building pc - in great need of help choosing hardware
Linux - HardwareThis forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Corsair Value S PC3200 DDR-DIMM 512MB Unbuffered, Non-parity, 64Megx64, CL2.5
1.) mobo: dont need sli but would like to have dualcore support for future upgrades. it has an ata-133 controller, in other words ill be able to reuse my old pata hdd, correct?
better suggestions, anyone?
2.) the graphics card i chose based on the nvidia chipset and price. i dont intend to play games, but i would like to run *cough* vista *cough* painlessly in the future. is this card overkill considering im not a gamer? would
Gainward GeForce 6200 TurboCache, PCI-Express, supports 256MB, DVI, Tv-Out
be a better choice considering my needs?
running mostly gentoo & enlightenment/gnome.
3.) is there a great difference between an athlon 2.0 -> 2.2 -> 2.4GHz?
im very confused about this, so any input greatly appreciated.
i tried inserting links but apparently i cant right now (new member restrictions) - sorry.
I think I would prefer to get a Geforce 6200 ahead of a 6600 and spend the saving on an additional 512 MB of RAM. I think a 1 GB / 6200 system would run better than a 512 MB / 6600 system.
As for the Athlons, I think that the 64-bit 3x00 processors are the same setup (Venice chipset?), so the 2.2 GHz will be 10% faster than the 2.0 GHz one. Buy a faster one if you can afford it I supppose.
1.) mobo: dont need sli but would like to have dualcore support for future upgrades. it has an ata-133 controller, in other words ill be able to reuse my old pata hdd, correct?
better suggestions, anyone?
2.) the graphics card i chose based on the nvidia chipset and price. i dont intend to play games, but i would like to run *cough* vista *cough* painlessly in the future. is this card overkill considering im not a gamer? would
Gainward GeForce 6200 TurboCache, PCI-Express, supports 256MB, DVI, Tv-Out
be a better choice considering my needs?
running mostly gentoo & enlightenment/gnome.
3.) is there a great difference between an athlon 2.0 -> 2.2 -> 2.4GHz?
1. Yes you will be able to reuse your pata hdd. Check the speed on the hdd to see if it is ata-133 or 100 or whatever it may be. It will run at the speed of the lower of the two (i.e. ata-133 hdd/controller with ata-100 hdd/controller will run at ata-100). You probably won't even need to use the sata ports if you're not doing gaming or running a server, since the only time you notice the speed increase would be read/write operations to the hdd (like load screens for games).
2. I recently purchased a geforce 6600 with 256MB and it's a very nice card, but you can probably get by with much less. But if you're doing anything that requires lots of RAM don't use any of the TurboCache cards, b/c it's almost like a hybrid between onboard graphics and a graphics card. It has it's own RAM but it still borrows system RAM. And the graphics look like crap anyways.
3. Yes and no. It really depends on your system's other components, you know a chain is only as strong as the weakest link, and the cpu has never really been a major bottleneck in most systems... it's the fastest component in the system. However, with that motherboard, you should be able to overclock a 2.0 to a 2.4 with relative ease, without frying anything or really putting much effort into it. About 15 minutes and you could save about $110 with a few changes in the bios so I wouldn't spend the extra money on a faster processor. I've done lots of overclocking before (built my last computer inside of a freezer and oc'd from 1.8ghz to 2.8 stable... ), so I'd be happy to help you if you need any assistance. Just keep in mind that those 64-bit extensions won't work without 64 bit software. Hope that helps.
I am new LINUX OS and wants to purchase a SYSTEM that fits for linux kernel 2.6 and highers including basically (RHEL4,SuSE 10).
I want your suggestion relateds these two CATEGORIES and also for some other issues given at the last.
---------------
Category 1
---------------
--------
D945GNTL
---------------
--------------------
PROCESSOR
---------------------
Intel Processor P4 3.2F GHzLGA2MB
------------------
HARD DISK
-----------------
Hard Disk Drive 120 GB(SATA)7200 Seagate (8MB Cache)
--------
RAM
--------
1*512MB PC3200 400MHz DDR SDRAM (Kingston)
----------
Casing
----------
ATX CASING 12 DIFFRENT PANELS TOWERS(300Watt)
-------------------------
KeyBoard,Mouse
-------------------------
DELL BRANDED
WHich modem to purchase? and its specification Modem can be
i). Conexent
ii). Rockwall
iii). US Robotics
3). I am living in PAKISTAN where SUMMER Season is long and in june and july summer is at its full swing with 40C to 45C so something about this issue.
