Your DIY 4 GHz Dual Core Gaming Rig For $720

[Citizen Philip]

An article over at Tom's Hardware (http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/12/your_diy_gaming_rig_for_720/) gives you all the ins and outs of putting together a gaming PC on a budget.

From the article... It is important to find a processor device with cores designed for a much faster clock than their nominal rating at a speed of up to 4 GHz without problems. With such a CPU and given the right combination of additional parts, you can truly build a high-end PC. And But won't such a project cost an arm and a leg? Think again: Using our select list of components, costs start at about $720 - including a quiet water cooling rig.

If you're looking to upgrade, you might want to check this out as a starting point.

[GrinR]

Intel? No thanks. I put together a whole machine (AMD X2 2800, 2 gigs ram, dual seagate 320s (640gig striped RAID), NVIDIA 9800GT,X-PLOSION 7.1 sound card, plus Antec P180 case and extras ... HSF, AS4 etc.) for a whopping $1600 total. you can easily pare this down in MANY ways to get a fine machine without buying into Intel's crap.

[Dabombpizza]

I find it intresting you would pair a 4ghz dual core with an ATI x1300. You're system is going to be blazing fast at algebra but choke on oblivion...

[Grimmjow]

a buddy of mine @ work showed me this link, and after showing it to me he went and bought just about everything listed. im still waiting on results of this "budget 4.0 GHZ machine"

[Murtaug]

I find it intresting you would pair a 4ghz dual core with an ATI x1300. You're system is going to be blazing fast at algebra but choke on oblivion...

Does Oblivion not make even pretty high end cards choke a bit with the settings turned up high? Or did the recent patch fix that? I don't know, I'm asking.

Also, going with a $66 graphics card now gets you a pretty nice rig to start; and later you can always upgrade that card and not feel so bad. It's not like the x1300 is a terrible card, and for someone just looking to build a decent rig to play a couple games on, not a bad choice. Definitely something that will need upgrading if you plan on heavy gaming though.

[Shifteh]

True, the x1300 isn't BAD, but the guy has a point - what could you possibly need 4ghz of CPU for that wouldn't also need a great video card?

[GrinR]

True, the x1300 isn't BAD, but the guy has a point - what could you possibly need 4ghz of CPU for that wouldn't also need a great video card?

It's for nerdy suckers who want to say "I GOTZ 4 THOUSAND MILLIONS OF HURTZ IN MY RIG FO SHIZZLE"

[shnastybiznastic]

True, the x1300 isn't BAD, but the guy has a point - what could you possibly need 4ghz of CPU for that wouldn't also need a great video card?
Oh, I dunno, all the things you do other than play games?

It's like this: You buy nice parts for the things you do the most. In my case, I tend to type and mouse more than I render graphics (for the record, this was true even when my computer was state of the badass art, and all I did was play games.), so a nice, responsive keyboard, and a comfortable mouse are the upgrades I am most willing to spend money on.

For a person who does nothing but play games, a better graphics card may be in order. But for someone looking to get a budget rig though , it makes sense to assume that they will use it for everything, in which case, the processor is a better upgrade than a graphics card.

If you really want to surprise yourself, count the number of hours you use your gaming computer for things other than gaming. It makes a dual processor rig look better and better. ;)

[KarmaGhost]

Oh, I dunno, all the things you do other than play games?

It's like this: You buy nice parts for the things you do the most. In my case, I tend to type and mouse more than I render graphics (for the record, this was true even when my computer was state of the badass art, and all I did was play games.), so a nice, responsive keyboard, and a comfortable mouse are the upgrades I am most willing to spend money on.

For a person who does nothing but play games, a better graphics card may be in order. But for someone looking to get a budget rig though , it makes sense to assume that they will use it for everything, in which case, the processor is a better upgrade than a graphics card.

If you really want to surprise yourself, count the number of hours you use your gaming computer for things other than gaming. It makes a dual processor rig look better and better. ;)Your points are valid, however this news post and subsequent article are for a cheap gaming rig, so it's only natural that the video card is an important part of the setup. The ATI card they've placed in this rig is not going to get you high end graphics at a fast framerate. As long as you know that before purchasing all the parts, that's ok.

If you look, there are no "remarks" next to the graphic card. My advice? Scrap the $130 water cooling setup and spend that money, plus the $66 you were going to spend on the x1300 on a decent mid- to high-end GPU. You'll be really glad you did.

[ttoastt]

I'd agree with dumping the water cooling, spending the extra on a nicer graphics card would last you longer. And if you're trying to make a budget PC, it almost seems humorous to add in water cooling. That doesn't render the article useless, just saying the suggested water cooling doesn't quite match up with a real budget PC, especially when their article is about getting the best possible PC for the lowest price.

Also, I've been accepted to the guild of redundancy guild.

Edit-
And for the upgraded PC, they suggest a motherboard that they say is too loud and suggest installing passive coolers, why not just get a different motherboard?

