RealityRipple

So, my old heap is in need of some major upgrading within the next 6 months. The new Phenoms look good, but I want to wait until they get a little more perfected before I buy. Assuming they stick with an AM2+ socket, my Motherboard requirements are as follows:

• AM2+ Socket
• At Least 1x IDE (UDMA) slot
• Front Panel Audio
• Front Panel USB
• Front Panel 1394 (Firewire) [Not required]
• 5.1 or better sound OR no onboard sound card
• At least 2x PCI slots
• 11"x12" form factor at most

I'll be buying a new Motherboard, Processor, Video Card, RAM, and possibly DVD±RW drive (depending on the number of IDE slots on the Motherboard). If anyone has any recommendations from now until June, please let me know. Also, what's the best way to search for features on a Motherboard? Newegg doesn't have listings for Front Panel features, and Google's results tend to be cluttered.

__________________

kris23

ehh.... Phenom is a joke really, performance is abysmal and Intel's 45nm quad-Cores will waste it, the AM2+ boards are also rather expensive, RAID controller is horrid as DH member Judas posted

Intel Quad-Cores will be coming in every pricepoint from $230 and up, all of which are extremely powerful and superior to the current and future phenoms

within the next 6 months, Intel and Nvidia will come out with their performance giants, far greater than their AMD and ATi competitors

DDR3 may drop to the $200 range and the Intel 4X series of chips will be out, as well as the nvidia 780/790i boards will be abundant.

hearing this, do you still want to go with AMD? phenom is not a wise choice for the money

__________________

OldBuzzard

Ya know Kris...there are some people that just don't give a damn about the fact that the Intels are a bit faster than the AMDs. Some folks prefer AMD for reasons OTHER than performance.

In my case I refuse to buy Intel based on some of their past business practices and down right arrogance. Do you remember the 'big brother' number they tried to put into all their processors when the PII was released and the shitstorm that created? How about their PAYING vendors to not use AMD processors? YOU can support a bunch of weasels, but I damned sure won't. READ THE F***ING POST. he REQUIRES THAT IT BE SOCKET AM2+! Respect his wishes and keep you Intel fanboi comments to yourself.

In the majority of your 'answers' you say something to the effect the whatever the OP got is somehow inferior to what YOU personally think is good, and that he made a mistake. Sure, make the guy feel bad. Did you stop to think that maybe it took him a year or more just to save up the money required to buy what he did, and that's the best he can afford given price/performance? In some cases the option that YOU think some one should use isn't available. There are folks from all over the world posting here, and some areas some hardware isn't available, or it's insanely expensive as compared to here in the US. Just give it a rest, keep the negative comments out, and offer advice based on the OPs question.

__________________
When looking for a reason as to why things go wrong, never rule out sheer STUPIDITY

OldBuzzard

Sorry Reality, but I got a bit off track from your post.

I've been keeping an eye on the Sapphire PC-AM2RD790. Not sure that it's hit the market yet but the specs on ther web page look pretty good. On paper the AMD 790FX chipset looks prettty good, especially if you are interested in Crossfire. But then a lot of things look good on paper and then suck in practice. Of course if you are going to be using Nvidia GPUs then that's probably the last one to look at

Right now I'm using an ASROCK board and am quite happy with it. Yeah it's not the best overclocker in the world, but I don't OC any way so that's not a consideration for me (Well, I did OC it for a day or two just to see how fast I could push this Brisbane, and did get it up to 2.9G without playing with memory or voltage tweaks which I didn't think was too bad).. It's been as stable as a rock and that's what I'm looking for. The two MB's I used before this one were ABITs and they were good as sell. I put an ASUS in the system I built for #1 son, and that seems to be doing it's job.

Doing research on hardware is a time consuming process for sure. I'd recommend that you go to some of the 'better' MB mfgs sites, and take a look at their AM2+ offerings, and then google each one that has what you are looking for. See if their are any reviews on them, and read as many from different sites as you can. There are some sites that are pretty 'fanboyish' on each side, so the more reviews you can read, the beter you will be able to sort those ones out.

