Personal built computer vs HP

[macroplanet]

Hello tech heads. New to the forums here. I guess I'll introduce myself first.

I am a gamer and a graphic designer.

There, that should do

With that said I'll get onto my concern/question. In the past I have always bought a computer through Dell. With my last computer I actually placed a new power supply and graphic card into the system myself.

I've decided with my next computer that I really wanted to just build one from scratch just so I got more bang for my bucks and it would be less difficult trying to find parts to fit my case.

However I ran into a problem. I went to newegg and put together some parts and the system was going to wind up costing around $950 for the system, which included:

1. Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
2. LG DVD Burner Black SATA Model GH22NS50 - OEM
3. Intel Core i7-860 Lynnfield 2.8GHz LGA 1156 95W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80605I7860
4. Western Digital Caviar Blue WD6400AAKS 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
5. GIGABYTE GA-P55A-UD3 LGA 1156 Intel P55 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
6. CORSAIR XMS3 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model CMX4GX3M2A1600C8
7. CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power ...
8. Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 1-Pack for System Builders - OEM

When I compare it to the HP HPE-170t series with the same i7-860 core/ 6gb of ram/ 750gb hdd and a radeon hd 5450 gfx card it comes out to be $999

To me it almost seems like a better deal with the HP. Unless I'm not picking the right prices at newegg or things have changed, custom pc always used to be cheaper to make for a better system.

Anyways, do you have any help or tips you could offer?

Again, I'm a graphic designer that likes to play few PC games (I'm more of a console gamer).

Thanks!

[liljim]

Theres a little catch 22 thing that happens now between custom built vs proprietary. You can now get a hp,dell etc cheaper with seemingly good specs but things arent always what they seem. PSU for example is where they often fail first, generic or value ram being second and motherboard third. They also often use large HDD's but its from the person who offered the best bulk price, not quality. Sure they can throw in a great cpu and video card but the average end user doesnt really know what else to look at from there.


Custom building has now become slightly more expensive but you do still get more bang for your buck. Better quality parts tend to offer more actual bandwidth and longer life with better options to upgrade later on without rebuilding. The parts you listed look great but i dont see where you listed a video card other than what the hp includes. Does your cost include a video card?

Also note that the 64 bit OS will only benefit you if you have 64 bit software. If not it runs everything under a 32 bit emulator thus defeating the true purpose. Being a designer you may actually have 64 bit tools, that would be nice otherwise your just begging for software compatability/peripheral hardware driver issues.

[macroplanet]

Thanks for your reply. I can understand how prices would be reverse compared to what I'm used to. To me it makes a bit more sense. To be honest, I'm not sure there are a lot of programs that use 64 bit either. I do know the newer Adobe products (CS4/CS5) currently do use it.

As for the video card, I was actually going to use the 8600gts that I currently am rocking in my Dell

One thing that I've always wanted to get was an Apple computer. Specifically a Mac Pro. But what I run into down the road is a computer that I cannot modify or even really fix myself (lack of knowledge). Plus I think Apple is beyond proud of their products. A lot of in house designers use Macs and basically live by them. To me it's basically the same as a PC, runs about the same, but lacks a right click mouse (unless of course you buy one with a right click).

The reason I wanted to do the custom built computer is because I feel I would have more control over the system down the road. When/if things break, upgrading specific parts, etc.

I do have one question though for you. There is a lot of talk about the Intel's i5 vs i7. From my understanding i5 is basically Duo-Core (I think one version of the i5 actually has quad core), while i7 is quad core with hyper thread. As a designer, someone that is mainly going to be using the Adobe Creative Suite programs, is it really necessary for me to get a quad core? What is your opinion on the subject?

Thanks again.

[liljim]

First, your absolutely right about not being able to upgrade/repair Macs. They are however different by operating system and not to much hardware anymore. They have went to intel cpu's on some models but everything else still remains integrated with little or no room for expansion. The operating system is much more efficient if one can ever get adjusted to it. Its a very clean UNIX based with a light weight interface, making it a brother to Linux. Probably more like a father but you get the point. Pound for pound, mac will out run a pc for things its designed to run but again, it has hardware limitations, proud is an understatement, and gaming just wont happen.

