Any computer geeks out there?

[big daddy russ]

Need some help with a setup. I'm building a new rig with the financial aid I have coming in this semester. I need it to run Photoshop CS, PictureMaker and Quark Xpress without the hiccups. I may be running Photoshop and Quark simultaneously from time to time.

This is what I know I'm getting:

2 Western Digital 160 GB SATA II HD's- RAID 0
2 Sticks Patriot DDR400 1GB Low Latency (2-3-2-5) RAM
GeForce 6800GT 256MB SLI Video Card

I wanted to make the rest of my system pretty fast before settling in on a processor.

But I'm lost when it comes to the processor. Should I get a fast AMD processor like the FX-55, should I go with a dual core setup like an X2 4800 Toledo... or should I go with an Opteron (they're now making them for Socket 939) or dual core Opteron? I have about $900 to spend on the processor and don't want to have to fool with getting another computer for at least another five years.

And would it be important to have a lot of L2 cache for this setup or should I go with a basic processor and save the money?

Any other help with hardware appreciated. I've never worked with anything more powerful than an early P4 setup. I own a P3 966 right now, so most of the hardware is foreign to me. If you've heard bad reviews about any of it, relay it to me. I also decided to go with dual SATA II hard drives in RAID 0 rather than spend the extra money for SCSI. Good call or bad call?

Sincerely,

Another computer geek

PS: This (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Manufactory=&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=517%3A7439&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=0&PropertyCodeValue=0&description=&MinPrice=&MaxPrice=&SubCategory=343&Submit=Property) is the website where I'll probably be buying the stuff. In there is a rundown of the 939 CPU's they have.

[cdlvj]

Originally posted by big daddy russ
[B]Need some help with a setup. I'm building a new rig with the financial aid I have coming in this semester. I need it to run Photoshop CS, PictureMaker and Quark Xpress without the hiccups. I may be running Photoshop and Quark simultaneously from time to time.

This is what I know I'm getting:

2 Western Digital 160 GB SATA II HD's- RAID 0
2 Sticks Patriot DDR400 1GB Low Latency (2-3-2-5) RAM
GeForce 6800GT 256MB SLI Video Card

I wanted to make the rest of my system pretty fast before settling in on a processor.

But I'm lost when it comes to the processor. Should I get a fast AMD processor like the FX-55, should I go with a dual core setup like an X2 4800 Toledo... or should I go with an Opteron (they're now making them for Socket 939) or dual core Opteron? I have about $900 to spend on the processor and don't want to have to fool with getting another computer for at least another five years.

And would it be important to have a lot of L2 cache for this setup or should I go with a basic processor and save the money?


Would just go with the basic processor, The software has to be specifically written to use the dual stuff, especially the OS. Right now Linux is probably the only economical product that would take advantage.



Any other help with hardware appreciated. I've never worked with anything more powerful than an early P4 setup. I own a P3 966 right now, so most of the hardware is foreign to me. If you've heard bad reviews about any of it, relay it to me. I also decided to go with dual SATA II hard drives in RAID 0 rather than spend the extra money for SCSI. Good call or bad call?


SCSI is much better and faster. Better off spending more money on your disk access because that is what slows up the system. RAID is not necessary, get a good tape backup. RAID is for server systems and database systems. Not necessarily fool proof either as I have seen a controller go bad and wipe out all of the disk in the RAID array.

[Ranger Mom]

WOW!! Every single bit of that was Greek to me!!

Good Luck BDR!!

[zeus63]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
WOW!! Every single bit of that was Greek to me!!

Good Luck BDR!!