__________________
When looking for a reason as to why things go wrong, never rule out sheer STUPIDITY

RealityRipple

My personal views are not influenced by price or availability, but on power consumption. My home is run on solar panels, batteries, and a backup generator. The Phenom processors currently use 95 watts, as compared to, say Intel's Core 2 Quads, which use around 130. As insignificant as that may seem to you, it matters to me. Also, I'm partial to the three levels of cache, four cores on a single chip rather than two on two, and the required cooling power consumption.
Honestly, I'm quite happy with my current Athlon XP 2700+ in terms of speed, as I don't play games and I don't edit video. Today's systems are capitalistically excessive, but I need to keep up with the newer hardware in order to write compatible software.
Since I won't be buying anything for at the very least two months, and preferably six, I'm expecting the Phenoms, or their successors, will have less problems and better performance. That is, after all, the idea of improvements. I don't plan on buying a first generation anything.

__________________

kris23

solar panels? then you REALLY need to take a look at intel's 45nm quads

the 65nm AMDs pull more power than the Intel counterparts, i believe even the Q6600 pulls less

the TDP power rating is different than the ACTUAL power rating of the processor, the TDP is the amount of heat in watts that can be dissappated from the chip, higher is better

the true chip consumption is only seen wiith monitors and special software

the 45nm quads pull tiny amounts of power, at stock, the QX6950 pulls only 60w or so, surprising isnt it?

the roles have switched, intel is very energy efficient compared to the AMD counterparts,

the benchmarks even say that Intel Enhanced Speed Step is superior to AMD's Cool n' Quiet technology


if you want energy efficiency, Intel is the way to go

__________________

OldBuzzard

Now THAT is certainly "a horse of a different color" Power/Performance isn't something that most folks are concerned with.

Makes your search for hardware a bit more 'interesting'.

I'll have to go agoogleing and see what I can find. This is going to be FUN

__________________
When looking for a reason as to why things go wrong, never rule out sheer STUPIDITY

Kazeko

TDP on the Phenom Quad Core is 95w.


Rated Q6600 TDP from intel is 95w as well.

The QX9650, however is rated @ 130w. In fact, the only Extreme that's below 130w are the Dual Cores @ an 800mhz fsb.

Intel® Core™2 Extreme Processor QX9650 - SLAN3

^^ Straight from Intel's mouth.

Remember: More speed = More Power. More Power = More wattage. More wattage = hotter. - Q6600's are notorious for being space heaters without some serious aftermarket cooling.


I would tell you, Reality, that you're probably right in your assertion, that an AMD processor will consume less power on a whole. Q6600's tend to eat up power at an exponential rate beyond OE levels, and I'd bet 95w is assuming low for Intel. Plus, given the FSB requirements and my own experiences with my Q6600 you're probably on the right track if you're looking for quad core.


AMD, from a business standpoint they've drawn back to server support and low to mid-range desktop computing options, while Intel has taken they're old position in the Enthusiast market. - There were Intel Fanboys back then as there are either now, on both ends of the spectrum.
I suspect they're prepping up to take the lead back, as the tables typically go back and forth every few years.



However - I built my brother's system a little bit ago, AM2 Athlon X2 6k+ on an nVidia 590 SLI chipset - It's definitely a bit more tame, but also produces SIGNIFICANTLY less heat, which says to me - Less power consumption.


It pained me to go with intel, to a degree, being the owner of a load of AMD CPU's since the K6 Days, but... I also play the capitalist.

I go with bang for the buck situations and raw performance, which Intel and nVidia currently take. So, my current set up is Intel.

With a bit more restrictive situation, I'd tend to side with you, both out of my own personal bias, and in my experience with both C2Q's and X2's.


AMD is definitely the power consumption winner, in my experience.


Unfortunately, as for mainboard solutions, not sure what I could tell you, beyond asking why you're looking for an IDE interface over SATA150 or SATA3.0. -- I'm assuming power consumption again, but I wouldn't think it would be THAT big of a difference?

RealityRipple

The only reason I want at least one IDE slot is for my 400 gig hard drive. I don't feel like buying a new one so soon, so I want to be able to use it for a few more years before buying a new SATA drive. I suppose I should clarify in that I want both UDMA and SATA abilities.

__________________

kris23

AnandTech: AMD's Phenom Unveiled: A Somber Farewell to K8

seems that the phenoms are currently being beaten by the Q6600, how much more a 45nm quad?

there is a chart that shows the current revision Phenoms (i think B1?, not sure but unimportant) power consumption vs the Q6600, now the Q6600 doesnt have all the new shiny power-saving technologies and it still beats the new phenoms at idle AND load



man, if i kept my mouth shut for everything, some people will feel the effects of their decisions when they couldve went the better route.

AMD isnt good for power savings or performance, Intel uses less power and packs more performance.

im done saying anything...... good luck with your build RealityRipple and i hope you find whats best for your needs, im done for today

__________________

ChaosMinionX

While the 45nm, and G0 Q6600 (95W) stepping quads have a lower TDP than say a B3 Q6600 (105W), the lower the TDP the better, not higher.

Higher TDP = more cooling needed, so rather than a cooler having to dissipate 95W of heat, it has to dissipate 105W of heat. Thermal Design Power is also quite different from the maximum power draw of a processor, but it represents the actual usage of a chip in day to day tasks and not 100% loading of a processor in say a stress test.

Phenom loses to Intel no matter how you look at it, except Phenom shows an edge in bandwidth intensive applications, probably more due to the fact that it uses an Internal Memory Controller (IMC) and Intel is still using a Front Side Bus (FSB)....

And remember Kris that Phenom is suffering from Translation Lookup Buffer (TLB) errata, that are hurting its performance 10-20%...let that get fixed a bit and they will be better, but they still wont beat Intel.

__________________

Kazeko

Going over the AM2+ options available, you shouldn't have an issue finding something with 5.1+ channels via the onboard audio with FP, with an IDE channel available, in addition to a few SATA options, and Two PCI slots.


What will matter, is your chipset preference. Currently the chipsets available, are the nForce 560, or 770/790 AMD chipsets. Biggest difference mostly boils down to Crossfire support. The 790 series does support it, the 770 does not. The 560 does not support SLI.


Also - You're looking for 11x12, and that might be a tough find, if it exists at all. Most ATX form factor boards are 12x8.6 - 10"


It would seem to me, given what you're looking for, that the following would be best (Though the size might be off from what you're looking for.)

Newegg.com - ASUS M3A AM2+/AM2 AMD 770 ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail

Here's the 790 solution, should you be so inclined.
Newegg.com - MSI K9A2 Platinum AM2+/AM2 AMD 790FX ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail

Neshi

it's not that reality ripple wants AM2 per se.. he says:
Assuming they stick with an AM2+ socket, my Motherboard requirements are as follows:AM2+ Socket.

so if intel is the better choice, he will go for an intel socket.
that's the way I understand what he meant.

I haven't looked into the things very deeply so I can't give you advice on what to choose, but it looked like some of the guys here thought you wanted a AM2 socket processor and nothing else...

__________________
If one does not attach himself to people and desire, never shall his heart be broken. But then, does he ever truly live?

Life is just too damn short for if's and maybe's

Kazeko

That's what I picked up? But hey, if I was wrong, I'd be happy to throw a LOAD of intel solutions out here too.

kris23

yea i know what you mean by the TLB errata i know that hes going to go in a few months but i highly doubt they will get a chip out that can crush Intel in the low power market without radical architecture changes.

the TDP though is a little confusing, seeing Xeons going with 100w TDPs and cooler, tougher chips vs Quads with 95w TDPs and running a little hotter and not as strong, but ehh theres another thing i learned

__________________

OldBuzzard

Just trying to look at this from a different angle.

Since POWER usage is a major consideration, would a LAPTOP do what you need to do? Possibly using it with a docking station if necessory?

You could still use your PATA drive by putting it in an external enclosure. Most will use USB to connect to the lappy, but if you aren't going to be doing a LOT of transferring of large files from the internal to external drives that probably wouldn't be a major issue.

__________________
When looking for a reason as to why things go wrong, never rule out sheer STUPIDITY

RealityRipple

I'm afraid a laptop won't cut it. I need multiple disc drives (at least one CD-RW and one DVD±RW drive, as I use them both at the same time [and wish I had more] quite often), a lot of USB ports (my current computer has 10, all full), and easy upgradability.

I would rather stick with AMD, and as I said, I'm giving this six months before I buy anything so things will drop in price and improve in quality. My case (which I want to continue using) allows for 12 inches by 11 inches maximum, so anything there or less would be nice. Also, what qualifies as 'large files'? DVD ISOs?

I guess what I want is the most energy efficient system I can get that uses recent, if not current, technology, so I can write software for today's hardware (though I do still try to make all my programs work on a 300 MHz, Win95 computer).

Something that caught my eye was this article on the up-and-coming Phenom X2 GE series. A TDP of 45 Watts sounds quite what I need.