Duals vs quads is still a pretty debatable subject. Im more than happy to share my opinion but take it at face value, its only my personal opinion. I feel about it much like i do the 64 bit operating systems. It may potentially be great but theres still ALOT of software that wont utilize 4 "cpu's". Some of the more modern games are just now taking advantage of dual core. From a gaming perspective, the performance gain from quad to dual hasnt been really substantial. With modern video cards now, most of the rendering load is sent directly to the card where the cpu did alot of the work in the past.

Now heres the catch to the above. There are currently good to have if you intend to multitask, they can handle tons of threads at one time and sooner or later code writers will figure out how to fully use the beastly cpu's that are out. If you use a quad now, you shouldnt have to upgrade for a long long time but thats about the only real aspects i can think of.

The machine im currently running is outdated severely "if" you look only at whats been released since it was built. This configuration is at least 3 years old, closer to 4 in all likely hood but its a AMD X2 6000 3 gig dual core, 4 gigs of ddr2-800 and a 8800gt with XP Pro 32 bit. None of that is impressive hardware anymore but i still can play anything on the market with max settings with other things running in the background. I say that just to say that a dual core will do anything you ask of it, it will handle any Adobe product you can get your hands on. Quad core is far from a necessity for anything. Its a future server workhorse if anything.

Hopefully that helps you make a decision either way, my intention is not to convince anyone that "this" is better than "that" but only to share what ive experienced myself.

[macroplanet]

I always thought about that too, it almost seemed quad core was beyond it's time. When it comes to pricing it gets a little tricky when picking which I want. i5 vs i7.

I'm actually embarrassed posting what I do my current designing and slight gaming on.
Pentium 4, 3.0ghz with HT
2 gig ram
8600gts (which is extremely bottle necked in my system lol)
70gb HDD space (I have to place all my designs on an external)

Honestly I'm probably headed more towards the i5, which is still new technology. Didn't they release late 2009? I do not do a lot of multi-tasking. The most I probably do is I usually will have Photoshop & Illustrator & sometimes Dreamweaver open at the same time. There is a slight hit on my systems speed, but I think if I had i5 to go with that I probably would notice a night and day difference. When I play games, I usually only have that game on. The only game I have really been playing is StarCraft 2, which runs fine on my current system. I would really like to try some of the newer pc games out though. You know, the games they port over from PC to console but you know deep inside that it should only be a pc game ;)

It probably would be smart to get the i5 too, then maybe upgrade a couple years down the road to what ever new CPU they have (when money maybe isn't so tight).

I really do appreciate your comment because I feel that you're not jaded by 'new' technology. i7 is really awesome and i9 will even be more awesome, but do we really need that kind of power now? Maybe the business world does, but as far as I know gamers are doing just fine with the duo-core2 technology.

[liljim]

i look at it as buying a Lamborghini to go grocery shopping, kinda pointless. Your system isnt really bad with all things considered. Its still capable of more things than it will be given credit for. Where you will probably benefit though is the overall bandwith of the newer cpu, ram and pci-e. The extra core, not so much. A 70 gig hdd is definatly in need of replacing i imagine lol, i can remember buying my first "big bad" 120 gig ibm deskstar drive and thinking "ill never fill this up". Man, was i wrong lol. Im running 3 drives now totaling 610 gigs of room and still find myself making room to save things. The big downside to modern games now is the room they require. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 eats up 12 gigs, bioshock 2 eats up 10.

I didnt know starcraft 2 was out though, have to go look into that now : )

Playing beta?

[macroplanet]

Yes it's beta. You can pre-order the game for $5 at GameStop and they give you the beta code. As far as I know, it's just like playing the full release. It's that smooth.

I like your grocery store analogy, lol. It is very true though. Over the next few days I'm going to go back onto newegg and see if I can probably lower the price a bit more. Currently I have the i5 Quad Core, I might see if I can just bump myself down to the i5 Dual Core. The way I see it, jumping from a Pentium 4 to a i5 will be like jumping to the moon.

As far as the HDD is concerned; YES, I do need a major upgrade. I have to put my art work onto my 500gb backup drive just to keep enough room. And forget about having more than 3 games installed on the computer. Especially with this generation of games, like you said. I always wanted to buy a new HDD, but I think I wanted to just save it all for a new computer.

