Advice needed with a pc build

cubix

Putting a new box together to mainly surf the web/Use it as a HTPC(when I get the funds for the projector:rolleyes: )/dip my hand into home video-editing and play the odd game or two. Should have a buget of €800-1000 to start with so can always cut corners on stuff like Graphic cards/big Hdd's to start with and upgrade as I need them. But was wondering if I should go the Intel or Amd platform route. I presume the mhz thing means nothing now as I was looking on Komplett and these two processerors looked a world apart for very small difference in money but to the noob I presume the intel is not that much faster, is it?

http://www.komplett.ie/k/ki.asp?sku=308955

http://www.komplett.ie/k/ki.asp?sku=317093

So my quest begins, so would appreciate all input into the following below with alot of advice on the MB/Cpu/memory please. From the quietness point of view for the HTPC end of it, is not very important as it will be in a bedroom above the lounge. But would like some advice on what cables would be best to run the dvi- signal from the pc down to the lounge(approx 5mtrs) and would there be any signal loss

Motherboard: ?

Cpu:?

Memory:Was thinking a Gig to start

Graphics card:Something reasonable to start,not top end that will break the bank;)

Hdd:

PSU:

Thanks Cubix

sdanseo

Instead of running 5m of cable, throw it under the carpet and through a small hole and mount the projector on the cieling below;)

christophicus

As far as i know AMD 64's are better at image editing then PD's so i would asume they are better at vidoe editing aswell. although if you are converting file types alot for movies then the PD will be better.

uberpixie

The intel chip is a dual core chip, the AMD is a single core.

The intel chip would be better for heavy multi tasking.
I.e encoding something and watching something else at the same time.

The amd chip is a very fast chip, generates much less heat and would be faster if you only intend your PC to do only 1 thing at a time.

The amd chip would also be much better for games.

8T8

If you can go with an Athlon X2 which is AMD's dual core line it will be better for HTPC usage & gaming compared to a Pentium D. However if you hold off a while Intel's Core Duo 2 line is launching soon and they would be much more competitive perhaps even better...

CPU: [socket AM2] 369.95
Athlon 64 X2 4200+

Motherboard: [Socket AM2] 85.99
Gigaybte mATX board with integrated HD audio and graphics supporting NVIDIA's Purevideo. Also has a PEG x16 slot for graphics cards.

Memory: 130
1 GB DDR-2 800

HDD: 179.95
Western Digital SE16 400GB

PSU: 96
Tagan 430w very quiet and has modular cables that allows you to remove excess cables thereby removing clutter.

Total 861 euro roughly for HTPC usage.

Now if you want to add a graphics card into the mix try a 7600GT for €192 which would bring you to €1053 and that's a pretty decent system outright.

You shouldn't have any problems with DVI at 5m I have my HTPC running from a 6m VGA cable. Lindy sell some decent length cables if you have trouble finding the right length.

garrath

I agree with 8T8. You should wait till the end of the month, AMD are dropping their prices quite a bit, and an X2 would be a lot nicer than the single core Athlon64 you were considering, esp. if you are looking at video editing. Have a look at the price drops here:
http://forums.firingsquad.com/firingsquad/board/message?board.id=hardware&thread.id=85887
The best bang for buck is probably the higher end X2s, 5000 or 4600 if you want to be more price conscious.

Also, the way to go, IMO, is AM2. With AM2, AMD now has DDR2 memory. This is more popular these days, so the prices will go way down (good for future upgrades), while the prices for standard DDR will actually go up. If you go with AM2 now you will also have a good chance of upgrading to a better CPU in the future (AMDs k8l and 4x4 will work with this socket). 939 is essentially being phased out, AMD have stopped production almost all of their 939 cpus.

masteroftherealm

christophicus wrote:

As far as i know AMD 64's are better at image editing then PD's so i would asume they are better at vidoe editing aswell. although if you are converting file types alot for movies then the PD will be better.

Eh quite the opposite would you believe.

Video enconding benefits massivly from the longer pipleline of the Intel chips. Resulting in the intel chips can be (up to) twice as fast as AMD chips in the area.
Bitta random knowledge for ye

cubix

Thanks lads,Sdonn was thinking that myself;) .8T8 very much appreciate the detailed input. MasterofTheRealm does that statement regarding intel's are better than Amd's 64 stand when you talk about Amd's x2

Cubix

christophicus

masteroftherealm wrote:

Eh quite the opposite would you believe.

Video enconding benefits massivly from the longer pipleline of the Intel chips. Resulting in the intel chips can be (up to) twice as fast as AMD chips in the area.
Bitta random knowledge for ye

What i meant in the last line was that infact P4's/d's are good for video encoding,Isnt that chngeing the file type? Or is encoding video editing?