|
|
#1
25th Dec 2008, 14:43
|
|||
|
|||
|
I dont know wheter to go with more cache or more RAM. Here are the two im torn between:
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/sto...ory_oid=-35614 http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/sto...ory_oid=-35614 (Already own a monitor) Looking to buy a computer tommorow (boxing day) from PC World or Comet £400 is my budget. If you could recommend certain processors or computer brands it would be appreciated very much. |
|
#2
25th Dec 2008, 15:25
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Personally the first one, Intel is the better chip and 2GB of RAM is plenty, you can add 2GB for next to nothing latter on if you need to also.
__________________
My System: Hybr!d
|
|
#3
25th Dec 2008, 15:31
|
|||
|
|||
|
yo check out my swapz iv got a procceser here if anyone wants to swap
Quote:
|
|
#4
25th Dec 2008, 21:21
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Yeah, the Q6600 is a better chip in general and the cache difference is completely meaningless when looking across two different manufacturers. Definitely the first.
Note though that this will be next to useless for gaming - video, audio, general office tasks is what it's made to do.
__________________
__________________
"I loved the P182 so much that, when my wife's system was all noisy and needed all sorts of cleaning, I bought her one. Then, when I wanted a cat, I bought a P182. The P182 is not a cat per se, but it's still an excellent buy."
My System: 日夏子
|
|
#5
27th Dec 2008, 06:55
|
|||
|
|||
|
Intel all the way at the moment, the Phenoms are pretty poor. I would ask what RAM speed is on the Intel machine though, it doesn't say.. if it's 667 then 4Gb of 800 would be better, if it is already 800 then you only have to buy 2Gb of 800 =)
You would be better off getting a dual core and saving a wedge of cash to use on a decent graphics card if you plan to play recent games, a 256Mb one (probably onboard too, not sure) wont cut much these days. |
|
#6
28th Dec 2008, 08:37
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank for the replies. This is the one I bought (I dont play modern games I use pc for downloading and burning dvds mainly)
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/product/seo/737738 It's a different one than the two I mentioned but I think it is better than them both. (everything is runnin really fast so far) Did I make the right choice? |
|
#7
28th Dec 2008, 08:40
|
|||
|
|||
|
Looks pretty powerful, however as it has an integrated GFX card as opposed to a dedicated GFX card it will not be much cop when gaming.
|
|
#8
28th Dec 2008, 08:47
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#9
28th Dec 2008, 08:52
|
|||
|
|||
|
Windows 32bit can only use 3.25GB no matter what, so you are at the max unless you buy and install Windows 64bit. Also the RAM access time speed difference between 667Mhz and 800Mhz is barely noticeable.
Like I and others have said the PC is fast, very fast and does not need anything other than a proper graphics card if you intend to play the latest games. |
|
#10
28th Dec 2008, 09:03
|
|||
|
|||
|
OK Thanks mate.
|
