New computer or fix my old one?

[djh101]

I'm looking at Gateways, most of them are running around $500-600. I have an old computer, though, and I wouldn't mind replacing some of its parts if that would work. Any advice on whether to buy or fix (and which parts to replace) and some recommendations on desktops or drive/card makes and models? And for what I need, aside from basic tasks (web browsing, itunes, etc.), I don't do a lot of gaming (other than minesweeper, online Flash/Java games, occasionally Rollercoaster Tycoon), I'm mostly working in Notepad++ or Flash 8 (starting to learn and get into C++ as well); I also spend a lot of time uploading and downloading (mostly PHP, HTML, SWF files through Filezilla, occasionally I'll download some movies). I also don't have a great monitor to support an expensive video card (I'm using a 17" several year old LCD). Anyway, here are my current parts and a few I'm looking at:
-CD Drive (http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=F561B-NP) (Model: BCD F561B)
-CD Drive (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827152058) (Model: ND-3550A)
-Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 120gb Hard Drive (http://techreport.com/articles.x/9147/1)
-EPoX EP-8VTAI Motherboard (http://www1.shopping.com/xPO-EPOX-EP-8VTAI-VIA-KT880-CHIPSET-SERIAL-ATA150-ATX-FORM-FACTOR-1xAGP-8X-5xPCI-2xDDR-W-SATA-RAIDLAN)
-GeForce FX5500 Video Card (http://www.newegg.com/product/product.aspx?item=N82E16814130197)
-1gb Corsair Memory (http://www.corsair.com/products/valueselect/default.aspx)

Here's some parts I've been looking at. Not sure about the video card (seems a little pricey and overly powerful), but I really like the motherboard:
-Gigabyte GA-MA785GM-US2H Motherboard (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128394)
-GeForce GTX 460 Video Card (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125333)
-4gb Corsair Memory (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145260)

Again, not entirely sure what needs to be upgraded or what I should upgrade it to. The Gigabyte motherboard runs almost twice as fast FSB speed as most of the Gateway ones I've looked at and 4.5x as fast as my current one. For under $200 I could get that and a nice 4gb of memory but if I'm going to need a new video card, hard drive, etc. I might be better off just going with a pre-built. Any advice?

[oracleguy]

Unless your current motherboard has an AM2 socket, you'll need to buy a new processor as well. Your current memory is incompatible with the new motherboard you selected so you will have to buy new memory along with the motherboard. And the memory you picked out is incompatible with the new motherboard you picked out. The motherboard supports DDR2 and you picked out DDR3 ram.

As for the video card, that is a mid range card. If you don't plan on playing any relatively modern games, you can go with something lower end.

[djh101]

Okay, I'll look into new processors. I can find some DDR2 memory, that's not a problem. There's also this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131651) Asus motherboard for $20 more than the Gigabyte one and it supports DDR3. It only has 2 usb ports, though (I'd have to get an extension) and it only says it supports SATA hard drives (my current ones are PATA).

And does it just support certain CPUs or does it actually come with a processor?

[djh101]

Wow, with the price of the processor thrown in, I think I actually am better off just going with a new computer.

AMD Athlon II X2 250 Regor 3.0GHz Socket AM3 65W Dual-Core Processor ADX250OCGQBOX $62
That'll bring the price with the motherboard up to $141, still not that bad I guess.

[oracleguy]

If your current hard drive is PATA, you'd be better off buying a new SATA drive. It will be significantly faster.

That ASUS motherboard has more than 2 USB ports, it just has 2 USB 3.0 ports, the rest I assume are 2.0 ports. That ASUS motherboard also only supports processors compatible with the AM3 socket, like the one you picked out.

[djh101]

Okay, thanks. So new hard drive, ASUS motherboard, and a new CPU (also, how important is quad core vs dual core and an L3 cache?). And 4gb of memory seems like plenty. What would you say about the video card, though? I might not need a great one, but do you think I at least need a new one? I found this one (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150450) for only $70- not nearly as good as the Gigabyte one but a lot better than my current one (and it has a lifetime warranty). If I'm DDR3 memory, though, do I need a video card that uses DDR3 memory?

[Azzaboi]

For the graphics card a Nvidia 260GTX or 275GTX Geforce would be well more than enough, even for some hardcore games, but remember DirectX11 isn't supported. Graphic card is the biggest bang on performance for gaming and large texture applications (more graphic card memory the better).

Stick with 32bit OS if your not going to go over 4GB memory, I recommend Windows XP Pro SP3 or Windows 7, not Vista! Maximum of 3-4GB DDRAM(2 or 3), check the speed on them.

Stick with a high speed Duo-core 2.6Ghz+, unless you want to update the entire computer motherboard and get an expensive i7 core (much faster, but high total cost). Quad Core isn't really worth it over a Duo-core, half the time 2 cores will be idle - one core is always used for OS and one core for apps/games, unless you use a lot of multi-core capable games and applications. So in other words Duo-core 3.2Ghz out performs a Quad Core 2.4Ghz by far if not using multi-core apps and costs less.

