Anyone see a potential problem?

metamorphpwner

metamorphpwner

metamorphpwner

Associate
Joined
6 Sep 2008
Posts
2,111
Location
Near Hull
Hi,
I'm ordering my new computer as soon as my dad's home as he has the account on overclocker, no point me making one aswell.
So below is a picture of what i plan to buy, but is it all going to work together without problem?, unless faulty?
my last pc had problems with the graphics card and driver its drivers, but that was upgraded over about 3/4 years.

 
All completely compatible and overclockable ;)

If you using it to game (which I assume) I would go with a RAID 0 setup (2 identical HDDs). Will boost your loading and boot times substantially. And I guess you have a case to put it all in. Only thing else would be a 3rd party CPU cooler if you are going to OC, with that CPU it would be a crime not to. 2.4GHz will bottleneck most things.
 
Last edited:
all good.

you could get a nice 500gb drive for £45, that's 180gb for five whole pounds.

elpedro. i was thinking of raid 0 for boosting loading times in games but then read that it made no real difference, some said that just installing games to a different drive to the OS was just as fast.

what's your experience with it? I may consider changing my setup.
 
tbh, i wouldnt bother with 8500 memory get some better 6400 i.e. tighter timings, and still with that mem at stock you can get the cpu to 3.6 ghz and most 6400 would overclock if you wanted to go higher!
 
DarthBallz said:
all good.
you could get a nice 500gb drive for £45, that's 180gb for five whole pounds.
elpedro. i was thinking of raid 0 for boosting loading times in games but then read that it made no real difference, some said that just installing games to a different drive to the OS was just as fast.
what's your experience with it? I may consider changing my setup.
Click to expand...

i thought a larger hard drive would be slower? but i also don't really need a lot of storage, we have a 1.5TB NAS next to my dads pc
 
mmmm...

metamorphpwner said:
i thought a larger hard drive would be slower? but i also don't really need a lot of storage, we have a 1.5TB NAS next to my dads pc
Click to expand...

I think larger capacity drives are faster because there's more memory on the same size platter so the seek times will be smaller, especially if you partition the outside edge and keep defragged. i could be wrong.
 
elpedro said:
Stick with the faster stuff as it will overclock and be worth the pennies in the long run.
Click to expand...

don't really know what the timings matter to it.
the cheaper 6400 i looked at are CL 5-5-5-18
the 8500 slightly more expensive are CL 5-6-6-18.
To me that means nothing, but looks pretty close.

Edit: one site says lower is better, but wikipedia says CL 2 is slower that CL5 which should mean CL6 is even faster?therefore better? am i way off here?
 
Last edited:
DarthBallz said:
I think larger capacity drives are faster because there's more memory on the same size platter so the seek times will be smaller, especially if you partition the outside edge and keep defragged. i could be wrong.
Click to expand...

A recent drive with 320Gb will be using a single high density platter, sequential reads will be faster than most 500gb drives which will be using 2 X 250Gb platters
 
Theres no OS system listed , I assume you have one preferably 64 bit if your using 4gb of ram (32 bit windows only gives you a little over 3 GB without some work rounds)

If you go for32 bit winodws installs go easier if you just run with 2gb until its ready (avoids occasional incompatibilites)
 
errata said:
Theres no OS system listed , I assume you have one preferably 64 bit if your using 4gb of ram (32 bit windows only gives you a little over 3 GB without some work rounds)

If you go for32 bit winodws installs go easier if you just run with 2gb until its ready (avoids occasional incompatibilites)
Click to expand...

64Bit windows vista ultimate OEM, Not used.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom