Low budget computer

[Handruin]

My sis is looking for a basic computer to perform email, web, and some light games (non 3D). She has a max budget of $500 which needs to include a monitor. I'm not familiar with the best combinations of inexpensive parts to create a reliable machine. I'd like to build her an AMD setup rather than send her to Dell. However, Dell does have some decent deals these days.

At first guess, this is what I've put together:
Antec Solution SLK1600 with 300W: $46
--GIGABYTE GA-7VT600P-RZ: $52 (1st choice)
--ABIT NF7-S2 Socket A: $58 (2nd choice)
--EPoX EP-8VTAI Socket A: $48 (3rd choice)

AMD Athlon XP 2600+ Barton: $73
ASUS DVD-E616P2: $26
SAMSUNG SpinPoint P Series SP1213C: $77
2x crucial 256MB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400: ($29 each) $60
GIGABYTE GV-R925128T: $42
(will use onboard sound)
Floppy drive: $0 (i have extra to donate)
keyboard: $0 (I have extra to donate)
Mouse: $0 (I have extra to donate)
Heatsink: $12
Fans: $0 (i have extra to donate)

Total so far:
$388 plus shipping

Leaves $112 for monitor (need suggestions).

Thoughts?

 

[Mercutio]

I'd suggest going to a Socket 754 Sempron 2600 and a GA-K8VM800M (They're like $60 new). The CPU is the same price. You'll save cash on the video card.

You'll be able to find a NEW 17 or 19 inch CRT for around $100, but if possible buy a lease-returned model from your local screwdriver shop.

I'd also drop the hard drive to 80GB unless your sister is an MP3/video fiend. Use the extra money to buy extra RAM.

 

[Handruin]

Wow, I missed that board while looking. The integrated video would be perfect for what my sister needs. I've never worked with a micro-atx. Does it fit into a normal ATX case? Do you think a 300 watt PS is enough for a sempron 2600? Also, how does the performance of a sempron feel? Does it feel laggy like a celeron (for lack of a better description)?

The reason I selected the 120GB over the 80 is because I felt the price difference was minor, but you're right, 80Gb should be more than enough for basic desktop use.

New config:

Antec Solution SLK1600 with 300W: $46
GIGABYTE GA-K8VM800M: $66
AMD Sempron 2600+ Palermo 800MHz retail: $77
1x crucial 512MB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400: $44
ASUS DVD-E616P2: $26
SAMSUNG SpinPoint P Series SP0812C 80GB: $60

New total:
$319 + shipping

 

[Buck]

I've never worked with a micro-atx. Does it fit into a normal ATX case? Do you think a 300 watt PS is enough for a sempron 2600? Also, how does the performance of a sempron feel? Does it feel laggy like a celeron (for lack of a better description)?

Yes. Yes. Snappy. No.

The one item that will make the system lag is the onboard video. But hey, once you're down to this type of configuration, you can't complain.

 

[Handruin]

Thanks for the feedback! The nice part is that this board has an AGP slot so if she ever wants to upgrade the video, she can.

 

[Mercutio]

I think you can find room for another 256MB RAM in your budget now.

 

[Handruin]

Any concerns about mixing memory sizes on a 754 pin MB? I could probably bump it up to 1GB (2x512) but I feel like that is overkill for her needs.

 

[Mercutio]

When she still has that PC four years later, she'll thank you for planning ahead.

 

[Handruin]

I bought the machine for my sister and I'm using it now.

I bought:

GIGABYTE GA-K8VM800M
AMD Sempron 2600+ Palermo 800MHz 754 retail
1x crucial 512MB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400
LITE-ON DVD
SAMSUNG SpinPoint P Series SP0812C 80GB SATA

Total with shipping was $270.

I donated:
Antec SX830 (with 300 W PS)
Sony 10x CD-RW
floppy drive
Arctic silver

I ordered from newegg on Wednesday and the parts came today. Only problem is the stick of RAM is DOA. When I turn on the machine I get a long beep and nothing else. I tried all sorts of troubleshooting, but the system wouldn't boot. I finally took one of the 512MB sticks out of my own system and put it in this one and it boots perfectly. I guess I'll have to contact newegg for an RMA.

