Building my own PC?

Oh I am definitely not getting Windows Vista. I'm pretty sure that I'm going with Windows 7.
Unless someone has any ideas about other systems? Has anyone tried Linux?
 
Take your money, go to the nearest apple retailer and buy a mac.
Forget the PC.

actually you can rent or lease a mac too.
 

Facetious

Moderated
Save yourself the trouble and pay a few more hundred than you had originally planned on a complete new unit. Really, eat top ramen for dinner for a month if you have to, something, just don't let yourself down since you don't have a back up PC :D
The very last thing you want to do is purchase a known faulty component from some smart ass at the computer store only to find that you have little if any recourse in getting said faulty component replaced. It's up to you man :dunno:, just read and understand all of the bullshit semantics in the fine print prior to signing the dotted line ie understand the specifics of the return policies on electronic items.

All the best ! :hatsoff:
 
Well, I'm looking to build a pretty strong gaming computer. I will also use it for watching movies and browsing the interwebs. That's about it.
About the money part, I'm thinking 10000 Swedish Kronor, which comes to about 1300 US dollars.

If you want to be completely top of the line, certainly the Core i7 is where you'd look, but the quad core Core i5 would do very well for your purposes. Most online retailers will try to push a bunch of RAM on you, but unless you're planning on getting a 64 bit OS, there's really no reason to get any more than 3GB of RAM, with hardware acceleration where it is now. The rest is basically just personal preference.

The main thing is to not skimp on the processor and the RAM! You'll regret it later...:yesyes:

Eh, unless you're running Crysis, RAM isn't going to make too big of a difference to the average user.

Oh I am definitely not getting Windows Vista. I'm pretty sure that I'm going with Windows 7.
Unless someone has any ideas about other systems? Has anyone tried Linux?

I've used Linux for the better part of a decade. Unless you've had some experience with it, I'd say stick with Windows 7. If all else fails and you want a taste of Linux without having to partition your hard drive, try Wubi. It'll let you dual boot without the mess of re-partitioning your hard-drive, and it essentially runs within Windows.
 
My plan now, is to NOT pay a fortune to some store for a new one, but to order the parts online and build the thing myself.
You typically save no money by self-assembly versus the stores, let alone direct from a tier-1 PC OEM like Dell, Gateway, HP, etc... However, you do get to select your components.

The main thing is to not skimp on the processor and the RAM! You'll regret it later...:yesyes:
The caveat on board, CPU and RAM is that they are time limited in cycle, Intel even more so than AMD. You might think you can upgrade the CPU later, but newer CPUs (again, especially Intel) often require newer boards with newer voltage regulators (if not a completely new socket). So I always advocate not worry about CPU and memory upgrades, buy the board and CPU (and RAM) and don't think about changing later (maybe consider a RAM upgrade at most at a latter date, if the prices really drop). More likely you'd just upgrade the board+CPU+RAM at that time instead, so just get the "best bang for the buck" today and don't worry about tomorrow.

And despite common assumption, there are plenty of quality chipsets-boards out there for $50. Many times they are the exact same ASICs and controllers as $150-250 units, just less slots. Hit reviews to confirm whether a chipset-board is a sound investment or not, for the specific CPUs you are considering. Unless you're going for a server-specific multi-socket, or going to throw in multiple GPU cards, don't worry about spending $200+ on a board. Honestly, I've had that argument too many times. ;)

As far as RAM, remember that Microsoft doesn't release a 32-bit desktop operating system that can support more than 4GiB of RAM (typically around 3.5GiB with reservations, and no single process can use more than 2GiB, long story). If you run Windows, you must use a 64-bit desktop operating system to get more than 4GiB of RAM support (per process restrictions still apply to 32-bit software running on the 64-bit OS though).
 
Oh I am definitely not getting Windows Vista. I'm pretty sure that I'm going with Windows 7.
Despite heavy marketing, Windows Vista and Windows 7 are the exact same operating system core, NT 6. Microsoft has made some tweaks to Windows 7, many of which can be made to Vista as well. It's a long story. In fact, Windows 7 finally gained many things that advanced Windows developers have been asking for years, and already existed (especially in their Embedded versions). But Windows 7 is still very bloated, no less than Vista. Hardware requirements of both Windows 7 and Vista are 3x what Windows XP required (long story, really hacked design -- at least compared to how MacOS X and Linux GUIs work)

Unless someone has any ideas about other systems? Has anyone tried Linux?
Do you run Windows applications? If so, run Windows. You said you're a gamer, correct? Linux is not a better Windows for Windows applications, especially games.

Linux was not designed to emulate Windows. It has an emulator that can emulate Windows "bug for bug" in several respects, and even run older stuff newer Windows cannot, or crashes with at times. But it is not designed to be a better Windows than Windows. Linux is designed to be Linux, which is a whole other ballgame. It did not come about because of Windows, not at all. At most I'd start with running open source software on Windows, like Firefox, OpenOffice.org, etc...

Yes, Linux is at the heart of many things (from Android to the PS3), but a general Linux install is not for Windows users. You don't have to be a computer whiz to use Linux, but you should never use Linux assuming it works like Windows. Many non-technical people use Linux, but they are as lost with troubleshooting things as they would be with Windows. Experienced Windows people become easily frustrated with Linux more, because virtually none of the troubleshooting they've learned for Windows is applicable.

Same concepts as MacOS X v. Windows users. In fact, MacOS X is BSD underneath (similar to Linux). The one nice thing about MacOS X over Linux is that they have relationships with superstore hardware vendors, whereas Linux (which is largely a community) does not. So there's a more likely chance that MacOS X will work with a computer superstore peripheral out-of-the-box than Linux for that reason.
 
I stick by what I said before, from my own personal experience...someone who looks at (deadly sites) porn everyday. Get a top notch processor, lots of RAM with a 64 bit OS (trust me), and the best video card you can get! The rest is not priority...trust me! I'm on my 4th computer since 1996, just updated to a new one last year, and for once, I did not cut corners and I love it. One second and pages are loaded, no joke! My computer before this one lasted 10 years, but I was cheap back then.
:dunno:
 
Since you are interested in going with a gaming system here are some suggestions:

Motherboard (mobo):
ASUS or GigaByte. DFI and Intel both make good mobo's. ASUS is tops in my book. On the mobo go with Socket 1366 since it's the latest and the greatest. Make sure it's an Intel board and not an AMD board. Also make sure the form factor is ATX. Now with the ATX Form Factor you need to find a case that supports the ATX sized mobo since there are other sized mobo's. Micro ATX, mini-ITX, XL-ATX. The standard ATX form is the most support version so you're better off sticking with this.

Case:
ATX Full Tower or ATX Mid Tower

Processor:
Intel
Quad Core - Intel Core i7 3.2GHz
Six Core - Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition Gulftown 3.33GHz

RAM:
For the Socket 1366 mobo I'd look at the DDR3 1600 as a minimum

Video:
DVI or HDMI only and I'd make sure the card I got was SLI. I'd get one that interfaced with either PCI Express 2.0 x16 or PCI Express 2.1 x16

Power Supply:
Minimum 700W or higher. If you are planning on running dual SLI video cards then I suggest getting in the 900W realm.

CD / DVD Burners:
Stick with the SATA drives only. Not only are they faster than the IDE type but the IDE is old technology and you have to deal with thos wide ass ribbon cables. Whereas the SATA cables are significantly thinner which helps your air flow inside the computer. This in turns in helping you keep your system cooler which gives your system longer life.

Floppy Drive:
nix this drive unless absolutely needed. I suggest getting a nice internal card reader.

Fan/Heatsink:
Needed to cool your processor. I personally like the direct cooling where the fan points directly to the processor but they do offer indirect cooling as well.

Thermal Compound:
Make sure you put some between the heatsink and the processor. Usually the new heatsinks come with compound on it but I wipe it off since I'm not satisfied I get enough coverage.

Hard Drive:
Western Digital, Seagate or even Hitachi. Stay away from Maxtor drives, they are typically pieces of junk. The drives come in different interface styles. IDE, SATA, SAS and SCSI. Whatever your choice stay away from the old IDE interface. Again it's slow and outdated. What ever you go with make sure your mobo will support it.

Cooling Fans:
Whatever you do with this, you can NEVER have enough cooling fans. Check the case you choose since they sometimes will come with only the rear fan or none at all. I get my cases that offer top, front and side vents that allow me to mount my fans. Most of our office computers have at least 4 case fans and this does not include the processor fan.

