SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 39 of 39
  1. #26
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Drool:



    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  2. #27
    + platinum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    6,441
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    woah, i'm droolin'

  3. #28
    Serial Publisher silver trophy aspen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    East Lansing, MI USA
    Posts
    12,937
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So much stuff you don't need.

    1. Dual Processors: Don't do it unless you plan on running *nix. Windows doesn't take sufficient advantage of dual processors so it's not worth it.

    2. RAID: Talk about an easy way to really increase your price. I doubt you could build a RAID system with your budget (where those US or CA dollars?) Plus this is a workstation, not a server, you don't need it.

    Get an AMD. They're cheaper, better, and use cheaper motherboards/ram. Just don't skrimp on the fan.

    Get 2 hardrives.

    Hard Drive A:

    This one is small and fast. Put your most used programs on this drive (Windows Etc)

    Either get a 10,000 or 15,000 RPM one

    15,000:
    http://www.pricewatch.com/1/26/3045-1.htm

    10,000:
    http://www.pricewatch.com/1/26/2150-1.htm

    Hard Drive B:

    This is your beast. Store your MP3's, digital movies, any big storage things here. Find some large eide drive for this, 80 or 100 GB is more than you'll ever need (unless you do lots of video editing)...

    Best Deal: 80GB
    http://www.pricewatch.com/1/26/2480-1.htm


    Processor/Motherboard: Get one of these:
    http://www.pricewatch.com/1/306/4210-1.htm

    Ram: Get two of these:
    http://www.pricewatch.com/1/33/2841-1.htm
    Chris Beasley - I publish content and ecommerce sites.
    Featured Article: Free Comprehensive SEO Guide
    My Guide to Building a Successful Website
    My Blog|My Webmaster Forums

  4. #29
    Not a post-script error?!! guysmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Underneath the Earth w/ Krom (Canada)
    Posts
    787
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have to agree. If one massive hard drive is running all your applications, it's going to slow you down big time. 2 hard drives for sure, especially if you record audio or have a home studio. Every good sound engineer I've met has that setup.

    I too lust for a Sony Triniton 19", I worked on one for a while and got spoiled (silver finish on a dual 500 G4). When I came home, my current 15" screen looked jive.

  5. #30
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree with everything but the dual processor bit, as win2k can more then "handle" dual processor, in fact it has no problem going up to 8 processors on the professional version.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  6. #31
    Serial Publisher silver trophy aspen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    East Lansing, MI USA
    Posts
    12,937
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Honestly I never heard anything on win2k.

    But as far as NT 4 or 9.x it won't utilize multiple processors well. Sure you can technically stack 8 processors but what I mean is that it won't evenly distribute tasks. The numbers I was given were 70/30 instead of the 50/50 you'd get with *nix.

    I got this for 2 sources. Leo on TechTV's ScreenSavers and a GateWay Technician who convinced a friend of mine not to do dual processors.
    Chris Beasley - I publish content and ecommerce sites.
    Featured Article: Free Comprehensive SEO Guide
    My Guide to Building a Successful Website
    My Blog|My Webmaster Forums

  7. #32
    Serial Publisher silver trophy aspen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    East Lansing, MI USA
    Posts
    12,937
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think I found a place to get cases like H displayed:

    http://www.computer-smarts.com/custo...uter_case.html
    Chris Beasley - I publish content and ecommerce sites.
    Featured Article: Free Comprehensive SEO Guide
    My Guide to Building a Successful Website
    My Blog|My Webmaster Forums

  8. #33
    + platinum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    6,441
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Good idea about getting a quick, small H/D aspen
    I might do that for mine

  9. #34
    Making a better wheel silver trophy DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    3,428
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Jeremy W.
    I agree with everything but the dual processor bit, as win2k can more then "handle" dual processor, in fact it has no problem going up to 8 processors on the professional version.
    2000 Pro only supports 2 CPUs.


    Originally posted by aspen
    But as far as NT 4 or 9.x it won't utilize multiple processors well. Sure you can technically stack 8 processors but what I mean is that it won't evenly distribute tasks. The numbers I was given were 70/30 instead of the 50/50 you'd get with *nix.

    I got this for 2 sources. Leo on TechTV's ScreenSavers and a GateWay Technician who convinced a friend of mine not to do dual processors.
    yeah, you won't get quite as good SMP performance from 2000 as you would from Linux if you're running only one program at a time. that's simply b/c most Win programs aren't multi-threaded ('cept Photoshop, 3D Studio, etc.) and more are on *nix. actually Win program ARE multi-threaded (most all programs have more than 1 thread), but they're not multiple CPU bound threads.

    but anyway, if you're running things that have more than one thread wanting to run at a time, 2000 definitely multi-processes fine. for example, 3D Studio render times are almost 100% (~95%+) faster w/ 2 CPUs -- that's about as good as you can get. so 2000 is definitely doing things right -- as long as your programs are giving it something to do.

    dual processors are GREAT (mostly... not mentioning a few problems that arise from some broken products... ahem, SBLive!). the smoothness of 2 CPUs is hard to beat w/ a single processor. your system is always responsive no matter how much you have going.

    what determines your comp's responsiveness isn't so much "how fast is my CPU?," but "is there a processor available that can run this thread right now?" and the answer to that question will be "yes" much more often with 2 CPUs.