I'm very impressed with this low budget system. It's very snappy, very quiet, and doesn't run very hot (38 Celsius with no case fans and stock AMD cooler). The on-board video is much better than expected. No noticeable issues with quality or color. The on-board audio gets the job done with no real issues. I would definitely give this system two thumbs up for anyone looking for an inexpensive system.

 

[Tannin]

Only weak point is the CPU, Doug, and they ain't half bad, even so. It's just a shame that AMD withdrew the Athlon XP 2500, which cost slightly less than the Sempron 2600 and went considerably faster. But what can you do?

 

[Buck]

Only weak point is the CPU, Doug, and they ain't half bad, even so. It's just a shame that AMD withdrew the Athlon XP 2500, which cost slightly less than the Sempron 2600 and went considerably faster. But what can you do?

Sell a Sempron 3000+?

 

[Tannin]

That's pretty much what we do, Buck. The small cache of the Ahlon XP-based Semprons cripples them. The Athlon-64 based Semprons are much better.

 

[Handruin]

I was a little skeptical the cache of the sempron might make this feel slow, or perform poor in basic multi-tasking. This sempron 2600+ seems way faster than my Dell celeron 2.53GHz in general operations. I have no hard numbers, but I can tell just by the feel of operations. Both systems are very close in spec otherwise.

Just for kicks I decided to burn a CD-ROM, copy 20GB of files over the local LAN, and run scan disk at the same time...the machine still seemed responsive enough to browse the net and do other desktop operations. These would be the types of things my sister might do, and she'll have no performance problems.

I went with the sempron socket 754 so that down the road my sister has the upgrade option of an Athlon 64 if she ever needs it. If I went with the Athlon XP, I'd be stuck in an older upgrade path. Given the price of this motherboard, I'm very happy with the results so far. She will even have the option to add an AGP card if needed, but so far the on-baord is just fine.

 

[Tea]

Whhoah! What a statement!

* Faster than a Celeron

Well, yes. But what isn't?

* Faster than a Dell?

Well, yes, but what isn't? *


Fair shake of the coconut, Handy Andy, saying something is faster than a Celeron is like saying that your favourite actress is prettier than Tannin. Saying something is faster than a Dell Celeron is like saying that she's prettier than Tannin's ar—

er ...

bottom.



------------------------------------------------------------
* Note. Not counting Compaqs. Well, probably not counting Compaqs.

 

[Tannin]

Now that you've had your fun, Tea, do you mind if I say something? No? Thankyou.

Doug, I didn't notice that you were talking about an Athlon-64 family Sempron. That's an entirely different matter. They have twice as much cache (i.e., the same amount as a Barton Athlon XP) and perform very well. I didn't know they went down as low as the 2600 though — the only ones I've ever seen on price lists over here are 2800, 3000 and 3100. But I doubt that that will matter: it's the cache that counts for on-the-desktop snap. Your sister will have a hot little system.

 

[time]

They have twice as much cache (i.e., the same amount as a Barton Athlon XP) ...

Whether they are Socket A or Socket 754, nearly all Semprons have a 256kB Level 2 cache, which is half that of the Barton and double the older Duron. The 'exclusive' cache architecture means we are supposed to add the Level 1 cache to get the effective size, i.e. 384kB (or 640kB for Athlon 64 and Barton).

I didn't know they went down as low as the 2600 though — the only ones I've ever seen on price lists over here are 2800, 3000 and 3100.

Sounds like those bird-watching eyes might need some help - the 2600-754 has been available locally for months.

I agree that Semprons blitz Celerons, but like Tea says, this is hardly surprising. However, you need to remember that we're half way through 2005 and you're talking about a CPU that compares with an old Pentium 4 2-2.2GHz (don't forget the slower clock as well as the smaller cache). Definitely only for budget solutions.

The Semprons will become more attractive soon when AMD finally stops crippling their 64-bit capability. However, Celerons will also be 64-bit, and heat aside, I think the Intel chipset platform will present a better budget solution - the onboard graphics in particular is so much better than the shoddy rubbish from Via.

 

[Tannin]

Available? Maybe so, but who would bother asking for it? Besides, with their stupid naming schemes, AMD deserve all the confusion and buyer resistance they have garnered for themselves. People used to react so positively when you offered them a Duron - but now, you have to spend half the day assuring them that a "Sempron" isn't a "Celeron", because they both start with "S".

(Say it aloud. Or azk Tea.)

