

http://snipurl.com/13ye8 case + 350w psu = £36.37

http://snipurl.com/13ye9 dvd r/rw £21.09

 

What you think of that?

 

That's a website from my local PC shop, so if you find stuff on that, that you recommend that would be good considering I can just go and pick it up.

 

 

Eclipse are reasonably priced, so no harm going there.

 

But the CPU is a dodo, you need to go C2D, or seriously not bother at all, the difference is huge.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

for 600£ you must be able to get a decent computer, no? especially if ye don't want a gfx-card. Id recommend you to build your own, you get more for less and it is really easy. I built my first one some months ago, and it's not hard at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Your Order

Item Price

(Price Inc) Qty Total

(Total Inc) Remove

ME-D2-1024D67

ME-D2-1024D67

1024Mb (2x512Mb) Dual Channel DDR2 667Mhz Memory

£53.95

(£63.39)

 

£53.95

(£63.39)

 

CAA-211WH

CAA-211WH

Asus TA-21 Series White ATX Case, 360W PSU

£30.95

(£36.37)

 

£30.95

(£36.37)

 

DRL-GSAH10NSI

DRL-GSAH10NSI

LG GSA-H10NBA 16xDVD+/-R 5xRAM Dual Layer DVD Writer -Silver

£17.95

(£21.09)

 

£17.95

(£21.09)

 

MBA-775DVSTA

MBA-775DVSTA

Asrock 775Dual-VSTA LGA775, PCI-E/AGP8x, DDR2, 7.1Snd, ATX

£31.95

(£37.54)

 

£31.95

(£37.54)

 

CPI-E6300

CPI-E6300

Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 1.86GHz LGA775 Processor - Retail

£109.95

(£129.19)

 

£109.95

(£129.19)

 

HDW-250KS

HDW-250KS

250Gb W. Digital Caviar Se 7200Rpm 16Mb Cache Sata Ii Hdd

£47.95

(£56.34)

 

£47.95

(£56.34)

 

Total Exc. £292.70

VAT £51.22

Total Inc. £343.92

 

Not totally happy with the memory, but cuts have to be made.

 

The extra money over budget is because you want it through eclipse, i reckon you can get that on budget elsewhere.

 

Thats my best mate, hope it helps!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go AMD (Athlon) over Intel every bloody time, just for the record. Generally perceived to be the stronger CPU - uses less electricity and has  much better chip performance (quicker than Intel by quite a bit) - I've used AMD for a long time (built about 6 computers myself) and had no bother with them at all, while I've had a fair few bad experiences with Intel. Admittedly it could be down to luck, but Intel processers generally feel slower and clunkier to me - the AMD is fairly well-known to be better, but Intel's marketing and history give it an edge.

 

These people telling you get an Intel Dual Core want a slap, basically. :wink:

 

It's the cheapest for a reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ASRock motherboard's are shite, mine bust like October time, took it back to Eclipse, they said they'll send me a replacement within 28 days, it's now December and still fuck all. :lol:

 

Unlucky, but im guessing thats all it is.

 

ASRock carry quite a good rep these days, its a shame you've been burnt.

 

Will not try and sell you it then, as i know once bitten, yer can fuk right off! Same shit with Aopen & Epox for me, never again.

 

But i do insist on the E6300, you wont regret it and if it means going over budget, or buying off the net then do it.  :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go AMD (Athlon) over Intel every bloody time, just for the record. Generally perceived to be the stronger CPU - uses less electricity and has  much better chip performance (quicker than Intel by quite a bit) - I've used AMD for a long time (built about 6 computers myself) and had no bother with them at all, while I've had a fair few bad experiences with Intel. Admittedly it could be down to luck, but Intel processers generally feel slower and clunkier to me - the AMD is fairly well-known to be better, but Intel's marketing and history give it an edge.

 

These people telling you get an Intel Dual Core want a slap, basically. :wink:

 

It's the cheapest for a reason.

 

Utter, utter rubbish mate.

 

I've been AMD for my last 4-5 CPU's, but i know when a product is better, and the C2D £200 chip whops the £600 offering from AMD....FACT.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

C2D vs AMD

 

(these are the 1st three links that came up, but its unanimous really)

 

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64_uk/

 

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/07/27/core_2_duo_vs_athlon_64_fx-62/

 

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2014685,00.asp

 

"It's clear that Intel's Core 2 Duo lineup offers superior performance across the product line when compared with AMD's Athlon 64 X2. In some applications, even a lower-cost Core 2 Duo can outperform some of the higher-end Athlon 64 X2s."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go AMD (Athlon) over Intel every bloody time, just for the record. Generally perceived to be the stronger CPU - uses less electricity and has  much better chip performance (quicker than Intel by quite a bit) - I've used AMD for a long time (built about 6 computers myself) and had no bother with them at all, while I've had a fair few bad experiences with Intel. Admittedly it could be down to luck, but Intel processers generally feel slower and clunkier to me - the AMD is fairly well-known to be better, but Intel's marketing and history give it an edge.

 

These people telling you get an Intel Dual Core want a slap, basically. :wink:

 

It's the cheapest for a reason.

agree. Get an AMD dual core, that's my advice (even though i don't have one myself :lol:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the E6300

 

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2802&p=12

 

f it weren't for AMD, we wouldn't have Core 2, and if it weren't for Core 2 then we wouldn't have affordable Athlon 64 X2s. Right now is one of the best times to purchase a new processor that we've seen in a long time -- assuming current prices hold and that availability of Core 2 Duo chips is reasonable in the next week or so. If you've been running a single core processor and are finally looking to make the jump to dual core computing, there's little reason not to at this point.

 

The processor landscape has been changed once more thanks to AMD's extremely aggressive price cuts. The Core 2 Duo E6300 is a better performer than the X2 3800+ but is also more expensive, thankfully for the E6300's sake it is also faster than the 4200+ and the 4600+ in some benchmarks. Overall the E6300 is a better buy, but at stock speeds the advantage isn't nearly as great as the faster Core 2 parts. In many benchmarks the X2 4200+ isn't that far off the E6300's performance, sometimes even outperforming it at virtually the same price. Overclocking changes everything though, as our 2.592GHz E6300 ended up faster than AMD's FX-62 in almost every single benchmark. If you're not an overclocker, then the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ looks to be a competitive alternative to the Core 2 E6300.

 

The E6400 finds itself in between the X2 4200+ and X2 4600+ in price, but in performance the E6400 generally lands in between the 4600+ and 5000+. Once again, with these 2MB parts the performance advantage isn't nearly as impressive as with the 4MB parts (partly due to the fact that their native clock speed is lower, in addition to the smaller L2 cache), but even with AMD's new price cuts the Core 2 is still very competitive at worst. If you're not opposed to overclocking, then the E6400 can offer you more than you can get from any currently shipping AMD CPU - our chip managed an effortless 2.88GHz overclock which gave us $1000 CPU performance for $224.

 

There are two potential concerns with building a budget Core 2 Duo system. The first is availability, and hopefully we will have a clear answer on that subject in the near future. The other is motherboard cost. The ASUS P5W-DH we used in this article is currently the best overclocking motherboard we've seen for the socket 775 platform, but at $250 it is anything but cheap. We have seen quite a few of the P965 motherboards that can also overclock the budget Core 2 chips to reasonable levels, with prices hovering much closer to $140. Unfortunately, none of those boards can support SLI or CrossFire at present.

 

If you are simply interested in maximum processor performance, P965 with any of the Core 2 Duo parts is going to be very fast. Gamers on the other hand are probably going to at least want to think about SLI/CrossFire, as typical gaming settings will be GPU limited with just about any current single GPU. That means they might need to pay more for an appropriate motherboard, especially if overclocking is a primary concern. We're also waiting to find out how nForce 500 for Intel does in the overclocking arena; at present, there's definitely concerns about whether or not the NVIDIA motherboards can reach the high FSB speeds that are required for overclocking everything but the X6800.