    BTW, off topic on Leo: he's cool most of the time, but some of the things he says, i wonder if he's on crack!

    2 examples of things he says a lot, that aren't true (re: Win2000):

    "don't play games as an Administrator b/c more services are running." WTH?! the same services ARE RUNNING NO MATTER WHAT USER IS LOGGED IN! and it doesn't matter anyway, b/c those services are not "active", which means 2 things: 1)they're not using any CPU time, and 2) any physical memory that they're using can and will be paged out if any other processes need it. so, if he benchmarked with his stupid advice he'd see that there's *ZERO* difference in game performance.

    he also says that "NTFS doesn't fragment as much as FAT/FAT32." BULL! that's probably the biggest myth about NTFS, and he preaches it all the time! there's is NOTHING in NTFS that would cause it to fragment less. nothing.
    Last edited by DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR; Nov 14, 2001 at 23:41.
    - Matt ** Ignore old signature for now... **
    Dr.BB - Highly optimized to be 2-3x faster than the "Big 3."
    "Do not enclose numeric values in quotes -- that is very non-standard and will only work on MySQL." - MattR

  10. #35
    SitePoint Guru sowen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Stockport, UK
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I beleive NTFS fragments considerably more than FAT(32). Its always a good idea to run speeddisk once a week, more if you do a lot of photo manipulation and or create and delete lots of files on a regular basis.

  11. #36
    SitePoint Wizard Defender1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    My Computer
    Posts
    2,808
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by TheOriginalH
    Hmmmm - question for all you pricewatch fans.....

    Some time last week I was looking at memory and there where pages of PC133 521mb sticks for $23. Phenomenal I thought, time to go christmas shopping . Went there today and could find nothing under $40. Still not bad, but do they always change the prices that quickly?
    They change so quickly because pricewatch is a "portal" site for sites and companies to advertise their best prices, so they can fluctuate quite a bit.
    Defender's Designs
    I'm Getting Married!

    Not-so-patiently awaiting Harry Potter Book 7 *sigh*

  12. #37
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Defender - wow, surprised by that level of fluctuation - ah wellm should have bought while the price was good .

    Aspen - good advice on setup - I may use that structure for my next PC. Have a similar setup at the mo (although 1 hdd (7200rpm) partitioned to three drives), but like the idea of having a small really fast one and a huge slower one very much. However, don't like the link you posted - it's christmas soon, I should be saving my money. Now you've made me think about how much I NEED a case like that
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  13. #38
    Net Senior Citizen tommatthews's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Posts
    869
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How does this Dell configuration sound:

    Dell Dimension 8200 2.0GHz Desktop
    AUD $ 3,876 40

    Base System INTEL(R) PENTIUM(R) 4 PROCESSOR 2.0GHz,MINI TOWER
    INTEL 850 CHIPSET
    CACHE 256KB ON-DIE L2
    MEMORY,256MB (2X128) PC800 RDRAM
    VIDEO CARD, 64MB NVIDIA GEFORCE2 MX WITH TV OUT
    MONITOR, 19"COLOUR (18.0"v.i.s
    HARD DRIVE 100GB,ULTRA ATA,7200RPM
    Operating System MICROSOFT WINDOWS XP HOME EDITION
    MICROSOFT OFFICE XP SB (OEM)WORD / EXCEL / OUTLOOK / PUBLISHER
    Optical Drive CDRW, 24X/10X/40X VARIABLE WITH FORMATTED MEDIA
    SOUND CARD,576 VOICE SOUND BLASTER LIVE VALUE
    NETWORK CARD,FAST ETHERNET 10/100, WAKE_ON_LAN PCI SPEAKERS, HARMON KARDON 19.5
    MODEM,V.90/56K,FAX/DATA,PCI,AUS


    affordable website design

    :: sydney australia ::

  14. #39
    Yugo full of anvils bronze trophy hillsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    :noitacoL
    Posts
    1,859
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My vote still goes with RAID. What happens when your huge data drive has a mechanical failure and you lose 5GB of stuff? I've had it happen twice (amongst other things, I don't buy Quantum drives any more )

    Yes, you could back up onto CDRs or buy yourself a tape drive (or Jaz, or Orb). And it's still a good idea to take off-system backups on a regular basis anyway. But nothing beats RAID for real-time protection.

    And it's not really expensive - last time I looked, an IDE controller was $200 and the drive is just another one of whatever you're going to use for your data drive.
    that's me!
    Now A Pom. And a Plone Nut
    Broccoli Martinez Airpark


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •