[deldrice]

I still can't decide which would be a better value. A 3.16 duo or a 2.66 quad. With the duo I would save $70 which would compensate for a better cooler which yields better OC speeds, but would a 2.66 quad and lower end cooler with slightly lower OC be worth it?

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by serverguy

Yh, what you say is very true. It has dropped a lot.

But the Q9300 and Q9400 have now come out, which are on the smaller die tech (45nm) so you get better temperatures and better overclocks.

Yeah I see that. I also see that Newegg doesn't carry the q9450 anymore. when i look elsewhere, I see it going for 350-399 (US dollars) I thougt i got mine for 269, but I may be mistaken. It's 45 NM as well but has 12 MB cache instead of the 6 that the q9400 has.

Just damn, I'm trying to catch up but the technology is moving to fast for me to even keep up with the little I DO know lol.

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by deldrice

I still can't decide which would be a better value. A 3.16 duo or a 2.66 quad. With the duo I would save $70 which would compensate for a better cooler which yields better OC speeds, but would a 2.66 quad and lower end cooler with slightly lower OC be worth it?

Man, you need to ask Carbon that. He says that very few programs even have the ability to use 4 cores. You really should check out his computer parts thread:

http://www.computer-juice.com/forums...station-18844/

It's the "sticky" he was referring to in his previous post. He (like serverguy) really knows his stuff, and the initial post on that thread is quite informative without being 25 pages long. READ IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol

[serverguy]

Originally Posted by deldrice

I still can't decide which would be a better value. A 3.16 duo or a 2.66 quad. With the duo I would save $70 which would compensate for a better cooler which yields better OC speeds, but would a 2.66 quad and lower end cooler with slightly lower OC be worth it?

What do you want to use the computer for? That would influence this decision. If you want to game, then go for the dual, if you want to encode video, then basically go for the quad.

Quad is maybe more future proof, maybe not. Who knows what going to happen

Personally, I think that an E8400 clocked to 3.8Ghz is going to be the smarter choice, and you'll save some cash while you're at it.

You'll also have a lot more luck overclocking a dual, than a quad.

[deldrice]

Here is my final build. Thanks everyone for helping me =D

CPU:

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Wolfdale 3.0GHz LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor Model BX80570E8400 - Retail GPU:
[IMG]http://images17.newegg.com/is/image/...2-795-TS?$S60$[/IMG]
SAPPHIRE 100243-1GL Radeon HD 4870 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire

MB:
[IMG]http://images17.newegg.com/is/image/...1-297-TS?$S60$[/IMG]
ASUS P5Q Deluxe LGA 775 Intel P45 Intel Motherboard - Retail

PSU: CORSAIR CMPSU-650TX 650W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC

RAM: G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800

HDD:

Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3400620AS 400GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s

Cooling:

XIGMATEK HDT-S1283 120mm Rifle

& XIGMATEK ACK-I7751 Retention Bracket

Case: Antec Twelve Hundred Black ATX Full Tower

So I guess my final question is, will everything there work right together. I mean ive checked to make sure everything is the correct one, but let me know if any of those parts are for some reason the wrong type/version. I also plan on overclocking to some extent, the 650W should be fine right?
Thanks again!

[thingie2]

Well if your gaming, or even doing anything with that PC, our missing one vital component, the Graphics card! seeing as the motherboard doesn't even have onboard video (atleast from what I can see) you won't be able to do anything with that PC unless you get a gfx card, again, refer to Carbon's sticky for which one to get.

[serverguy]

Originally Posted by thingie2

Well if your gaming, or even doing anything with that PC, our missing one vital component, the Graphics card! seeing as the motherboard doesn't even have onboard video (atleast from what I can see) you won't be able to do anything with that PC unless you get a gfx card, again, refer to Carbon's sticky for which one to get.

Ummm, theres a 4870 in there.

Yep, everything looks fine.

Only thing I might change is to get a Western Digital hard drive, but thats more personal preference.

[thingie2]

Originally Posted by serverguy

Ummm, theres a 4870 in there.

Yep, everything looks fine.

Only thing I might change is to get a Western Digital hard drive, but thats more personal preference.

Oh, there is, my appologies, it was because the [IMG] tag didn't work properly I thought it was part of the CPU, in that case, it all looks like a good build

[deldrice]

Another stall... I just read that the sapphire version of the 4870 has a lot of known issues. Going down to a single 512mb 4870 wouldn't knock me down much would it?
I'm thinking of replacing the 1gb sapphire one with http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814129113

[Bubba]

What OS are you going to drop in it? If you are going to use a Vista 64 bit system, (you'll need 64 bit to fully use all 4 GB's of RAM), you have to wait until the OS is installed before you put all your RAM in.