What computer should I purchase?

[guttboy]

SORRY...another question on operating systems....they offer XP home and XP Pro......what is the difference.....I was thinking about linking my Dell laptop Inspiron 8000 and this one via a router so that I could share the cable modem and transfer data between the two systems....will regular home edition XP allow for that.....

Basically why should I spend the dough for XP Pro?

THanks

[bockko]

[lunch break ]  here is the lowdown on memory types. sdram runs at 133mhz. It can work ok, in fact my freebie system from work has it, but at 1.8gig the cpu does fine. DDR is about midway in the speed range, RDRAM runs a frequency of 400meg i think. Faster bus speeds are attained by moving two bits per cycle (ie double data rate) instead of one bit. The double rate is why you see things like 266 mhz bus speed. As for game play, the faster bus speeds (rdram being the fastest) tend to give you better game play. I just read a review in maxpc magazine about how much memory you can benefit from, and 256 meg is plenty right now. I eyeballed the systems you mentioned, the 8200 will do you better than the 4400. the mx vid cards are essentially bandwidth handicapped versions of the non mx versions of the card. I had a gforce 2 mx with my new system, it ran great except that i wasn't satisfied with the 32 bit frame rates so I ran in 16 it mode. I just replaced it with a geforce 3 (non mx) and the card kicks the game's arnold, runs great in full res 32 bit color.  For full on game speed, get the 8200 with the pc800 memory, and if you can swing it, get the non mx version of the geforce cards (the mx version fill rates are less than half of the non mx card's rate).
If you would be happy with full res 16 bit (which is still very nice!) just opt for the gforce2 mx that is standard. Your frame rates will run at your monitor's max (like somewhere around 75 perhaps). You will even be able to fight in the smoke at a damaged field!
Your system will rock

[guttboy]

Bockko,
Lephturn was recommending the 4400 which uses the DDR SDRAM and he seems to think that is the better way to go as he indicates that INTEL is dumping the RDRAM chipset....can you shed some light on that?  Now Im a bit confused on which way to go....

[Lephturn]

guttboy,

Buy a DDR SDRAM based system, trust me.  I've been doing this for a long long time,  RDRAM while theoretically faster has only a tiny advantage in speed in reality, and I doubt you'd see any difference.  RDRAM is more expensive and will not be supported in the future while DDR SDRAM is the defacto market standard, is much cheaper, and will be usable in future machines.  Buy a DDR SDRAM based system (4400 series) with 256 Megs and you can always add another 256 MB later at a reasonable price.

As for XP Home vs. XP Pro, well both SHOULD do the internet connection sharing you want.  However, XP Home isn't really designed to work well on a local area network environment.  If you plan on having a few machines at your home that share files and such locally as well as connecting to the Internet, I recommend XP Pro... it's the "real" version of XP anyway.

And bokko while I'm sure you mean well, I can't recommend RDRAM to anyone.   Also just FYI, DDR SDRAM runs at 133 MHZ but the DDR stands for "Double Data Rate", meaning it transfers data on both the rising and falling side of the clock cycle for an effective speed of 266 Mhz.  RDRAM is also DDR I believe at 200 Mhz DDR, effectively 400 Mhz.  Although RDRAM seems faster from a Mhz perspective, a combination of the CPU not needing any higher bandwidth to memory and latencies in the RDRAM system means that in real-life applications the difference in speed between the two would be very small.  Add to that the fact that RDRAM is much more expensive and has no upgrade path, and I don't think anybody should choose an RDRAM based system at this time.  

[Lephturn]

BTW... it's better if you decide for yourself which version of XP is for you.  Check this out:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp

Personally, I'd go with Pro, but it's your call.

[guttboy]

Well Lephturn.....I REALLY appreciate the help!!!!

I spoke with a buddy of mine an hour ago at the squadron and he basically echoed what you had said.

I am going to go with the 4400, 256 DDR SDRAM, 2.0 Gig, 40 GIG HD, SB live card, and the GEFORCE 3 TI 200 with 64 on ram.

Well Im taking the plunge and ordering....

Thanks for ALLLL the help from everyone here......it has been invaluable!:D

Mike

[bockko]

Lephturn is on target in that rdram is not utilized fully at current cpu speeds, however,next years upgrade? Recent benchmark tests indicate a performance differences are slim between rdram and ddr, so while I still thing rdram leaves growth room for upgrades, the ddr system is still going to run great. And lephturn,  I do believe transfering data on the rising and falling timing signal = moving two bits per cycle...

nyway, with the geforce 3 card and that system you will be happy.
Good luck, out

[Lephturn]

Missed that bit=part bokko... but anyway my point was to explain it to guttboy, not really argueing with you here.  As for the "rdram leaves room for growth" part, here I disagree.  The only way to "grow" into it would be to use the RDRAM in your next machine... and even Intel is dumping support for RDRAM so you won't be able to do that.

http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2002q1/athlonxp-2100/index.x?pg=2

Here's a good test that highlights the difference between RDRAM and DDR Ram.  Yep, RDRAM is a bit faster.  However, it's not MUCH faster, we're talking a couple of % here in real applications.  Be sure to ignore most of the weird synthetic benchmarks and focus on things like Serious Sam or other real applications.  RDRAM is much more expensive, and not supported going into the future while DDR SDRAM is.  What I mean is, lets say you upgrade to 512 MB DDR SDRAM in a few months, and then a year later you decide to sell that machine and get a new one.  The chances that your extra 256 MB of RAM will be usable in your next machine are much greater with DDR SDRAM than they are with RDRAM.  Hence why I think you should go with that.

[guttboy]

Hi guys,
what is the difference between a P4 willamette and a P4 Northwood?  Also in a previous post someone reccommended upping the power from the power supply .05v to see if that helped the old system.....how do I do that.

I have a PCI/ISA Bios (P2B-AE) CMOS setup utility Award software.....I looked but couldnt see where I could manually up that voltage setting....am I looking in the right spot?  I get to the setup util by hitting F2 when it boots.

THanks again....

Mike

[mrsid2]

The best way to get bang for your bucks Intel way is to get a machine with northwood 1.6Ghz PIV and then overclock the sucker as high as it goes. It can go beyond 2.2 easy they say.

[maddog1]

Think I read at Tom's that the rdram is going to 533 this summer because the 2.5gig northwood gains ZERO due to memory bandwith......  the test they did with Samsung rd533 and a 2.5gig(I think) blew everything away by a fair margin.... also the northwoods run a lot cooler........  

Wheres Bloom when we need him......

Everytime I see Lepturn post it reminds me of the Yogi Bera quote,

When you come to a fork in the road, take it.

[bockko]

Wow gutboy, you got a lively post! Lots of good info here hehe (anyone here read maxpc?? sounds like it). I dunno if you ordered, but here is some direct aces high related info to help:
i have the 1.8 gig p4 using the sdram (slowest of the 3 memory types -- freebie from my job or i woulda gone with the ddr or rdram) with the geforce 3 ti 200. I get 75 frames per second in normal flight (my monitor max's out at 75, 1280x1024 resolution, 32 bit color). Around damaged fields with lots of planes and smoke I go down to about 30. If you get either the ddr or the rdram system and a cpu around 1.8 (1.6 is ok, 2.0 is way cool) you should do at least that good,   more likely better because of the faster memory type. The gforce 3 ti500 is faster than the ti200, it has a bit more bandwidth and a slightly faster processing speed. The 200, which i have, works great, but it will get long in the tooth a bit sooner than the ti 500...the ti200 should work well and you save that 100 bucks or so for your future gforce4 ti200 or gforce 5ti200 hehe.

I am not fully certain if rdram is getting dumped by Intel. The processors coming down the pipe in the next few years are going to be FAST. They need lots memory bandwidth, and while I saw some info on future chipsets, I don't quite remember what the solution is. I do know Intel and Rambus kind of fixed their contract (hence Intel's release of its own DDR chipset) and are working on memory formats for future processors. Of course, Intel will do what's good for Intel. If RDRAM fails or can be outperformed, Intel will go with the better solution in the long run (not that i work for intel ahem )

Later gutboy
[tip 'o the hat from a retired navy guy to an active airfoce guy]

[Vulcan]

RDRAM is on the short path to death.

Intel dropping support for it is the worst indicator. Intel own (or owned) a share of RAMBUS, hence they propped it up for some time. Having Intel drop support is like waving a death certificate over RAMBUS.

Another issue with RDRAM is the yields are low and memory manufacturers hate the stuff. Apparently the spec is hard to hit and a lot of product ends up in the garbage. Word from the memory manufacturers is they are already winding down production, expect to see RDRAM go to critical levels of shortage and prices to escalate.

I've seen some roadmaps for top end stuff, and RDRAM ain't in there (like the IBM X series servers... ALL DDR-SDRAM).

As for the memory size, 256Mb is nice, but 512Mb is becoming the norm. I'd say if you got 256Mb now you'd be shopping for some more RAM in 3-6 months.

[krazyhorse]

lephturn , im thinking about hooking up a 71 L 82  sb 350 , to my puter will this increase speed and what carb and intake would you recommend?? if anything i can use it for a fan

[DAVENRINO]

Tom's Hardware always hated Rambus until this interesting article.  BTW I have a DDR Athalon machine.

http://www4.tomshardware.com/column/02q1/020215/index.html

DJ229