looking to buy a new pc!

[Lf-final[XII]]

it will be from mesh.com because they offer monthly payments which is the only method i can afford.

anyhuu found this spec:

VISTA
Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Q6600 Quad Core Processor(2.4GHz,8MB Cache,1066MHz)
8GB RAM
512MB nVIDIA GeForce 9600GT
500GB hard drive

= 700pound

is that worth the price experts?

[pennywise]

8GB = insane overkill. Let me guess - 32bit Vista?

Everything else seems fine though.

[Lf-final[XII]]

so you dont think i need 8gb of RAM?

apparently the 32bit vista only picks up the 3gb RAM and the 5gb dont do anything?

[invicta ging3r]

I wouls stick at 4Gb ram at max, but dont go cheap on it, get sum nice stuff.

Also, if its mainly for gaming i would get a dual-core still. E4000 and E5000 would be your best bet i think. And what u thinking about mobos?

O and if your saving on costs, why not build it urself?

[Lf-final[XII]]

dual-core?

you mean dual is better than core?

i dont have the time nor expertise to build it myself

[invicta ging3r]

for gaming atm it is better to hav just 2 cores a higher clock speed than 4 cores at a lower speed because not any (i dont think) games can properly utilise all 4 cores.

[Galactus]

Its okay for the price. I would go after a better graphics card myself.

[Lf-final[XII]]

a better gcard? i thought its top of the range?

so duo > quad? :O

[pennywise]

9800GX2 is top of the range. 8800GT is great (I have one), but there are a few superior cards around (IMO I reckon it's the best value for money, but each to their own).

The Q6600 is apparently fantastic for everything, regardless if they use all 4 cores or not. If you can pick one up cheap enough, why not take it? Think forward 2 or 3 years when programs actually do utilize all the cores; you'll be glad you took the plunge now.

[DarK']

Yea I have the Quad Q6600, and its fantastic.

[Dragon007]

9800GX2 is top of the range. 8800GT is great (I have one), but there are a few superior cards around (IMO I reckon it's the best value for money, but each to their own).

The Q6600 is apparently fantastic for everything, regardless if they use all 4 cores or not. If you can pick one up cheap enough, why not take it? Think forward 2 or 3 years when programs actually do utilize all the cores; you'll be glad you took the plunge now.

I agree with pennywise. If you have the option to get a quad-core now, I would go with it so that you don't have to upgrade in the future...or at least, not as near in the future. :)

For the money, you aren't going to get a higher speed dual-core, or if you do, it won't be much faster and you aren't going to notice that much of a difference. I have the Q6600 and I think it runs great.

The 9800 cards are the best nVidia has right now, but the 9600 probably isn't a slouch either. I haven't looked into it personally. It will have the newer chipset than the 8800, so again, you are sort of preparing for future games, etc. So long as the core clock speed, memory clock speed and memory interface are comparable and your running about the same number of pipelines, you should go with the "newer" technology, in my opinion.

Enjoy your new rig!! :)

[[25H]V|Jgr.Rambo]

You would power a space shuttle with 8 gig of ram. plus it would be a waste because as im aware in vista your computer will only use about 3 gig max.

[[Ret'd TA]RaRaAvIs]

Q6600 is awesome really, as Pennywise said, better to go Quad now, while there isnt much that use it, rather than go Dual and having to upgrade in a year or 2.

I got a Q6600, 2.4Ghz Clocked to 3.2Ghz, on stand fan & heatsink, 3.8Ghz it becomes quite unstable, with some random overheating,and some people i know have got it upto 4.8Ghz with Water Cooling, you wont find a better Processer around for the price.

On the RAM 4Gigs is more than enough, i was gonna have 8Gig, as i have Vista 64 it could all be used, but it runs fast enough with 4Gigs of decent RAM, just a waste of money atm, maybe down the line a year or so i'll get another 4Gigs.
Vista 32 can use 3.25Gb of RAM, it can techinally use 4Gb, but is unstable, so not worth the trouble.

Doesnt the 9600/9800 use the same chipset as the 8800, is just tweaked more, and has more onborad RAM. I may be wrong, but im pretty sure it has.

Depends what your doing for what Hard Disk you have, but look at how much Cache they have and RPM, when i built my new rig, 4 months ago Seagate had a nice Hard Disk drive out, which i've got. Has 32Mb Cache and 10,000 RPM, sounds like a jet engine when it accessing some stuff. But it can match on Raptor HDD (which are meant to be the best), and when its like £50 less than a Raptor of exact same specs.

[Lf-final[XII]]

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 4 x 2.50GHz, Socket LGA775, 6Mb Cache, 1333FSB (including fan)
1024Mb PC6400 (800MHz) DDR-2 Memory x 4 (4GB)
320GB Western Digital Caviar Hard Disk Drive SATA-300 7200rpm 16MB Cache
Asus P5KPL-VM Socket LGA775 Intel G31, DDR2 USB2 Audio LAN SATA PCIe MicroATX - For Duel/Quad Core CPUs
Antec Mini Tower Black Steel Case, 380W PSU
Black x18 DUAL LAYER DVD-RW
Nvidia GeForce PCIe 9600GTS 512Mb DDRIII Dual Head DVI (SLI-Ready)

i was offered that spec for 650 pound?
is that a good quad core processor aswell?

and yes im looking for a pc that will last me a while in the future so quad ftw :)

[[25H]V|Jgr.Rambo]

380w psu that might just power your atari.