Computer

nic8082242 · Post by **nic8082242** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:12 pm

Alright I've ben needing a new computer for a while mine's a piece of crap

I can't spend more than about $300, so I was looking on newegg and came across this

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6856167023
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115052
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820146580
I've got harddrive to put in it.
Already Own Xp Home & Pro

It's definitely better than what I have.

Any comments, plz don't comment if you're gonna be rude I'm on a budget.

HotDog-Cart · Post by **HotDog-Cart** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:14 pm

Decent PC.

Just one thing.

Does it do what you need it to do?

If so, its a good computer to you.

GoldenfrankO · Post by **GoldenfrankO** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:17 pm

I might get one. If it lets you go online, and download from the interent (put stuff on psp/mp3) I might get one.

grossaffe · Post by **grossaffe** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:29 pm

first off, if you have the ability, I would suggest you build your own so you get the most bang for your buck. also, I would look into getting a Linux distrobution (Ubuntu's really user-friendly and can grow on you quick) because not only is Linux free (meaning more money towards computer and not OS), but it'll perform WAY better on modest hardware that windows ever will.

Post by **bicostp** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:38 pm

If you're working with such a tight budget, you're better off saving your money until you can get something decent. Going from a 2.6 ghz P4 to a 3.0 ghz P4 isn't all that big a difference, especially since it's a single-core processor. Sure you can drop a C2D into it eventually, but then you'll have wasted the $90 on the P4. Believe me, when I built my HTPC it was on a tight budget; the processor works fine for videos and simple Flash but lags like hell on modern games or high-def videos (it's a 3.2 ghz Celery D). That P4 you linked to will do for now, but soon you'll want something more robust.

If your current Dell can do everything you need it to and you're not doing a bunch of games with it, drop some more RAM into it and it will tide you over. That combined with a good cleaning courtesy of free maintenance tools (or even a complete reinstallation of XP) will get you at least a couple more years out of it.

When it comes to PC upgrades, a large jump is always more economical than baby steps.

edit: DON'T BOTHER WITH LINUX!!! It's a waste of time except for internet access and word processing, and has its own fair share of troubles. If you don't consider yourself a Windows power user, you really shouldn't even think about switching.

edit: I don't like Linux because it's a disorganized mess of config files and redundant forks, and people tout it as the best thing ever. Programs that aren't poor imitations of existing commercial products are buggy and half-finished, and there's no consistency in their interfaces (sometimes within the same program). You can't legally play DVDs on it, it turns its users into loud fanboys or the equivalent of religious fanatics, and some of its project leaders are mental. (Stallman, who founded the free software foundation, complains that his decrepit old Thinkpads can't run 'free and open' BIOS code, then gets an XO-1 and gimps it by deleting the WiFi drivers which have traces of copyrighted code, then copyrights everything he writes. Yay hypocrisy!)

For more information, visit this blog which fits my opinions on the matter to a T
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/

grossaffe · Post by **grossaffe** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:58 pm

bicostp wrote:edit: DON'T BOTHER WITH LINUX!!! It's a waste of time except for internet access and word processing, and has its own fair share of troubles. If you don't consider yourself a Windows power user, you really shouldn't even think about switching.

woah, now, calm down. that's not all linux is good for. sure, it doesn't do a lot of modern commercial gaming, but it certainly doesn't hurt to get acquainted with it. I've been using it for about six months now and couldn't be happier. sure, i have XP as a dual-boot option, but I haven't booted into it in a LONG time (although, I will admit that it doesn't help that XP stopped recognizing my video card due to a spontaneous device-conflict). And its not like he has to "switch", he can just give it a try on his current machine and decide if he likes it before he figures what he'll do on his next machine. no need to be hostile to a harmless, free OS.

vskid · Post by **vskid** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:45 pm

grossaffe wrote:Linux...perform WAY better on modest hardware that windows ever will.

Uh, no. I have a laptop with a 900MHz P3 and 256MB of ram, and a desktop with a 1.7GHz Athlon XP and 512MB of ram. They both have XP on them and it runs just fine. I tried Ubuntu on the desktop, but surprise, surprise, no drivers for the ATI graphics card so it had to use the default driver which gimps it to heck.
XP was made for hardware not even half as good as what he is getting, it'll fly for everyday tasks.

grossaffe · Post by **grossaffe** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 10:18 pm

vskid wrote:
grossaffe wrote:Linux...perform WAY better on modest hardware that windows ever will.
Uh, no. I have a laptop with a 900MHz P3 and 256MB of ram, and a desktop with a 1.7GHz Athlon XP and 512MB of ram. They both have XP on them and it runs just fine. I tried Ubuntu on the desktop, but surprise, surprise, no drivers for the ATI graphics card so it had to use the default driver which gimps it to heck.
XP was made for hardware not even half as good as what he is getting, it'll fly for everyday tasks.