I'll post back this week to let you know what i'm looking at. Again, thanks for your help! Your views have helped me a lot. I'm just so used to people saying buy the most expensive stuff or you will regret it. It's good to hear that someone with a Duo Core is rocking current games at max settings.

[liljim]

Glad i can help but keep in mind that my gaming ability comes straight from my video card, not my processor. Regardless of quad or dual, framerate will depend on the gpu. 8600 has 32 stream processors with a 675/1000 clock speed where with the 8800 im running 112 with 660/1940 clock. Thats not to say you cant run what i can but if you get in a really graphic intense scene, frame rate may drop a few frames per second until the activity calms back down some. That would happen with any cpu on the market, its not related at all.

Is the starcraft beta just single player?

[macroplanet]

Currently the SC2 beta is only multiplayer. But it's pretty awesome because they still have achievements, ranks, map creator, friend list, etc... It's only 5 bucks to get it (at least it was last week, not sure if gamestop still has some left).

I eventually will get a newer graphic card, but my priority right now is the complete system. I guess the 8800 still decent with all current games then?

[liljim]

I would have to say yes to the 8800. I play Call of duty modern warfare 2, bioshock 2, perfect world international, all completely maxed and lag free. I know at some point ill find something to choke it down but i dont intend to upgrade unless that happens or it dies.

[macroplanet]

Okay, sorry for the wait.

I've updated a few things and need your opinion.

* means it's a new part.

*1)AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor Model HDZ955FBGMBOX

*2)GIGABYTE GA-MA785GMT-UD2H AM3 AMD 785G HDMI Micro ATX AMD Motherboard

3)CORSAIR CMPSU-650TX 650W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 ...

4)Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case

5)CORSAIR XMS3 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model CMX4GX3M2A1600C9

6)Western Digital Caviar Blue WD6400AAKS 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive

7)ASUS DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS Black SATA 24X DVD Burner - Bulk - OEM

8)Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 1-Pack for System Builders - OEM

I've always have been an Intel guy. So my lack of knowledge with Intel vs AMD is slim. I have a couple of questions about this setup. With the AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition, will the Corsair PSU I have work with AMD, or do I need to find a specific PSU that is compatible with AMD? As far as using AMD...what is different with AMD compared to Intel? Do you recommend one over the other?

I found that AMD was way cheaper than Intel, I've always have heard that though.

Thanks again liljim

[liljim]

Ive always preferred AMD. When you match up the two chips on performance scales, AMD is much less expensive than its equal powered competitor. That may change somewhere down the road, who knows but for now i suggest AMD. What you have selected will work fine with your PSU. My only advice is to check some of the other AMD products for a lower wattage. 125 is high wattage and will generate more heat than say a 95 watt would. You dont necessarily need a black edition cpu, that simply means its speeds are unlocked allowing it to be overclocked. Its not a bad cpu by any means but if you dont intend to overclock then you can save a few bucks by using a AMD Phenom II X4 945 Deneb 3.0GHz 95 watt instead. Its only 200MHz less which you will never see, it draws less on the psu thus producing less heat in the case and out. If you intend to fool around with overclocking some then the black edition will be the way to go.

Intel's I5's and I7's give AMD a hard time on benchmark scores but that falls back to prior statements, is it really necessary? Unless your running a gaming server or the like, i cant see paying what intel's asking.

[macroplanet]

Great eye!

I went ahead and switched out to the AMD Phenom II X4 945 Deneb 3.0GHz Socket AM3 95W Quad-Core Processor Model HDX945WFGIBOX. Having less heat in a system is always important. I will say my Dell that I have now loves to run everything hot. My graphic card that I have now usually runs @ 75-80c on a full load. I hate it, cause I know it's slowly killing the card. Limited cases suck

I do not plan on doing much OC. I know a lot of experts do it and always OC their systems, but honestly I really don't have an interest in pushing the system more than what it already can do. I guess I'm afraid I would screw it up

I've always have heard great things about AMD products. Always has been a bang for your bucks I guess.

One other question. Would I need to get a new Motherboard since I switched out to the new Phenom II X4?

Thanks again for the input.

[liljim]

the gigabyte board above should run that X4 just fine.