[Deathbane27]

I was going to say that $130 on water cooling for a system with a $66 graphics card was nuts, but we ARE talking about an extreme overclocking job on the CPU here. Depending on how much further you can push the CPU with it (or, rather, how much you can't push without it), it may actually be the best use of that $130, for games whatever else you're doing.

[shnastybiznastic]

this news post and subsequent article are for a cheap gaming rig, so it's only natural that the video card is an important part of the setup.
True, but I would imagine that the people who want to spend as little as possible on thier gaming rig also intend to use it for day to day activity. Of course, graphics cards are also quickly approaching the point where a fella who runs at 1024x768 needs nothing more than the x1300. All in all, I would rather have the fast processor and a graphics card that will do what I need (albiet need to be upgraded in a few years).

[RMan]

So how many people here have used a water cooler? Are they worth the trouble?

[KarmaGhost]

Also, I've been accepted to the guild of redundancy guild.It never hurts to have another forum member post an agreement to another's opinion, so join the club with your head held high! :)True, but I would imagine that the people who want to spend as little as possible on thier gaming rig also intend to use it for day to day activity. Of course, graphics cards are also quickly approaching the point where a fella who runs at 1024x768 needs nothing more than the x1300. All in all, I would rather have the fast processor and a graphics card that will do what I need (albiet need to be upgraded in a few years).It used to be that resolution would make or break your fps in just about any game, but I think there's more to it than that nowadays. Texture sizes and post effects have a major hit on performance. With my old rig, I was amazed at how little frames I lost by switching to DVI output and 1680x1050 when I got my new monitor, but when changing texture sizes, it chugged away. Now with my new rig, there are only a few games that I cannot run at 16x10 with details all or almost all the way up(Condemned and Oblivion come to mind) without losing what I consider significant fps. That brings up a good point, however; what I think is significant and what I think looks good may be completely different from what another person finds acceptable. I find 128 MB of video RAM (which is what this x1300 has and what I had for a year-and-a-half until recently) to be completely unacceptable, but maybe it will run games at speeds and details that will suit you just fine. Honestly, it's definately not future proof.So how many people here have used a water cooler? Are they worth the trouble?I personally have never used a water cooler, but from what I've read and what I've heard they're not exactly "economical." That is, the MHz boost and subsequent performance boost you get from cooling your rig with them isn't worth the cost; you could just buy a higher end processor with the extra cash. For a lot of people, water cooling solutions are either a way to show how "1337" they are or are a way to eliminate noise from fans, or both.

However, what I get from this article is that Tom's Hardware is very impressed with the amazing overclocking capabilities of the Intel Pentium D 805 processor and wanted to showcase it's "bang for the buck" potential. That being said, in a little more than one month, you will be able to purchase both Intel and AMD processors for a fraction of what they cost now as both companies are slashing prices (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13790), so this article will be, basically, obsolete. If you can wait a month, I say do it!!

[RMan]

For a lot of people, water cooling solutions are either a way to show how "1337" they are or are a way to eliminate noise from fans, or both.
Yea, I got that impression (went and read some newegg user reviews), I was more interested in it for reducing noise. The overclocking is nice, but it seems like too much trouble to get what appears to be about a 10% increase in CPU speed over a good fan. I used to do that kind of thing, not water cooling, but just working real hard to get maximum overclock, but it's not interesting to me anymore.

[crashedout]

So how many people here have used a water cooler? Are they worth the trouble?

Only for very extreme overclocking. If you are shooting for a more standard overclock, stick to air. Water can be a pain to deal with. I put together a kit before the heat-pip coolers were out, if they had been out when I did mine I might have skipped it.

[BigJonno]

If only this had been around a couple of weeks ago. I helped a friend put a system together with that kind of budget, it would have been fun to try it out.

[Manzy]

[From the article]:

"Our earlier tests with the Intel Pentium D 805 showed how clock rates of 4 GHz or higher could be achieved without system instability, while a water cooling was required."

[from http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/dual_41_ghz_cores/]:

"stable operation was possible at 4.1 GHz, and without even the need for substantial boosts to cooling!"


El muy deceptive-o (that's spanish for very deceptive).

[Citizen Philip]

All I know for certain is, my next rig will be the quietest components. Of course, I just bought a new rig, so that won't be awhile. But I tell ya, the next sytem will be a ninja.. except for all the blinky lights I'll put on it..

[Com_Gaunt]

Does anyone know what kind of fan is on that case they are displaying? it's huge and as far as I found, not standard on that specific case.

[mos]

The site you want for building systems is right here (http://arstechnica.com/guides.ars).

[serion]

Mos, Ars is my only other computer news site besides EvAv. I never knew anyone else who even knew about it! How cool is that?

[Citizen Philip]

I like HardOCP and Ars. I use to look up tech information Tom's Hardware, but that's when Firing Squad use to mention Thresh as a co-founder.