questions about pc build

Bruce SX · 12 Mar 2014

......I am focusing on video cards this week. The following are two choices that are available to me, and will fit my peanut budget. Any advice, one way or the other, will be appreciated. Thanks.

New PowerColor Go! Green AX5450 1GBK3-SH Radeon HD 5450 (Cedar) 1GB 64-Bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready Low Profile Ready Video Card.
New PowerColor Go! Green AX6450 1GBK3-MH Radeon HD 6450 1GB 64-bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.1 CrossFireX Support Low Profile Ready Video Card.

KR,
Bruce

Computer0304 · 12 Mar 2014

The 6450. Newer is better since technology is always getting better.

smarteyeball · 13 Mar 2014

Bruce SX said:

Intel '06 QX9650

I'm back.

Just to clarify, this is definitely the chip you want to use. Both are quad cores, but this one is the most powerful and newer of the two.

As for the video card, the 6450 is roughly the same performance as the 8500 Gt mentioned earlier. Whilst it will handle Half life okay, it's still not going to be much chop for newer titles. The biggest benefit of the 6450 is that it should run cooler and use less power.

What resolution is your monitor Bruce?

Bruce SX · 21 Mar 2014

......The question of a monitor brings up yet another item for the future. I don't plan on going too large....19" will do I think for my space availability. 1280X1024 most likely.

To answer your question, at the moment, I am using a older 17" NEC MultiSync LCD1700V. It beats the 15" Dell monitor I was using a couple of months ago.

I'm not really too fond of widescreens as they seem to squash the vertical images.

I just hope that by the time I get everything up and running it won't all be obsolete.

KR,
Bruce

Computer0304 · 21 Mar 2014

I think it already is.... Will this build be a replacement for your PC? Or just a fun/specific use build?

Bruce SX · 21 Mar 2014

......A replacement for my 12 year old Dell tower with XP, and a fun build to get hands on experience. I will be using it for word processing of a amateur nature(newsletter), surfing, and lightweight gaming.

Most of my gaming is done on a PS2....so you can see how backwards that is.

My next step in THAT dept.(soon) is a PS3, but now PS4 is out...ai-yi-yi!

So yeah, outdated, but a few steps up from what I have now. Trying to keep up with the rapid advances in tech is certainly a challenge for me. I can now see how outdated this present build is going to be, but hopefully it can carry me forward until 2016 or 17. By then I should be able to assemble a up-to-date machine. That's my plan. One step at a time. I don't mean by buying parts in anticipation of using them later, but by being able to put enough aside to do it all at once. Correctly.

Thanks for all the input from everyone. It has allowed me to gain a firmer grasp of what I should expect to have accomplished by the time this presently unfinished build(60 days max to finish) becomes fossilized. This web site, along with those participating here, has greatly enriched my expectations in a positive manner. I am very grateful.

KR
Bruce

Computer0304 · 21 Mar 2014

OK if you insist.

Bruce SX · 22 Mar 2014

Actually it is the circumstances, at this point, that dictate insistence.

KR
Bruce

smarteyeball · 23 Mar 2014

Bruce SX said:

......The question of a monitor brings up yet another item for the future. I don't plan on going too large....19" will do I think for my space availability. 1280X1024 most likely.

To answer your question, at the moment, I am using a older 17" NEC MultiSync LCD1700V. It beats the 15" Dell monitor I was using a couple of months ago.

The main reason I ask is that the lower the resolution, the less 'taxing' it is on the GPU.

For example, at a resolution of 1024x768 / 4:3 (15"), performance is what's called "CPU bound". That is, it's the CPU that does the majority of the work. At 1280x1024 / 5:4 (17"), the CPU still does the majority of the work but the GPU starts to do it's share. It's only around 1680x1050 /16:10 (22") that the GPU becomes the main workhorse.

What this means to the user is that a "powerful GPU" at low resolutions is largely under utilised. So while it's still prudent to purchase the fastest GPU you can afford, it's not as big a deal compared to the situation if you had a 1920x1080/1920x1200 monitor.

I'm not really too fond of widescreens as they seem to squash the vertical images.

I understand. I myself prefer the 16:10 WS Aspect ratio vs 16:9 WS as the 16:9 does cut off a bit off real estate. Yet it is possible to adapt. It's all down to personal preference. If however you are in a position of having to consider a widescreen monitor in the future, a 22" 1680x1050 16:10 is a good compromise in order to avoid the squashing look.

I just hope that by the time I get everything up and running it won't all be obsolete.

Technically it already is obsolete since that's the nature of the technology beast but the real question is "is it obsolete" for your needs? And from what you've mentioned your needs are you will definitely get the longevity you hope for out if it at prices you can currently afford :) Especially if you can grab a SSD. That will be the proverbial day to day noticeable usage "rocket up the bum"

Bruce SX · 23 Mar 2014

......Thanks for the clear explanations. Gives me a better outlook, and allows me to alter my goals. The SSD is definitely figured in as a component. I believe that I will go for the 128 GB.

I am still cramming as much as I can into the peanut. Obviously I still have some important areas to cover.

The most important thing I have learned is that any choices I make concerning what, or what not, to utilize in my project ultimately land on my shoulders. I can deal with that.

KR
Bruce

questions about pc build

Hi......

Hi smarteyeball......

Hi Computer0304......

Hi smarteyeball......