I recommend SATA hard drive over PATA or IDE, it would be faster, but check the overall RPM and cache for the hard drive (also make sure the motherboard supports). 7200RPM is standard hard drive speed these days, the more RPM the faster it can spin and read data, the more cache 16MB-32MB the faster the transfer rate, the more plate headers the more data it can read off at the same time.

Depending how out dated your computer is currently, it might be worth getting a new one, but watch those package deals with cheap graphic cards, etc.

[djh101]

Very knowledgeable, thanks a lot. Right now it looks like the main thing I'm keeping is the frame (might even replace that, though), the cd/dvd drives, and the fan. I can always add more memory later, for now I'm sticking with 4gb. I'm probably going to go with the ASUS motherboard and an Athlon II x2 processor. I might go with a little better video card, but the $70 one is a hell of a lot better than what I have now. My old hard drives are working fine, but new one's are fairly cheap now- I'll probably be running either Windows XP, Windows 7, or Linux (Debian). And altogether, I think that still comes out to at least $100 less than the gateway and twice as fast (although most the Gateways had nicer video cards).

[djh101]

Okay, all I have to do now is choose a good processor. $99 for the Phenom II x2 3.2GHz or $63 for the Athlon II x2 3.0GHz? The Phenom has half as much in its L2 cache but it has a 6mb L3 cache. Do I need an L3 cache? And how important is an extra tenth or twentieth of a GH? There's a lot of different processors basically the same, except some are 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, etc. Should I pay $5 more for an extra .1GHz? Here (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=athlon+ii&x=13&y=30) is the page.

[oracleguy]

Stick with 32bit OS if your not going to go over 4GB memory, I recommend Windows XP Pro SP3 or Windows 7, not Vista! Maximum of 3-4GB DDRAM(2 or 3), check the speed on them.

I disagree. There is no reason to not use a 64-bit OS on a new system, which this is turning into. If you have even 4GB of memory, you can't utilize all of it with a 32-bit OS, you'd only get around 3.2GB of it. Plus even if you were to only put 2 or 3GB into it now, if you decide to put in more later you'll need a 64-bit OS anyways. So you might as well just use a 64-bit OS from the get go.

I recommend SATA hard drive over PATA or IDE, it would be faster, but check the overall RPM and cache for the hard drive (also make sure the motherboard supports).

PATA and IDE are the same thing. And the motherboard doesn't care about the RPM or cache size of the hard disk attached.

[djh101]

So... Athlon II 3.0, Athlon II 3.1, Athlon II, 3.2, or Phenon II 3.2? And the laptop I'm on right now is running 32-bit Vista with 3gb memory. I think the other laptop is 64-bit vista, not sure about the memory but I think it's the same.

[djh101]

I hate NewEgg. Not only do I have to decide between the specs now, but they have 3 pages of combos for each item. The $99 Asus motherboard comes with memory for a good price, but I'm not sure if I want the 6gbs SETA slots. There's a nice $119 Asus but the only good combo is with a video card ($169 very nice video card, but only $15 and the one I originally chose is still $40 cheaper). Then there's the $79 Gigabyte that isn't as good as the Asus motherboards but it has the best deals (several choices of highly discounted video cards and one for $35 off that includes a $79 video card and Phenom II x4 processor). I'm so confused:confused:.

[oracleguy]

The 6Gbps SATA ports are SATA3 which will eventually replace the common SATA2 ports on motherboards these days. SATA2 and 3 are backwards and forwards compatible so it isn't a huge deal right now if the motherboard you buy only has SATA2 (3Gbps) ports.

As for your processor choices, I am not familiar enough with AMD's current offering to help you decide between the Athlon and the Phenom.

As for the speed though, that is up to you, the difference will be negligible between 3.0 and 3.1 or 3.2.

[Azzaboi]

oracleguy - thanks for the corrections, let me clearify a couple of things.

I said stick with 32bit OS if your not going to go over 4GB memory. If you plan to have more memory or upgrade in the future, yes it's great to have a 64bit OS for more memory. My point is 3GB in 64bit is worth less than 3GB in 32bit, so if you have less than 4GB it is better sticking with 32bit (even though your right it maxs to 3.7GB). The reason is 64bit is taking almost twice the space in memory, if you run small or 32bit applications which don't use that space, there is a lot of blank area left over. I recommend getting 6GB+ if using 64bit. Not only do you have to update the OS to 64bit, but also the motherboard and processor, as well as system drivers and applications.

The reason I say not Vista is because it's a memory hog compared to the others, Win7 using the less memory (is just like Vista but with all the fixes and removed annoyances), WinXP SP3 being older but still faster performance frame rate (better for older computers, tweaking and hardcore gaming).

For "I recommend SATA hard drive over PATA or IDE, it would be faster, but check the overall RPM and cache for the hard drive (also make sure the motherboard supports).", I was meaning the SATA support, not the speed.

