Computer Purchasing Advice

[endaround]

So it may look like I need to do soemthing I've been putting off and end up getting a new computer. I'm looking to get a decent setup for about $600-650 (and no I'm not getting a mac). So I'm looking at these 2 at costco:

 

http://www.costco.com/Bro...hse=BC&Ne=4000000&eCat=BC|

 

and

 

http://www.costco.com/Bro...hse=BC&Ne=4000000&eCat=BC|

 

I feel like I'd be better off buying the one for $500 with the slower processor and spending $100 on a better power supply and a graphics card than buying the $600 with the Q9300. Any thoughts?

[bjkrautk]

My one thought is this: how do you use your computer?

 

It may sound like a stupid question, but as someone who migrated over to laptops a few years back (for personal use, I still have a desktop at work), I'd much rather sit in front of a TV with my laptop and browse the Internet than be shackled to my computer desk.

 

On the other hand, if you're planning on using the computer for processor-intensive applications (like video editing, gaming, etc.), you might still need that desktop. It's difficult to advise someone without that sort of background info.

[endaround]

I physically can't use most laptop keyboards. I have an ulnar nerve problem that requires a pretty strict ergonomic setup to keep it from reoccurring.

[DHonks]

I am planning on getting a netbook soon for just the scenario you mentioned bjkrautk. However, I don't get why all laptops seem to slow down (ie, get bogged down) within 2 years. I've never had a desktop show signs of declining performance before the 4 year mark. So I happen to like having a desktop for primary computing, and I'm going to buy a netbook with the realization that I'll need to replace it within 2-3 years, so why buy a $900 laptop?

[1992casey]

I physically can't use most laptop keyboards.

 

Laptops suck ergonomically. Either the keyboard is too high or the screen is too low. There's no way around it unless you're able to hook up a separate keyboard/mouse or monitor. It's just the nature of the beast.

 

However, I don't get why all laptops seem to slow down (ie, get bogged down) within 2 years.

 

This is just speculation, but maybe it's because technically, laptops are healthier if they're not used on your lap. Ideally, they should be placed on a hard surface.

 

I first ran across this information when I read my MacBook Pro manual: it says that if the computer feels hot, you should get it off your lap and onto a hard surface. Apple tech support told me that they don't recommend using notebooks on laps at all.

 

A web search produced results saying that heat issues affect all "laptops." It's not an Apple thing. Your lap is a soft surface that can interfere with air flow.

 

If you look at it, it should be noted that no manufacturer refers to these computers as "laptops." They're called "notebooks" or "MacBooks" or whatever. The Apple tech support guy said that Apple refers to them as "portable devices." Given all this, there's no false advertising involved.

 

At home, my MacBook Pro sits on a "breakfast in bed" tray ($15 at Target). That's nicer than putting it on my lap anyway. For traveling, I went over to Lisbon Storm, Screen, and Door and bought a piece of plexiglass, 1/4 inch thick, that slides right into the computer bag. It cost $5.97, including having it cut. They also sanded the corners to prevent the possibility of damage to the bag.

 

It totally covers heat issues when I put the computer on my lap. In additon to not feeling heat on the case, software that reports temperatures in various parts of the machine indicates that I'm covered.

 

Getting back to endaround's original question, I think he's on the right track when he wants to invest in the graphics card and power supply. However, I do like the 6MB L2 cache that the faster processor offers.

[bjkrautk]

I don't think you're going to notice a ton of difference between the two, out of the box. They have the identical graphics hardware, amount of RAM, hard drive size, etc. Since they're both made by the same people, I'd expect virtually all of the internals to be identical; you might want to check as to where the systems can top out on RAM (as extra memory could be used to extend the life of the desktop, if you wanted to do that).

 

 

My one hesitation with recommending an upgrade to the graphics card (and this is where my laptop buying hurts my ability to recommend), is that I don't know whether graphics cards in the $100 range are going to provide a significant boost in performance over the integrated GPU on the motherboard. You're obviously not getting a high-end GPU on integrated graphics, but you're also not buying a high-end card in the $100 range, so be sure to look at some benchmarking sites before you buy. (There are other benefits of a graphics card - like HDMI output, and having a TV tuner on your PC - but it doesn't sound like that's your motivation here.)

[1992casey]

One thing endaround would gain with the separate graphics card is the ability to turn down the amount of system RAM dedicated to graphics to the absolute minimum. Or, I should say, hopefully he does. It'd be good to ask if that setting is adjustable.

[nate82]

Graphics cards are made mainly for games and graphic and video editing. For the most part. The onboard video cards are never a good idea if you are planning to play games on your PC. Performance wise you could be losing about 40-50% of your performance by using an onboard video card since it shares the RAM on your PC and Vista is already a memory hog with the 64 bit Windows though that isn't as much of a problem because you could go up to the maximum amount of RAM your motherboard can support.

 

32 bit Windows is limited to 3.5 GB of RAM I believe you can't go any higher than that because the operating system doesn't know what to do with it. With 64 bit you can go up to the amount of RAM your motherboard will let you have the highest I have seen is 16 GB of memory.

 

Getting another video card if you are planning to do some gaming on your PC is something you need to do you can't really run all of the newer games and even some of the older games with on board video.

[1992casey]

32 bit Windows is limited to 3.5 GB of RAM I believe you can't go any higher than that because the operating system doesn't know what to do with it.

 

I guess it can vary a from machine to machine. I've heard about the Vista 32 bit limit being as low as 3.1 GB; 3.5 his the highest I've heard. Both of endaround's options have 64 bit Windows, so he'll be free of that limit.

[endaround]

Yeah, even spending $50 can give you a decent card plus 512MB of video memory:

http://www.newegg.com/Pro...aspx?Item=N82E16814500062

 

Or $100 can get you a very good card:

http://www.newegg.com/Pro...aspx?Item=N82E16814150316

 

Either of which would give you greater power and reduce the strain on the system for allocating video memory.

 

The big problems with this computer are the 300w power supply which many companies are throwing in now (300w is just really pathetic) and the fact that the mother board is exhausted at 4 GB of memory.

[nate82]

I suggest building one yourself or ordering all the parts and taking it to a local PC shop and have them put it together if you are not confident in putting one together yourself.

[endaround]

Except that I can't build it for that price. A Intel Core Duo 2 Quad Q9300 is $250 for the CPU alone, a Q8200 is $170. Add in $100 for a motherboard, $100 for an OS and I'm at $370-$450 without a case, power supply, hard drive, or memory.