 

[Mercutio]

Believe me, those slower socket 754 chips have been on my radar since the day they came out. The 754 boards are a bit nicer, since all of them at least have SATA (for "free"), and that Sempron 2600 makes a nice replacement for the old standard XP2500. The Sempron 3000 is a damned nice little chip, and the Venice 3000 is just jaw dropping for low heat or overclocking.
I know 754 is a dead end, but for right now it's everything I'd want to work with.

 

[CougTek]

Whether they are Socket A or Socket 754, nearly all Semprons have a 256kB Level 2 cache, which is half that of the Barton and double the older Duron.

Most of those with the Palermo core I see on my pricelists feature 128KB of L2 cache, not 256KB. One notable exception is the 1.6GHz Sempron 2800+, which has 256KB L2 cache. Most of the others have half as much.

I hope the newer 3300+, running at 2.0GHz, made on the 90nm process and featuring x86-64 instructions will be a good overclocker. What a bang for the buck this cheapie piece of silicon would be for folding if it can easily reach 2.6GHz and above. :roll:

 

[CougTek]

I started checking for all Sempron models and what amount of L2 cache they have depending on their core and... it's freakingly complicated. We need to make or find a chart about this. Paris, then Palermo, then "E" revision Palermo and this one brings this and this one brings that.

AMD is even worse than Intel to confuse buyers.

 

[P5-133XL]

I started checking for all Sempron models and what amount of L2 cache they have depending on their core and... it's freakingly complicated. We need to make or find a chart about this. Paris, then Palermo, then "E" revision Palermo and this one brings this and this one brings that.

AMD is even worse than Intel to confuse buyers.

Try: Anand Tech -- Processor Obfuscation and You: An Update on AMD and Intel CPUs

 

[Handruin]

I've been running the Sempron for a couple days now and at 100% load with F@H, the core runs at about 40 degrees Celsius with the stock HSF with an ambient room temp of 25.8 (78 F). The one change being I used the Arctic silver cleaner and purifier along with a coating of Arctic Silver 5 to the stock HSF. Also keep in mind I have no case fans in this system...but that may change. The hard drive runs warm, but not too hot IMHO. My goal was to have a few moving parts as possible so that I don't get a phone call in a year when a case fan dies. On the flip-side, I don't want a call that the hard drive has died either.


===========================

On a similar confused topic of CPU cores, I'm looking at the chart that Mark linked to, and I'm noticing two cores for the A64 X2. The Manchester and Toledo...

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2418&p=2

Manchester Athlon 64 X2 2 x 512K 90nm SSE3 + Dual Core
Toledo Athlon 64 X2 2 x 1024K 90nm SSE3 + Dual Core

At first glance I'd say the Toledo is the better core, but there isn't much reference in that article to which one is better. The most they say is:

Toledo is the dual core version of San Diego and it will power the Athlon 64 X2 4400+ and 4800+ parts (1024K L2 per core); the Manchester core will be used in the 4200+ and 4600+ (512K L2 per core), though we may also see "rejected" Toledo cores in those chips if the past is any indication.

If a rejected Toledo can pass as a Manchester, I'm guessing Toledo is the way to go. I'm really liking the 4400+, but the cost is ridiculous right now...newegg want's $719. :eekers:

 

[Handruin]

Believe me, those slower socket 754 chips have been on my radar since the day they came out. The 754 boards are a bit nicer, since all of them at least have SATA (for "free"), and that Sempron 2600 makes a nice replacement for the old standard XP2500. The Sempron 3000 is a damned nice little chip, and the Venice 3000 is just jaw dropping for low heat or overclocking.
I know 754 is a dead end, but for right now it's everything I'd want to work with.

I was very happy with your suggestions of gigabyte motherboard and Sempron CPU. I recommend it to anyone in the market. I've joked with my sister that I want to keep this system and build her another. It definitely feels like an upgrade from my 2200+ aside from graphics performance. The install was a breeze, and the motherboard has been super-stable so far. My only issue was with the RAM, which I've already sent back for an RMA. Gigabyte even provides a tool to create the SATA boot driver for winXP. A pain at first, but otherwise easy to install once the floppy was created.

I even fired up my warcraft III on her system and believe it or not, the on-board video was able to play the game in 3D. It wasn't great, but I didn't even expect the game to launch. I played for about an hour with no problems. Definitely two thumbs up on the recommendation.