Matah's new new computer

Sorry nobodie, all I could think of.

All my computer parts are finally in and I just set everything up a little while ago.

First off, I have this case:

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDe ... 115&depa=1

This thing is huge. Just the door panel can cover my old chassis completely. Jarinor would know. I'm talking 35 pounds - empty.

Processor:
http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductde ... 483&DEPA=1

Fast as hell. I'm enjoying my 64 bit masterpeice very much indeed. I look down on all of you with your crusty old 32 bit artifacts.


Motherboard:
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDe ... 498&depa=1

Very fast with tons of features. It has a sweet boot up screen.


Hard drive:
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDe ... 033&depa=1

It's really huge if you're upgrading from an 80 giger. Still very fast with all that storage.

I have 6 fans and cooling isn't a problem.

I have a socket 754 aphla heatsink with a vantec tornado. It's crazy. My cpu hardly ever goes above 37 degrees celcius. It'll do until I can afford water cooling. I also have 1 gigabyte of corsair PC3200 RAM.


I ran Ad-Aware and I swear it didn't take 30 seconds. It's so nice not having all kinds of unremovable Compaq shit and being free of the bonds of a proprietary setup is awesome.

 

matah, I must say that is one helluva pc. I think that when I decide to upgrade my pc(the day I ever have the money to) I shall call you and consult over a few things.

Wish I had that hunk of hardware sitting in my room...here's to you(or rather your pc) :thumbup:

 

Thank you.

I can't afford to spend money on things that aren't going to be satisfactory, so I always end up researching things alot more than the the average person in my position.

 

Congratulations Matah. I hope you love your new computer.

 

I bet it's noisy as hell . Also, by not using the provided heatsink, you just voided your AMD warranty.

 

Even including the title rip-off, I'm impressed and a little jealous at your new system, what kind of vid-card do you have though?, I noticed that it was conspicuously absent from the run down... let me guess it's the only thing you haven't up-graded yet and it's a crappy GF2 right?.

 

I was going to get a new computer with a 3.2Ghz P4, but that 64-bit Athlon is over fifty bucks cheaper!

 

Intel isn't coming out with their 64-bit chips for a while more yet, but they are touting the whole "Look how many more features we have!" already. What they leave out on their comparison charts is that AMD's have been out for fucking ages and are a shitload cheaper, and are a known quantity. Granted, for a server you only want to use Intel chips, but still...

 

I was thinking of building a dual processor system for rendering in Bryce 4. However, the price tag increases insanely as you browse new motherboards. www.tyan.com and see what I'm talking about. Can any uber geeks clarify my bothersome doubt: what impact will have dual processing over my games? Are they worth the price tag?

 

You got me. I'm going to get 9800 AIW, but I don't have enough money as of now.

I think my heatsink may be AMD qualified, but I not sure. And there's no way I'm putting that nasty weak heatsink on my cpu.

 

As far as I know, dual processors will only improve gameplay if the game is set-up so that it can use dual processors, and the only game I know of that'll do it is Quake.

 

Who is :thumbup: and why was he banned?

 

I think I'd just wait the extra 30 seconds for the rendering process rather than spending loads of money on the dual processor setup. Though, I do like the concept.

 

and more importantly, how is he continuing to post from the void?

 

I believe it's an old account of Matt's. I really don't know how he's managing to post though, guess I'll take a look see at some point. Added to that, he's as dumb as shit, as evidenced by this statement:

Quake does NOT support dual processors. No game does yet, otherwise you would have seen a dual processor motherboard for retail sale, instead of just in servers, dipshit.

As for your question Aries, it probably would make a difference, but only to the extent that all the other parts of your system can keep up - having the fastest dual processors on Earth doesn't matter if you've only got a shitty graphics card, it's still going to chug. Dual processors will eliminate the bottle neck at the CPU level, but it'll just transfer somewhere else, like it always does. That said, Tyan make shitty desktop boards, and I wouldn't really trust them on servers either, but they're a decent enough option. If I were you, I'd be looking out for the release of dual core Intel chips, which are due out about June/July next year. Start saving, because they'll cost a fortune, but you'll have bragging rights .

Dual dual-core processors would kick so much ass though...

 

Get your facts straight before chewing someone out.
Actually, dual mobo's were retailing strong for a while, especially back in the day when people found out that you could overclock celeries in the 300-400 range, put 'em on a dual mobo, and have your own low-budget dual CPU PC. In fact, my old house's media center PC still runs on two celery 366 CPU's overclocked to 550.

Also, is it me or does that mobo lack PCI-X?

 

Quake is Quake. Quake 2 is Quake 2. Quake 3 is Quake 3. Quake 2 and Quake 3 are not "Quake". See where I'm going with this? Otherwise, I am suitable chastened for not realising that some games do support dual processors.

PCI-X only came out recently, and I don't believe it's available yet on 64-bit boards. If it is though, they'd be pretty damn expensive, and you can bet the Intel ones will hit your pocket hard.

 

Actually, from what I could find, supporting SMP has been in the Quake engines since Quake 1, which you could run on WinNT to get it to use both CPU's, back in The Day (tm). It didn't give you all that much of a performance boost, but it did use both CPU's. I think Quake 3 was the only one to have the ability to run in a somewhat SMP optimized mode, though.

But that doesn't change the fact that buying a multi CPU system for desktop use right now is a dumb idea.

 

I'm currently working on numbers 10 and 11 in my line of custom computers that I have built, most of them since 1988 and I've used those big Antec cases on all but three of them. Antec makes a good case, but recently I tried out a couple of cases from Enermax http://www.maxpoint.com/products/ser_ch ... /index.htm because they put the hard drives in from the side on rails instead of having to mount them in a cage with screws. I made the change because I was fed up with losing a drive slot to my AGP video card on the Antec cases and having to be so careful any time I took that cage out to change out a drive. I must admit that I'm not totally happy with these cases because the drive bays are about an inch too far away from the back of the case for most motherboards and make it difficult to use standard length IDE cables, which are required for drives larger than 137 GB. (After getting four 250 GB Western Digital IDE drives, I can tell you that they are telling the absolute truth when they tell you that.) At any rate, I find that these larger cases, when set up with the maximum number of double ball bearing fans, are not as noisy as you might expect and they will keep your system cool and make it last a lot longer and be more stable than on sandwiched into a mini-tower with one fan or only the fans in the power supply and on the cpu.

That's a nice looking motherboard you chose, too, Mata.

I'm on a fixed income, so I also have to do some serious research and make sure that I'm getting the most "bang for my buck" when I set up a new system. Even when I build it for someone else, it's usually for a relative who doesn't make a lot of money, so I have to keep the expense low and the quality high.

I noticed that there were several limitations in that link you cited to Quake 3 about their multiprocessor support that should be pointed out to anyone who is considering such a system. If you don't have true multiprocessor support from your operating system, then you are just wasting money by building one. So, if you don't want to use something like Windows NT 4, I would suggest that you wait until a 64-bit, multiprocessor version of Windows XP, or the equivalent, is released to look seriously at such systems to get the most for you money. Until then, a system like Mata's is a much more sensible way to spend your money and it will be ready for the 64-bit OS when it is finally released.

I'm not sure I can agree with Jarinor's insistance that Intel is the only way to go for a server chip, especially in light of the fact that AMD is making big profits and serious inroads in what was traditionally an Intel only field. AMD is making seriously competitive cpus now days and should be looked at without all the prejudice and make a fair comparison before making such statements. Actually, from some of the reviews I've read, server applications are exactly where the new AMD chips are giving their Intel competition a hard time - especially if you look at the differences in cost.