__________________

kris23

DVD ISO files and large HD movie rips qualify as large files. anything measured in gigabytes is considered large

i seriously dont recommend an external enclosure with a laptop, the whole transfer through USB may erase your files completely if the enclosure's IDE to USB transfer adapter is poorly designed, ive lost alot of data with an old enclosure ive been using....

since then, i changed it and have seen no problems so far, but would just recommend a full tower system for stability

6 months is a very long time so anything can happen. just make sure to thoroughly research what you want.

and remember, TDP isnt the actual power consumption of the processor. 6000+ processors use more power than the Phenoms or Quads, the fact that they put out less heat simply means that the energy is being put out somewhere else than as heat.

look at reviews from the many sites out there. or you can come back when you build the system and we'll show you which is the best system for low power environments

__________________

swimtech

Looking at This page, from the article Kris23 references at Anand's site, it's hard to justify an AMD system from the perspective of power consumption.

This is a new development from Intel, as for the previous 4 years or so, total system power consumption for a typical desktop system has been lower with AMD products - no longer - and will likely remain so for another year or longer - those nifty highK gates you know...

The kicker here is that no only will an Intel based platform (desktop) consume less power overall but will get more work done in the same amount of time. If Kris23 is an Intel fanboy then so be it, but it appears he has interpreted the data properly. The latest AMD products will only be able to match the power consumption figures for the forseeable future, not necessarily better them.

The energy saved will run another lighting device, power another monitor (LCD), allow a room fan to run, or, um, not!

Oh, and look at getting a system with the ESata interface for flexibility's sake - it's the first widely seen external interface that should run flat out at internal interface speeds, 'cause it's the very same interface.

__________________
It's not so much getting your way that matters or not - what matters is how you go about getting it.

kris23

are laptops with eSATA common? i never seen one before.

__________________

kris23

to RealityRipple, seeing how you are trying to go for a low energy system, there are many new technologies that can help you save power.

one VERY important factor, more than any other component in your system is your power supply.

as you are coming from an Athlon XP, a rather old processor from before the 80 PLUS certification came around.... chances are that your PSU is something of a 70% efficiency or lower. do you want to do a full upgrade of your system to save more power?

Western Digital came out with their Caviar GP drives, RPM throttling design allows for great power savings. a few watts less than a regular drive but still less power,

DDR2 is the best now at DDR2 800 for you, running the memory at the standard 1.8v is your best bet for power savings.

ASUS has their EPU chip for their boards that makes the system be more efficient with the power it has, seems to be only on X38 boards which are somewhat needy in terms of power, i dont know about the 790 series of chips though.

you may be better off with a G35 board with integrated graphics, do you have any need for a graphics card? in todays power requirements, GPUs tend to take as much power as the CPU

__________________

RealityRipple

I've just finished testing my current system, and come up with these results:
When it's off, it takes 4 watts.
When it's on, the lowest CPU usage is 115 watts, with lowest fan abilities.
Turning the fans on adds 10 watts (4 for case fans, 6 for PSU fans).
Full process usage adds 10 watts as well.

What really bothers me is my 40 watt monitor uses 12 watts when it's 'off'. With all the trickle charges, my entire system uses an extra 45 watts when I'm not using it at all.

I will be upgrading my motherboard, processor, RAM, and video card, but not my hard drive (yet). I need enough video capabilities to transcode videos, create high quality Flash videos, and play Civilization 4 at highest quality settings. I don't think I want integrated video, because I'll need to be able to upgrade it (hopefully) without replacing the motherboard, and an onboard video card seems like an eventual waste, since you can't easily repurpose it.

__________________

OldBuzzard

I did find one lappy with eSATA, but I didn't look too long. They do have PCMIA cards that would give eSATA capabilities. But since a lappy doesn't seem to fit the bill, then thats just extra info that doesn't do him any good.

The PSU is going to be as big, if not bigger decision as the rest of the system. since PSU efficiency will make a huge difference. I know that all of the Corsair's rank high for efficiency. Not sure if they are the best tho. That will take some research as well.

__________________
When looking for a reason as to why things go wrong, never rule out sheer STUPIDITY

RealityRipple

Well, here's my current Power Supply, which I'm sure isn't any good, what with its >70% efficiency.

On thinking it over, I may want to get new everything. I can keep my current system as it is for backup use or for guests or showing off, since it's got a lot of fancy lights and crap. I think I'll buy all new parts for as much efficiency as possible, with the exception of the speakers, because music is the most important thing for me...

AKA: Disregard the motherboard size, the need for IDE, and the front panel stuff.

__________________

kris23

alright, ill get to work right away!

__________________

PangingJr

kris23,
you might want to ask the OP on his needs again to be sure that, the new computer system must be a AMD-based only or not? and what is the budget allowed for this new computer build, and he wants to buy parts and to build it at 6 months from now?

swimtech

Something of note in considering supplies, they tend to reach their peak efficiency at about 30-80% load, with the most meaningful drop in effciency at the low end of load state. In other words, they tend to be least efficient at low loads as a percentage of their rated output.