 

The E6300 and E6400 can easily overclock to E6700 and Core 2 Extreme X6800 levels, though the smaller cache does limit performance a bit. That being said, our overclocked E6300 was able to equal and in all cases but one outperform AMD's Athlon 64 FX-62. In fact, in quite a few benchmarks, the overclocked E6300 is essentially out of reach of anything AMD can offer with their current K8 designs. At $183, the value here is tremendous, and if you're willing to overclock the benefits don't get any clearer than that.

 

If you overclock the E6300, you knocking out AMD's FX-62, which is a £500 chip.

 

Not bad for £110.

 

The E6600 which is a true Conroe overclocked will beat anything AMD currently have overclocked, its that good, can be had for £210 and isn't even Intel's best chip.

 

The battle this time round has been well and truely won by Intel (am as gutted as anyone, i bought an AMD 3700 just months before the C2D came out) and AMD really need its next batch of chips to be world beaters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

C2D vs AMD

 

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64_uk/

 

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/07/27/core_2_duo_vs_athlon_64_fx-62/

 

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2014685,00.asp

 

"It's clear that Intel's Core 2 Duo lineup offers superior performance across the product line when compared with AMD's Athlon 64 X2. In some applications, even a lower-cost Core 2 Duo can outperform some of the higher-end Athlon 64 X2s."

 

The AMD is still better at this price range, trust me, once you add all of the other peripherals into the equation. Those reviews were probably written by Intel employees, in fairness, the larger companies employ a great many to work on subversive advertising of that sort. As someone who has built computers since the age of five and who owns their own chain of independent computer stores (overclocking/speed testing/diagnosing is my bread and butter, but I far prefer getting down to the nitty gritty and doing the building) I'm offering my full backing to AMD for someone looking to cook-up a tower for around £325 at this precise moment in the market.

 

This is my life, I know what I'm talking about - whereas you seem to be Googling for you answers. Never trust the media, man, has Parky taught you nothing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

C2D vs AMD

 

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64_uk/

 

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/07/27/core_2_duo_vs_athlon_64_fx-62/

 

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2014685,00.asp

 

"It's clear that Intel's Core 2 Duo lineup offers superior performance across the product line when compared with AMD's Athlon 64 X2. In some applications, even a lower-cost Core 2 Duo can outperform some of the higher-end Athlon 64 X2s."

 

The AMD is still better at this price range, trust me, once you add all of the other peripherals into the equation. Those reviews were probably written by Intel employees, in fairness, the larger companies employ a great many to work on subversive advertising of that sort. As someone who has built computers since the age of five and who owns their own chain of independent computer stores (overclocking/speed testing/diagnosing is my bread and butter, but I far prefer getting down to the nitty gritty and doing the building) I'm offering my full backing to AMD for someone looking to cook-up a tower for around � at this precise moment in the market.

 

This is my life, I know what I'm talking about - whereas you seem to be Googling for you answers. Never trust the media, man, has Parky taught you nothing?

So, you'd recommend me to buy a AMD X2, yeah? By the way, does anyone have the AMD 64 Newcastle?

Link to post
Share on other sites

C2D vs AMD

 

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64_uk/

 

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/07/27/core_2_duo_vs_athlon_64_fx-62/

 

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2014685,00.asp

 

"It's clear that Intel's Core 2 Duo lineup offers superior performance across the product line when compared with AMD's Athlon 64 X2. In some applications, even a lower-cost Core 2 Duo can outperform some of the higher-end Athlon 64 X2s."

 

The AMD is still better at this price range, trust me, once you add all of the other peripherals into the equation. Those reviews were probably written by Intel employees, in fairness, the larger companies employ a great many to work on subversive advertising of that sort. As someone who has built computers since the age of five and who owns their own chain of independent computer stores (overclocking/speed testing/diagnosing is my bread and butter, but I far prefer getting down to the nitty gritty and doing the building) I'm offering my full backing to AMD for someone looking to cook-up a tower for around £325 at this precise moment in the market.

 

This is my life, I know what I'm talking about - whereas you seem to be Googling for you answers. Never trust the media, man, has Parky taught you nothing?

 

I'm coming to Mr Woodgate when I want a new PC. :D

Link to post
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...