Yeah, ATI's openGL sucks, but that's not Linux's fault, you can blame ATI for that. nVidia graphics cards run just fine. and again, no need for the hostility.

vskid · Post by **vskid** » Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:12 pm

Sorry I came off hostile. I just dislike it when people think that you need a ton of power to surf the web and watch youtube.

grossaffe · Post by **grossaffe** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:53 am

vskid wrote:Sorry I came off hostile. I just dislike it when people think that you need a ton of power to surf the web and watch youtube.

I don't think that, I also don't think you need to spend hundreds of dollars on an operating system to do that either. If he finds he doesn't like Linux, he doesn't have to use it and he didn't spend any money in trying it out. but if he finds he does like it and it does what he needs his computer to do, then that's a bunch of money he just saved. Its not for everyone, but there's no harm in giving it a try, especially on a computer that he's planning on replacing.

Post by **bicostp** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 7:25 am

I've run XP on a Pentium 1 166 with 128 MB of RAM and no MMX extensions, and with all of the shiny effects disabled it worked perfectly fine. (It wasn't what I'd call a fun experience, but shows you how low it can go.) To put that into perspective, when I tried Ubuntu on a Compaq DeskPro EN with 512 MB of RAM and Intel graphics (the drivers, by some miracle, worked), I experienced similar performance.

XP system requirements wrote:These are the minimum requirements for basic functionality. Actual requirements vary, depending on the system configuration and the programs and features that you choose to install. If you are installing Windows XP over a network, you may need additional available hard-disk space.

The minimum hardware requirements for Windows XP Home Edition are:
Pentium 233-megahertz (MHz) processor or faster (300 MHz is recommended)
At least 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM (128 MB is recommended)
At least 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available space on the hard disk
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM drive
Keyboard and a Microsoft Mouse or some other compatible pointing device
Video adapter and monitor with Super VGA (800 x 600)or higher resolution
Sound card
Speakers or headphones

source: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/304297/EN-US/

The requirements for XP Pro are the same. It says it requires a Pentium 233, but installs and runs fine on mych less than that. As long as it finds a Pentium-class CPU and 64 MB of RAM, a plain-vanilla stock XP install disc will install just fine.

Upkeep and configuration are more important.

grossaffe · Post by **grossaffe** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:02 am

bicostp wrote:I've run XP on a Pentium 1 166 with 128 MB of RAM and no MMX extensions, and with all of the shiny effects disabled it worked perfectly fine. (It wasn't what I'd call a fun experience, but shows you how low it can go.) To put that into perspective, when I tried Ubuntu on a Compaq DeskPro EN with 512 MB of RAM and Intel graphics (the drivers, by some miracle, worked), I experienced similar performance.

XP system requirements wrote:These are the minimum requirements for basic functionality. Actual requirements vary, depending on the system configuration and the programs and features that you choose to install. If you are installing Windows XP over a network, you may need additional available hard-disk space.

The minimum hardware requirements for Windows XP Home Edition are:
Pentium 233-megahertz (MHz) processor or faster (300 MHz is recommended)
At least 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM (128 MB is recommended)
At least 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available space on the hard disk
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM drive
Keyboard and a Microsoft Mouse or some other compatible pointing device
Video adapter and monitor with Super VGA (800 x 600)or higher resolution
Sound card
Speakers or headphones

source: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/304297/EN-US/
The requirements for XP Pro are the same. It says it requires a Pentium 233, but installs and runs fine on mych less than that. As long as it finds a Pentium-class CPU and 64 MB of RAM, a plain-vanilla stock XP install disc will install just fine.

Upkeep and configuration are more important.

I believe that there is a version of ubuntu specifically made for weak machines. I think its Xubuntu, but i could be wrong.

HotDog-Cart · Post by **HotDog-Cart** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:21 am

Lol dude. Are you sure that, the 631 socket CPU will fit in the 945 socket motherboard?

Seriously, that socket may not fit. Look for a different one.

Metroid fan · Post by **Metroid fan** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:26 am

Yeah it's Xubuntu and I have it on my pathetic pentium 3 433 mhz and it runs pretty well. Watching youtube isn't exactly a joy but it works for what I need it to. That being Torrents and surfing the web.

Harshboy · Post by **Harshboy** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:28 am

Install TinyXP Rev09.

I can't link to it, but Google will help