PATA and IDE are the same thing - cheers for the correction.

djh101 - For the processors, L1 cache is closest to the core, typically smallest and fastest. L2 cache is typically bigger and slower, and 'further away' (both physical, distance, and in latency). L3 cache is even bigger, slower and further, etc. Larger caches help reducing the need to access main memory.

Stay away from Celeron, they are cheaper and slower models.

For an extra .1GHz, it wouldn't do much difference.

If you are upgrading to 64bit OS, ensure both your motherboard and processor support it. When you install it, update flash the BIOS to the latest for newer processor, memory and hardware support.

Ensure you match your motherboard to processor (it should have a list of support or pin count, etc). Some older motherboards might limit you to what is allowed and will fit/work.

There is a lot of stuff to look into when purchasing computer components or making a custom build computer, check for unbios reviews. Good luck!

[djh101]

Thanks for all your help. I've decided to switch to a motherboard with built in video which also supports PATA (so I only will need one harddrive), my price is down to $454. All I'd like to do now is maybe switch out my current choice processor and power supply (they come together in a combo, but even without the combo bonus I think I could get a barely worse processor and power for at least $20 less):
-ASUS M4A89GTD PRO AM3 AMD 890GX SATA 6Gb/s HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.475074) ($140)
+OCZ Signature 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10666) Desktop Memory Model OCZ3SR1333LV4GK ($81 - $20 combo)
-AMD Phenom II X2 555 Black Edition Callisto 3.2GHz Socket AM3 80W Dual-Core Desktop Processor - C3 Revision HDZ555WFGMBOX (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.468990) ($99)
+CORSAIR CMPSU-450VX 450W ATX12V V2.2 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power Supply ($75 - $20 combo)
-COOLER MASTER RC-690-KKN1-GP Black SECC/ ABS ATX Mid Tower Computer Case (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119137) ($60)
-Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST3160318AS 160GB 7200 RPM 8MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148511) ($39)

[Azzaboi]

Sounds pretty good...

So your not getting a graphic card? It would drive up cost (my rule of thumb is get the most out of it ending up to be 1/3 the total machine cost, ekk, but then again I'm a hardcore gamer), but if you have an old one or an internal graphic card (with shared memory) you can really bottleneck the overall performance. Afterall it's where most of the juice ends up. Built-in video shares the system memory, etc, it doesn't perform well when it comes to the latest games (some won't run if requiring shaders, etc) and large memory applications, multi-tasking.

The power supply of 450W is minimum for most average graphic cards these days. If you do get a high powered graphic card it might not support it or the system will become unstable, might not even start up sometimes. Just note on the side of the graphic card boxes what power it would take. For example a Nvidia GTX275 requires Two 6-Pin PCI Express power connectors from the power supply and a min 500W or greater (this wouldn't work stable on a 450W when other devices, hard drive, etc, are added). For upgrade purpose I recommend a 700W depending what graphics you have in mind or you will be stuck with an older one, internal graphics or another replacement cost in the future.

Just keeping in mind upgrades in the future as well.

Install the OS on the faster, newer hard drive your getting, then connect the older one to be a slave, backup storage, etc (remove the old OS). This way your won't be slowing down the system running apps and games.

[oracleguy]

So your not getting a graphic card? It would drive up cost (my rule of thumb is get the most out of it ending up to be 1/3 the total machine cost, ekk, but then again I'm a hardcore gamer), but if you have an old one or an internal graphic card (with shared memory) you can really bottleneck the overall performance. Afterall it's where most of the juice ends up. Built-in video shares the system memory, etc, it doesn't perform well when it comes to the latest games (some won't run if requiring shaders, etc) and large memory applications, multi-tasking.

The ASUS motherboard the OP picked has a ATI Radeon HD 4290 on board. Which should be more than sufficient for minesweeper and Roller Coaster Tycoon which the OP said is the limit of their gaming. And the motherboard has an x16 slot on it if they ever decide to put a dedicated card in.

That Radeon chipset won't bottleneck anything else with what they plan to do. Even 40 dollar video cards can do 1080p hardware playback these days. You are right though if they plan to play Left 4 Dead 2 or something, they are going to need a better video card.

Since their budget is pretty small, the on board video card is their best bet. Especially since they can always add a dedicated card later.

[djh101]

Actually, I don't have a budget. Well, I do only have $700 but I don't plan on exceeding that. I'll keep in mind the power requirement for a good video card, but I do have a PS3 and I prefer to keep all of my gaming on there and off of my PC. I've been getting a lot of mixed responses (both on here and overclockers.com)- some people say that a good video card is overkill for my needs, others say that a built in video card may end up being insufficient. I'm going to Fry's today to look at parts and hopefully pick up a case (I don't really want to buy one online with the shipping cost) and after that I'll try to settle on my final cart decision and purchase my parts. Thanks for all the help everyone. I'll post an update when I have everything purchased and assembled:thumbsup:.

[hitek]

Hey

Your old parts are good enough just increase the ram 1 to 4 gb.

Good luck