review this build

[=98=]

Re: review this build

Cache has a massive impact on the CPU's performance. Q6600 would be better. As for the ram, unless you want 420mhz fsb's, then get the 800mhz stuff.

[[USAC]S|Cpl.TinFoil]

Re: review this build

As he edits/encodes with it, CPU, RAM, and possibly a Nvidia video card are essential. Go for the bigger CPU cache in whatever you get, as stuff like encoding benefits (the reason I spent the extra $10-20 for a E6600 years back). A large amount of extra RAM is necessary for NLE applications like Sony Vegas (and to an extent, disc burning), but not really something like Avisynth. With the new advances in h264 CUDA playback for Nvidia cards (1080p with 2% CPU load) and Nvidia's giddiness for Badaboom, I would get a lower-end 9xxx to save some cash.

Yes, people, I know the 4850 is better. Light gaming, however, suggests that he is not trying to run Crysis and Far Cry 2 at maximum quality DX10 1920x1080.

If he/you wants to overclock, then go for the Q6600 or one of the new Phenoms. Haven't seen the encoding benchmarks for it yet, though.

[signa]

Re: review this build

If its only light gaming i would suggest getting a cheaper graphics card (maybe a 9600GT or 4670) and upgrading to one of the 2nd gen C2Qs (45nm)with SSE4 like the Q9550, might benefit when doing photo and video apps with that.
If you cant fit it into the budget maybe look at the phenom IIs?

Nothing wrong with the power supply you have there but you wont need a 650W a 450W corsair unit would do fine.

thanks. after I got my Q6600 I kind of stopped looking at benchmarks of newer quads. I guess I should look more into that.

Ive had no problems with asus mobos however if your looking at that then you should have checked the combo deals as ive managed to price it up around $10 cheaper but with 1066 DDR2 instead of 800 DDR2 and everything else has stayed the same
[/IMG]

nice. I'll look more closely at some of those combos.

Also, the spot for the 24 pin on that mobo is right in the center, instead of the side, so cable mangement will be a *****...

Cache has a very huge impact. I suppose it depends on what you're doing, but I imagine down the road applications will be taking advantage of that extra cache.

Cache has a massive impact on the CPU's performance. Q6600 would be better. As for the ram, unless you want 420mhz fsb's, then get the 800mhz stuff.

I've always believed in the more cache the better. take a look at the history of intel cpu's. they always released a cheaper version of the same chip with less cache and it always performed worse.

perhaps I should consider a lesser video card like a Radeon 4670, and put the money towards a better CPU like the Q9550 (2.83ghz) with 12mb L2 cache? I could go that route and it might only up the price $20~

[Busby, Paul (Bicci)]

Re: review this build

yep more cache is better which is why my suggestion of changing from 65nm to 45nm went straight to the 9550. Bear in mind Intel plan to phase the Q6600 out of production ASAP so if thats the budget option which still remains most sense then do it quick!
For what this guy seems to use it for he would deffo benefit from the lesser video card although as mentioned the NVid cards do tend to offer better video card acceleration than ATI cards so the 9600 may be better (i have heard the extra oumph starts at the 9800GTX+ though... confirmation necissary). Just take into account the lesser PSU, that can save a lot of cash and on top of the potential cash saved from the GPU it opens doors for the CPU which is more important.