Yeah, no joke. GEEKS!!! (Just kidding)

[99IHSMustang]

I wouldn’t worry about going Dual Processor unless you’re an Intense PC game freak or you want to use it as a home server! I would definitely go with an AMD 64-bit processor. I wouldn’t worry about SCSI unless you want to use the machine as a server. SATA 0 will work just fine. From what I understand some boards that have SATA capabilities also run JBOD (Just a bunch of disks) that allow you to use HD’s that are not the same size. Such as a 200GB with a 100GB. SATA 0 stripes without parity so you won’t have fault tolerance, but just back your system using Norton Ghost and put it on a DVD. I have a copy of Windows XP 64-bit edition. I have a 64-bit set up at home but I am running Windows 2003 Server so I have no need for it yet. Just to give you an idea my 64-bit system has an Athlon-64 inside and runs at 1.7… with overclocking probably 2.7 or more. It runs way faster than my P4 2.9 GHz machine.

[44INAROW]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
WOW!! Every single bit of that was Greek to me!!

Good Luck BDR!!

I agree RM.. I know where the mouse, monitor and on/off switch are though :D

[BigTex]

yeah.............mmmmmm .........what he said

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by BigTex
yeah.............mmmmmm .........what he said

Haha :clap: :clap:

[zeus63]

Quote from Tommy Boy (Chris Farley).--I was just checkin' out the specs on the retro...I'm retarded.

[big daddy russ]

Originally posted by cdlvj
Would just go with the basic processor, The software has to be specifically written to use the dual stuff, especially the OS. Right now Linux is probably the only economical product that would take advantage.
I was going to upgrade to either one of the Linux 64 bit systems or the new Windows 64 (not until after MS works out all the bugs) if I went with a dual core to take advantage of all the multitasking capabilities, but I know my girlfriend's AMD 3200 754 is blazing fast without anything else.



Originally posted by cdlvj
SCSI is much better and faster. Better off spending more money on your disk access because that is what slows up the system. RAID is not necessary, get a good tape backup. RAID is for server systems and database systems. Not necessarily fool proof either as I have seen a controller go bad and wipe out all of the disk in the RAID array.
Would you recommend getting a SCSI card that could do RAID 0, RAID 1 or no RAID at all? If I get a 3700 CPU I'll still have enough money to splurge on RAID... or is RAID too much money without enough return? I've been looking on all the gaming sites and they seem to say that SATA 3.0 RAID 0 is as quick as all get out (I can't imagine how fast a SCSI RAID 0 setup would be) or that SCSI RAID 1 is more reliable than anything else. Which would you guys recommend?

And would a zip drive tape back up work or should I go with one of the newer, bigger Sony drives (like an AIT drive)?

[44INAROW]

now it is Greek Squared to me.. by the way BDR - be sure and PM RM :)

[big daddy russ]

Originally posted by 99IHSMustang
I wouldn’t worry about going Dual Processor unless you’re an Intense PC game freak or you want to use it as a home server! I would definitely go with an AMD 64-bit processor. I wouldn’t worry about SCSI unless you want to use the machine as a server. SATA 0 will work just fine. From what I understand some boards that have SATA capabilities also run JBOD (Just a bunch of disks) that allow you to use HD’s that are not the same size. Such as a 200GB with a 100GB. SATA 0 stripes without parity so you won’t have fault tolerance, but just back your system using Norton Ghost and put it on a DVD. I have a copy of Windows XP 64-bit edition. I have a 64-bit set up at home but I am running Windows 2003 Server so I have no need for it yet. Just to give you an idea my 64-bit system has an Athlon-64 inside and runs at 1.7… with overclocking probably 2.7 or more. It runs way faster than my P4 2.9 GHz machine.
Well, to be perfectly honest I still have no idea exactly what a server does... I guess it serves other computers but that's about all I know about it. My girlfriend's dad (who's the VP of a software company out of Houston) said I should go with an Opteron and could've hooked me up with a nice server workstation (Opteron 252, 1 GB, dual 74GB 10K RPM SCSI hd's in RAID 0) from Hewlett Packard at his price of $749. I would've loved to get in on that, but I just couldn't come up with the money before the deal ended.