Operating System:
In today's time most are moving into the 64bit realm. I suggest doing this but in many occasions many old software packages you're running in XP or lower will not run or require updates. If you have a printer older than 3 years you might get lucky and find updates for the printer or download firmware updates. Chances are you might need a new printer.

There's a good bit to think about when building a system but when your done and it boots up and purrs like a fine engine it was all worth it. Also you can usually save some money doing it yourself.

Lastly if you are looking for some deals and good prices to build your system you can always visit NewEgg. This is where I've been purchasing my parts for about 4 years. Look under the Computer Hardware tab to start your adventure.

Hit me up if you ever have questions or need guidance.

Good luck.
 
64 bit OS (trust me)
32-bit OSes are just fine, just not Windows. 32-bit Windows desktop OSes don't support PAE out of Microsoft's infinite wisdom (Not!). There are various caveats with 64-bit OSes (long stories).
 
Footnote
With the operating system I just assumed you were wanting to run a Windows system which is my bad. Don't get me wrong 32bit systems are good but the technology is moving forward into 64bit and if you plan on having the system for some time I would be afraid the 32bit would become outdated.

Also with the RAM if you desire 64bit then 4gb would be a minimum but I'd probably step up to 8gb
 
Footnote
With the operating system I just assumed you were wanting to run a Windows system which is my bad. Don't get me wrong 32bit systems are good but the technology is moving forward into 64bit and if you plan on having the system for some time I would be afraid the 32bit would become outdated.

Also with the RAM if you desire 64bit then 4gb would be a minimum but I'd probably step up to 8gb

:thumbsup:
 
32-bit OSes are just fine, just not Windows. 32-bit Windows desktop OSes don't support PAE out of Microsoft's infinite wisdom (Not!). There are various caveats with 64-bit OSes (long stories).

Steve Ballmer might be one of the dumbest computer executives in the history of the industry. "There's no need for it, people willing to pay for a system with that much to access are probably looking for an all-together new OS".

Mmmhmm, Steve. :rolleyes:
 
Footnote
With the operating system I just assumed you were wanting to run a Windows system which is my bad. Don't get me wrong 32bit systems are good but the technology is moving forward into 64bit and if you plan on having the system for some time I would be afraid the 32bit would become outdated.
I was just pointing out that if you install more than 4GiB, and you run Windows, you need to be running 64-bit versions like Windows Vista and Windows 7 64-bit. Also do not attempt to run the 64-bit versions of Windows XP, major compatibility issues.

32-bit applications on 64-bit Windows will run, but cannot use any additional RAM. 32-bit Windows desktop applications are limited to 2GiB RAM. However, you can take advantage of running multiple 32-bit Windows applications over more memory on a 64-bit Windows system, with some overhead caveats.

Also with the RAM if you desire 64bit then 4gb would be a minimum but I'd probably step up to 8gb
Yeah, you should really be going to 6GiB (triple channel DDR3) or 8GiB (dual channel DDR2/DDR3) or 12GiB (triple channel DDR3), if you're doing 64-bit.

Steve Ballmer might be one of the dumbest computer executives in the history of the industry. "There's no need for it, people willing to pay for a system with that much to access are probably looking for an all-together new OS".
Mmmhmm, Steve. :rolleyes:
Ballmer has always been an idiot. Then again, on the technical side, Gates was a bafoon, even if he had the business tactics down. Gates has made more poor decisions in the history of Windows that Microsoft than anyone, even when core Microsoft architects all disagreed with him, and they are still trying to reverse the damage today.
 
Ballmer has always been an idiot. Then again, on the technical side, Gates was a bafoon, even if he had the business tactics down. Gates has made more poor decisions in the history of Windows that Microsoft than anyone, even when core Microsoft architects all disagreed with him, and they are still trying to reverse the damage today.

You're right, but the defining characteristic of Gates was his tenacity, obstinacy even when it came to getting his product out there and recognized. He essentially conquered the market through sheer saturation. Ballmer, (who was deemed smarter than Gates when he was appointed to the CEO position) has really just rested on his laurels, focused on image, and essentially insulted anyone who uses a competitors product, or goes against what Microsoft is pushing. Funny to see again how Microsoft and Apple are the exact same.
 
Top