Compucase CI-6606 300W for AthlonXP 1700+

[Clocker]

Hey guys-

Merc can probably answer this one. My brother-in-law has a 3 year old system I built for him inside a Compucase CI-6606. At the time, it had a 300W power supply. I don't have the specs for the power supply back then so I'm not sure if it will be OK for a new 1700+ (0.13 micron) system.

Will the PSU be OK, borderline, or should it be upgraded?


Other components that will be included:
40GB WD JB
Geforce4 MX
ECS-K7S5A Pro
Maybe 512 DDR but might keep his old SDRAM

Thanks,
C

 

[CougTek]

It should, unless perhaps you overclock the Athlon to insane frequencies. I doubt the PSU has dual fans, so be sure to put a decent 80mm fan in the rear to exhaust the hot air produced by the CPU.

I once used a cheapo no-name 300W PSU to power up a dual 2000+ Athlon MP platform. I tried to kill it by letting it crunch in a close, unventilated room during hot summer days, but the PSU did not die. It was very hot though (roughly 75C). AFAIK, the whole thing is still working one year later as a server for a small company too cheap to buy a reliable box from me.

 

[Clocker]

Thanks, Coug.

I just had an idea that will save my bro-in-law some money. I doubt he's looking for a big increase in performance or anything...so, I think I'll just put the Celeron II 950 I was trying to get rid of in the for sale forum in his Gigabye GA-6VX-4X along with increasing his RAM to 256 or 512. (He just needs a box that will run WinXP nicely & play the occasional game.) That way I'm sure his PS will be fine and (added bonus) I don't have to tear the system all apart. I'll throw in a WD 40GB JB drive in there as well to speed things up and give him a newer drive with reliability & warranty.

I may update his graphics card from a TNT2 16MB so he can play some nicer games. Any suggestions for well under $100? I was thinking of a fanless solution so a Geforce4 MX440 64MB comes time mind....

Thanks,
C

 

[Mercutio]

It's almost certainly a HEC power supply. Sometimes they're sold as AGI or... some other brand I can't recall. Nonetheless, they ARE HEC power supplies.

HEC PSUs have been Athlon-rated since 2000, so it should take any punishment you'd care to dish out. My PC with 11 internal hard disks is on a 350W HEC PSU.

 

[Clocker]

Thanks for your feedback, Merc.

C

 

[CougTek]

I may update his graphics card from a TNT2 16MB so he can play some nicer games. Any suggestions for well under $100? I was thinking of a fanless solution so a Geforce4 MX440 64MB comes time mind...

A GeFarce 4 MX is kinda outdated. You would be better off with a Radeon 9100 64MB (the 128MB version doesn't add any performance worth of) or a GeFarce 5200FX 128MB (beware of the 64MB versions as some have only a 64bit wide memory bus). I would personally opt for the Radeon 9100 as it is cheaper and still offers very acceptable performances in most modern games. The GeForce 5200FX supports DirectX 9, but that's only a marketing trick as it doesn't have the horsepower to display all the DirectX 9 effects, so if you want to keep playable frame rates, you'll have to cut on the visual goodies just as much as you would with the Radeon 9100.

Don't waste money on the new Radeon 9200. It is slower than the cheaper 9100 anyway.

Here, I can get a Radeon 9100 (from Sapphire) for 94$CDN and a 128MB GeForce 5200FX for 116$CDN (Asus V9520). In your currency, that's 70$ and 87$ respectively.

 

[Clocker]

Thanks Coug. I have been trying to find a review comparing the 9100 and the MX440 but they seem few and far between. My impression has been that the MX440 offers better performance but I could definitely be wrong.

With your input, I'll keep digging to find a direct comparison of the two. But, if you have seen any direct comparisons, drop me a link...

Also, the MX440 (nonSE) is only about $50 which is pretty compelling...

Thanks.
C

 

[CougTek]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-9100_3.html

The flashy red bar is for the Radeon 9100 (from GigaByte) and the green bar is a GeForce 4 MX 440 with AGP 8X support. Keep in mind that the Radeon 9100 (a remarked 8500LE) is DirectX 8.1 compatible while the GeForce 4MX is mostly DirectX 7 (ok, up to DirectX 8.0, but not 8.1). You get better frame rates on games based on old engines on the GeFarce, but newer games play better on the Radeon. 2D clarity is certainly better on the Radeon too. Just like MPEG-2 videos.

 

[time]

1. I wouldn't expect any problems from a 3-year old HEC (Compucase) PSU. After all, a Thoroughbred 1700 doesn't need much juice.

2. I think the 440MX is adequate as a companion to the rather weak Celeron. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is only a Coppermine with 128kB cache, right?

3. Clocker seems aware of it, but beware of the difference between MX440/MX440-8x and MX440-SE. Reviewers tend to gloss over it, but there's a big difference.

4. I'd be happy to even be able to buy Radeon 9100, rather than the wall-to-wall 9000/9200 we are stuck with here. Plus we are paying way too much for them. :x So as the XBit Labs tests show, it's kinda simpla down under: the 440MX is a way better buy than the 9000/9200. And I'd dispute whether most 440MX have any clarity problems.

Having said that, I just picked up a FX5200 for under US$75, compared to US$90 for a Radeon 9000. It's surprisingly high quality, with a huge passive heatsink. Too slow for hard-core gamers, but an excellent budget solution in the making, and great output (I haven't used one of the 'funny' driver versions that leave bits out). Oh yes, and Coug is wrong about which versions have DDR - you just have to be careful.

For me in Oz, the selection will probably go something like this now:

Basic - MX440-SE DDR
All-rounder - FX5200
Gamer - Radeon 9500/9600
Geek - Radeon 9800

I can see that whatever is next up from the 5200 (5600?) could be a serious challenger to the 9600, if the price is right and the cooling is not too outrageous.

I reckon the old Ti4200 could become something of a bargain as it runs out, too.

 

[CougTek]

Oh yes, and Coug is wrong about which versions have DDR - you just have to be careful.

I never wrote anything about DDR memory on the GeFarce 5200FX. I wrote that some of the 64MB versions have 64bit wide memory bus. I never wrote it could be SDRAM memory. AFAIK, there are no GeForce 5200FX with 64bit SDRAM memory. There are a few with 64bit DDR memory (but only on the 64MB models). All the 128MB models I've seen (I haven't checked them all) had 128bit wide memory bus. So just to be sure he doesn't get a card with choked RAM, I suggested he opt for a 128MB model instead of a 64MB model, if a 5200FX is what he wants.

 

[CougTek]

AFter a bit of research, I found out that Gainward has a 128MB model with 64bit wide memory bus, but it's the only 128MB model I'm awared of with the crippled bus. All the others 64bit memory cards were 64MB models (several from Gainward - designed as lite versions, the SL-5200-CD from Soltek and the Chaintech A-FX20 64MB for instance).

 

[time]

Doh! That's what I meant to say: 64-bit vs 128-bit. Looks like you worked it out anyway.

 

[blakerwry]

Coug, what's the diff between a Saphire 9000 and a 9100? I assume that they are prtty much indistinguishable in performance... does the 9100 run cooler or offer any additional features over the 9000?

I want a card with TV/DVI/VGA...

 

[Jan Kivar]

Coug, what's the diff between a Saphire 9000 and a 9100? I assume that they are prtty much indistinguishable in performance... does the 9100 run cooler or offer any additional features over the 9000?

I want a card with TV/DVI/VGA...

If the naming is based on the ATI's chips, 9100 is a renamed Radeon 8500, and 9000 is... well, 9000. If You check Futuremark's Hall of Fame, You'll see that 8500/9100 performs better in 3DMark 2001 SE (if that's really anything to base the comparison...).

Some versions of 9000 have VIVO features, IIRC.

Cheers,

Jan