For example, with your present supply, you're pulling 140 watts or so when your supply is rated at 520 - that's a 30% or so load - kind of like running a race car engine for driving in the city. The supply is barely hitting its powerband. The only real NEED for a very strong supply is for overclocking, where the power efficiencies of the electronic components decrease relative to clock speeds, systems with lots of drives (and for those only at startup...), a top end processor that is used fully, and top end video card or SLI/Crossfire video card setups.

That being said, the applications you'll run matter too. Vista is a full time 3D app in itself, and Civ 4 running at high res will use both a good amount of CPU and Video juice, later release games need even more. 3D gaming/rendering is one of the, if not the most stressful thing, that computers do. High Definition video requires both strong CPU and Video as well because of the massive computational requirements. If you're into video, you're probably going to want the capability to do it in high def - a whole new ball game in requirements for CPU and Video with the requisite increase in power (supply) necessary to drive those components. So, that is why newer systems running at full load require 250-300 watts total to run, as measured by actual consumption figures (overclocking not accounted for...). You're likely going to want your upgraded/new system to do more than your present one, but it's not necessary to go overboard either.

Kris23 has gone overboard - but he wants to, and might need to in order to hit some killer overclocks, or just for shizzles. Nice system!

Pick your supply accordingly to hit the efficiency powerband with your intended use power consumption in mind, with some headroom for safety and upgradability down the road.

Edit: As an example from my own research: If I were building a system now, it'd be a P35 mainboard, an E6750 precessor, 3850, 3870, or 8800GT video, 2G ram, Vista, single large internal drive, two optical drives, with onboard sound and network (maybe wireless) capability. I want to overclock some full time (about 20%) to gain more value from my expenditure on the processor. For that system, I would choose a PC Power and Cooling 610 watt supply. While gaming, it might pull 300 watts on peaks. There's plenty of room with that supply to add more hard drives, memory, and upgrade the CPU later without considering running the supply over spec at all, or using it outside of its powerband efficiency-wise.

__________________
It's not so much getting your way that matters or not - what matters is how you go about getting it.

RealityRipple

I actually got my current power supply when I was using a much more power consuming setup... I've since removed my overclocking, extra drives, and eleven case fans to accommodate the electricity setup. At the time, I was using 380 watts on idle, so I figured a 520 would give me room to expand. Now I want a practical work computer, not a fun one.
@Kris & Pangng: I'd prefer AMD (The Phenom X2 GE ones look promising indeed), but it's not necessary if the Intel system is truly more efficient. I don't currently have any budget whatsoever, but I'd definitely like to keep it below $700.

__________________

kris23

this is my recommendation, for todays components anyway.... judging from your responses, do you really think you'll need a Quad core or would you be better with a Dual? you can disable the 2 extra cores or maybe even 3 on some advanced motherboards just so you know.... then enable them as you need them.

Newegg.com - COOLER MASTER COSMOS 1000 RC-1000-KSN1-GP Black/ Silver Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case - Retail
Newegg.com - Western Digital Caviar GP WD10EACS 1TB 5400 to 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM
Newegg.com - MSI NX8500GT-TD256EH GeForce 8500GT 256MB 128-bit GDDR2 PCI Express x16 SLI Supported Silent Heatsink Video Card - Retail
Newegg.com - AuzenTech Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1 7.1 Channels 24-bit 192KHz PCI Interface Sound Card - Retail
Newegg.com - PC Power & Cooling Silencer 610 EPS12V EPS12V 610W Continuous @ 40°C Power Supply 100 - 240 V UL, cUL, CE, CB, TUV - Retail
Newegg.com - Crucial Ballistix 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory - Retail
Newegg.com - ASUS P5K-E/WIFI-AP LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Newegg.com - Intel Xeon X3210 Kentsfield 2.13GHz 2 x 4MB L2 Cache LGA 775 Quad-Core Processor - Retail

i highly suggest passive cooling to minimize fans in the case and save more power, an 80 PLUS Certified power supply that is sized to 20% minimum power consumption is necessary


is there anything i particular that you need? for this system? i just ordered a set of z5500 5.1 speakers and can tell you about them once i get them if youre in the market for good speakers.

__________________

kris23

woops... looks like i went overboard...... $700..... overshot it by 2x......

i was looking at the components while all you guys were responding.....

__________________