As far as the rest, that software is some of the biggest stuff on the market and gets really bottlenecked with average computers. That's why I was worried. One of my classmates up here has a P4 2.4, 768 MB RAM, 80 GB SATA hd, Radeon 9600 128mb system that gets eaten up when he tries to run Quark and Photoshop Pro at the same time. Load times take forever and the video card/system RAM doesn't have enough dedicated memory to handle more than one image on Photoshop at a time. I don't want anything like that and I'm going to be upgrading from time to time. I almost went with a PNY video card, but since I'm not doing anything close to autocad I figured I'd save the $300 and put it towards the CPU. Besides, I figure I'll be starting out with XP Media Edition and I love watching movies from my computer moniter before I go to sleep. That'll give me some better graphics at about 1/3 the price of the PNY.

Oh, and I don't think I'll be gaming much. About the only game I could see me getting would be Halo 2, but that's not in my immediate future.

[big daddy russ]

Originally posted by 44INAROW
now it is Greek Squared to me.. by the way BDR - be sure and PM RM :)
Well does RM have IM? If she does I can catch her ASAP w/o the hassle of a PM.

[NateDawg39]

I think you should go with a Dual Lenox Processor...or maybe a RNX 22 Dual spread matrix line up. Those are the most made up crap names ever....:D

[44INAROW]

Originally posted by big daddy russ
Well does RM have IM? If she does I can catch her ASAP w/o the hassle of a PM.

ksimm@aol.com

[Ranger Mom]

AIM is: KSIMM

I am on right now!

[big daddy russ]

Originally posted by 44INAROW
ksimm@aol.com
LOL, I thought we were just having fun with acronyms. I didn't know you were serious. I just sent her a PM... don't really have IM anymore.

[big daddy russ]

Oh, and two more questions guys... what's the transfer rate of SATA II compared to that of SCSI 320? I can't find figures on that anywhere on the web.

Also, is there a DVD burner with a SCSI interface? If there is I'd love to know.

[44INAROW]

Originally posted by big daddy russ
LOL, I thought we were just having fun with acronyms. I didn't know you were serious. I just sent her a PM... don't really have IM anymore.

:inlove: :inlove: I love it..

[garageoffice]

Big Daddy, if you're that concerned with the performance, make sure you check out the specs and reviews on the motherboard you plan to use. You will find that there can be HUGE differences in overall performance, especially when you have fast disk and lots of memory coupled with resource-hungry software. Sorry I don't have any recommendations for you, but I haven't built anything lately rivaling the system you're describing.

I have been very happy with the performance of my Athlon 64, though. In fact, just for fun, I've run it with 32-bit windows, 32-bit Linux and 64-bit Linux (haven't tried the 64-bit WinXP yet) and have found performance to be great in all scenarios. I run DB and application server software on it and it has really impressed me so far.

[cdlvj]

A server essentially is a centralized computer with all the storage for multiple clients. That way all the essential files can be backed up easily, and restored if need be.


Would you recommend getting a SCSI card that could do RAID 0, RAID 1 or no RAID at all? If I get a 3700 CPU I'll still have enough money to splurge on RAID... or is RAID too much money without enough return? I've been looking on all the gaming sites and they seem to say that SATA 3.0 RAID 0 is as quick as all get out (I can't imagine how fast a SCSI RAID 0 setup would be) or that SCSI RAID 1 is more reliable than anything else. Which would you guys recommend?

And would a zip drive tape back up work or should I go with one of the newer, bigger Sony drives (like an AIT drive)? [/B]

I would not spend any money on RAID. What RAID does is give you the ability to hot swap a bad drive in the array. You just pull out the bad one, and pop in the new drive, and it corrects itself.

Just a simple basic tape drive would be ok. And hopefully you probably would never ever have to use it. Only a few companies make zip, and you would be locked into that hardware. With the basic, you can easily dump your data, and move it to another computer in the future.

Photoshop is very disk intensive, open a large size image, and it will use 3 to 4 times that for keeping track of layers.

You do pay more money for SCSI, but usually their drives mostly always come with 5 year waranty. You are lucky if you can get a 3 year waranty with the others.

[big daddy russ]

garage office, cdlvj, Izzy, thanks for the help. At least I know what I'm up against.