Please help me spec my PC!

Percy1983

I would agree you can't compare clock speeds on processors directly accross AMD/Intel or even across generations of the same manufacturer.

I haven't built a system using the energy efficient models but from the look of it they perform the same and use less power but do cost a little more.

To go with AMD X2 X3 X4 X6 is clearly the number of cores, then the main difference is the L3 cache, which can make a difference in some programs and less in others, in short athlons don't have L3 cache while phenoms do.

The number fo cores is down to usage, I speced a similar system for a friend who wanted to do a budget HD editing/authoring to which we went for the athlon 620 (x4 2.6ghz) and in short when he hits encode all 4 cores kick into action and off it goes, if he wasn't doing video editing an x2 3ghz would be faster for day to day tasks. In this case we used a 785G board with (ATI 4200 graphics) and as mentioned due to it have UVD2.0 it can decode 2 HD streams at once, as it is we also added a blu-ray burner for his needs.

The main reason I am recommending AMD processors in this case is due to the chipsets they use on the boards which give excellent onboard graphics.

Also people talking about upgradability, if you go for an AM3 board now with an x2 that same baord will take an x6 if you wish to upgrade later?

In short I always try to spec PC's to do what people want, not what I want.

irisandalex

Thanks Percy, very helpful. I'm settling on an Athlon II as it appears the L3 cache is primarily useful for games, doesn't justify its substantionally higher cost for me.

So my problem now is the ghz/cores trade off. Hard to know as I don't know what software makes use of the cores!

When having loads of programs open at once on the computer, as I always do, will Windows intelligently allocate different programs to different cores? If so, I guess I would benefit from multi cores even though each individual application only uses a single core.

Percy1983

The extra cache does benefit gaming but can effect other things, but it won't slow you down in normal tasks and may show slightly while encoding video/compressing files and such like.

You don't need to worry about core usage windows will distribute the workflow as it sees fit.

It is a difficult one to compare an x2 3.1ghz to x4 2.6ghz is a case of when using 1 or 2 cores the X2 will be better and the x4 willl only be better when doing more, personally I would say for 'normal' use the x2s are just fine but having a quick look you might not pay much more to get an X3.

Looking on ebuyer I can see the 255 (x2 3.1ghz) for £46.85 and the 455 (x3 3.1ghz) for £55.90 to which I don't think its too much of a premium to pay for the extra core, one of those paired with a board like so http://www.ebuyer.com/product/244433 and you can see you have a good system for not much money.

irisandalex

Thanks Percy, I was going to ask about the motherboard!

I'm starting to think I should get more cores - I do use multiple screens (two at the moment) and frequently have video streaming on one, with email constantly coming in, while I work on web development on the other screen. I'm guessing therefore I will see a clear benefit to multiple cores.

irisandalex

Right, pretty much going with that, but upgrading from the 455 to 450: 3.1 to 3.2khz for just £3 more.

Motherboard selection time.....

irisandalex

bloomin 'eck, yet another long list of choices! How do I decide on motherboard - the one you suggest doesn't have spdif output, which I find helpful......

Percy1983

Right the main thing to look for is the 785G and 880G chipsets.

Spending little more gets you this
http://www.ebuyer.com/product/236462

Looks spot on and even has a couple of USB 3 ports.

irisandalex

I will check that one out.

Are these chips significantly better performing for my kind of applications than the ones on the much cheaper motherboards? e.g.:
http://www.ebuyer.com/product/238974

pendulum

As budget is important, and you want to achieve the best performance for your money, have you considered buying used? Ex-gaming machines are often good buys, as they were built for performance so tend to have good branded parts, a good CPU & RAM combo, a decent video card... and best of all they are cheap. Some may be overclocked which can increase power consumption significantly, but it's easy to return to stock speeds. If you search eBay for local only sellers, you get to go round and view the system working before buying.

Percy1983

The main difference is the graphics is a 2100 so directx 9 support and UVD1 (acceleration for 1 stream only) compared to the 4200/4250 with directx 10 suport and UVD2 (2 streams) (+a bit more 3D grunt).

It is worth noting there is only 2 ram slots, it might be worth getting one with 4 slots so use 2 now for 4GB and still have spare slots for an upgrade.

But overall that board wouldn't hold anything back.