You probably won't even need to use the sata ports if you're not doing gaming or running a server, since the only time you notice the speed increase would be read/write operations to the hdd (like load screens for games).Jesse
to be hones, as far as i understand, no difference is to be expected at all, even between an ata 100 vs ata 133 due to restrictions on the read/write/seek-time capabilities (=bottleneck) of (most consumer grade) hdds, let alone noticing a difference between pata vs sata/sata2. am i wrong? the only reason im aiming for a sata compatible hdd is future options, as i hope (at least) the mobo should last quite a few years. im aiming for a dual core compat. mobo for the same reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardLappy
I recently purchased a geforce 6600 with 256MB and it's a very nice card, but you can probably get by with much less.Jesse
well, although i am not a gamer, i have to admit that playing an occasional game would be a bonus. a BONUS, by no means a necessity. 2 reasons im not aming for a cheaper card: *as ive stated, i expect the thing to last for a while. *i do want it to run smooth on vista (nope, im not running linux 90 % of the time because i hate ms: ) i simply like penguins & devils: ))
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardLappy
But if you're doing anything that requires lots of RAM don't use any of the TurboCache cards, b/c it's almost like a hybrid between onboard graphics and a graphics card. It has it's own RAM but it still borrows system RAM. And the graphics look like crap anyways.Jesse
thanks for the tip, i was actually considering doing just that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardLappy
I've done lots of overclocking before (built my last computer inside of a freezer and oc'd from 1.8ghz to 2.8 stable... )Jesse
LOL
youre kidding about the freezer... ...right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardLappy
so I'd be happy to help you if you need any assistanceJesse
will remember! just give me some time: )
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardLappy
Just keep in mind that those 64-bit extensions won't work without 64 bit software.Jesse
yes, im aware of that. it doesnt seem to be that great an obstacle though.
the main problem is the mobo, im still considering abit vs asus & nvidia vs via. at the end of the day, i guess ill just have to make a more or less random choice, as (from what ive read) theres similar pros and cons and no clear #1.
to be hones, as far as i understand, no difference is to be expected at all, even between an ata 100 vs ata 133 due to restrictions on the read/write/seek-time capabilities (=bottleneck) of (most consumer grade) hdds, let alone noticing a difference between pata vs sata/sata2. am i wrong? the only reason im aiming for a sata compatible hdd is future options, as i hope (at least) the mobo should last quite a few years. im aiming for a dual core compat. mobo for the same reason.
Though it's only a small difference on paper between ata 133 and sata 150, it actually does feel much faster with the sata and even more so with sata2. With my last system I upgraded just the hard drive from a 20GB 7200rpm ata 133 to an 80GB 7200rpm sata 150, and the results were significantly better. My present system uses SATA2 and the results are really really noticeable, but only during read/write operations (installing Suse went by much faster on the sata2 (3Gbps) the sata150).
Quote:
Originally Posted by vessi
thanks for the tip, i was actually considering doing just that.
No problem. A friend of mine decided to get a turbo cache card just because it had 256MB, he didn't realize it got 128 from the system RAM. ATI uses the "hyper memory" moniker for their version of the technology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vessi
LOL
youre kidding about the freezer... ...right?
heh heh...hell no. I sealed up the board with liquid acrylic and drilled holes into the freezer so the cables to the monitor, keyboard, power, etc. could be plugged in, and I wired up external switches for power on, reset, and to clear the cmos. Sealed up the freezer itself and turned it on. It's about the best bang for your buck if you're looking for a quiet yet super efficient cooling system. Temps were so low they wouldn't register past zero in the bios. What sucked was when the compressor gave out (it was an old junk freezer) and I lost $800 worth of hardware to the water when the ice melted. Fun stuff though...
Corsair Value S PC3200 DDR-DIMM 512MB Unbuffered, Non-parity, 64Megx64, CL2.5
1.) mobo: dont need sli but would like to have dualcore support for future upgrades. it has an ata-133 controller, in other words ill be able to reuse my old pata hdd, correct?
better suggestions, anyone?
2.) the graphics card i chose based on the nvidia chipset and price. i dont intend to play games, but i would like to run *cough* vista *cough* painlessly in the future. is this card overkill considering im not a gamer? would
Gainward GeForce 6200 TurboCache, PCI-Express, supports 256MB, DVI, Tv-Out
be a better choice considering my needs?
running mostly gentoo & enlightenment/gnome.
3.) is there a great difference between an athlon 2.0 -> 2.2 -> 2.4GHz?
im very confused about this, so any input greatly appreciated.
i tried inserting links but apparently i cant right now (new member restrictions) - sorry.
tia
Sounds just like my new box, except the graphics card. I ran out of money somewhere around there, and ended up with an ATI Radeon X300SE. Mobo and CPU been supported by Linux so far, except the Radeon. When installing I wasn't able to use the 'ati' driver option so I now have no hardware acceleration which I'm currently trying to fix. Also, the on-board sound was not found by Debian Sarge AMD64 and I'm working on this at the moment. It was found by Fedora Core 4 no problem.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.