I know there are a few threads floating around about PC specs, so I thought I’d ask some simple questions that hopefully need only simple answers.

1. Scan or Chillblast – looking at buying one of their customised machines – anyone had any experience? Scan seem to be getting slammed for CS of late, whereas CB seem to be very much respected.

2. Are CPU and RAM (still?) the main factors in getting the best performance out of everyday use, e.g. running say 10 apps and maybe 20 tabs across IE/FF/Chrome?

3. Are solid state drives worth the extra (over a 7200rpm)?

4. Do the top-end Nvidia/ATI cards, e.g. 480 and 5870 etc, really up the performance of everything graphic-related? I’m not talking CAD stuff here, but certainly big image-heavy PowerPoint (100+ slides with animations/plugins etc) files?

5. Is Windows 7 64bit genuinely happy running old software (I know there’s a site for checking each piece of software somewhere), even 32bit? Is it just hw drivers that might need updating?

6. Any real-world different between overclocked i3 vs i5 vs i7?

TIA
SM

1. No but I think both have OK reps, looked at them both myself but went with overclockers.co.uk in the end as cheaper and faster delivery

2. Yes, mostly RAM for browsing unless heavy flash/java apps type stuff. IE 9 has hardware acceleration stuff in it but not convinced it makes much of a difference from my limited testing

3. Depends what for – for stuff that access the disk a lot then they can be. Also better with random I/O (most general stuff) than sequential (say DB transaction logs)

4. Hmm not tested, I have a 5870 in mine but only really use it for games, Powerpoint gets done on my work laptop and Internet browsing on my home laptop

5. Not tried old software sorry

6. Sweet spot seems to be an oc i5 from what I’ve read, an i7 can give better performance but it’s marginal compared with the additional cost

3. Yes they do make things faster significantly (so I gather) if you put Windows on it, since there are lots and lots of small files.

4. No. Fancy graphics cards are all for 3D. 2D will be the same no matter what, these days.

5. Yes

Will 64-bit Windows 7 run 32 bit Adobe programs ok? I’m thinking of upgrading to 64 bit to make use of Premiere CS5 – no transcoding required! Don’t want all my old 32 bit photoshop, after effects etc not working though. Also I have a 32-bit Maya I’d like to use if possible.

Sorry for slight hijack.

Google it!

Ordered one of these bad boys this evening:-

http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/dell-vostro-430-i7-860-3gb-ram-500-/824584

Free upgrade to Win7 Pro 64bit included and I bumped the RAM up to 4Gb.

2) RAM and CPU still make the difference… What else is going to?

3) Yes if you’ve got enough cash to buy one big enough for all your data. If you’re only fitting one big enough to install the OS on, it will boot up mega quick but you’ll just be using a normal 7200rpm HD for your data.

4) Top end GFX cards only make any difference for gaming or folding at home. A basic GFX card will help for things like HD videos and Flash over integrated graphics, but high end GFX cards are really only for gamers.

6) i3 is dual core only so won’t compete. Dual core i5’s won’t compete either despite the increased clock speed. There’s not a huge amount of difference between the top quad core i5’s and the base model i7’s apparently, and the i5’s are usefully cheaper. Obviously a top end 6 core i7 will blow anything else into the weeds, but a 2.8 quad core i5 against a 2.8 quad core i7 won’t reveal a massive performance difference but it will be 30% cheaper. Oh, and the i5’s are more readily overclocked so I understand.

If you’re only fitting one big enough to install the OS on, it will boot up mega quick but you’ll just be using a normal 7200rpm HD for your data.

Yeah but a great deal of faffing around is with all the small OS files and the DLLs etc which get stuck in \windows\system32

Cheers guys – feedback appreciated, and good that it kind of differs from some I’ve heard elsewhere.

3. Have been recommended to use a SDD for OS and some kind of funky hybrid Seagate thingy for data. Don’t think I can justify the price diff though.

4. Point taken ref cards – haven’t decided how much gaming it’ll get – probably not much.

6. I know the number of cores can make a difference, but I’m talking about VFM between them. Some people say a properly OC’d i3 is better VFM (for most purposes) than an i5 or i7. Think I’ll check out OC’d i5’s now though.

Cheers

There’s a load of CPU stats at this site so you can compare relative performance:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

Also pages for gfx cars and hard disks.

a super dooper chip is wasted money if you stick it in a cheap board – check the fsb speeds of the boards and read reviews for these too.

oh yeah – stick linux on an existing hard drive and give it a go, ubuntu or linux mint

Some people say a properly OC’d i3 is better VFM (for most purposes) than an i5 or i7.

For general computing purposes that can’t utilise a quad core processor effectively, they probably will be due to higher clock speeds. But for any software that can utilise more than 2 processor cores effectively, a quad core i5 or i7 will blow an i3 into the weeds…

I’m of the opinion that dual core processors in desktops will really be low end stuff only soon enough, now more and more software can fully utilise a quad or even hew core processor they’re really starting to show their effectiveness despite their slightly slower clock speeds.

I’m sure anyone else that also has an SSD will agree with me, there is NO WAY i’m going back to platters. (and that’s just a 40gb for OS-X, apps and work data, then a 500gb platter drive for media etc. )

Single biggest difference you can make for everyday use. I’d rather have a 2Ghz core 2 duo and an SSD than say a 3 gig quad core i7 and a hard drive. Infact, assuming everything else was of a reasonable basic spec, SSD is the first thing I’d spend money on.

Most important things on a new (so CPU will be decent, and assuming 4gig ram as a minimum) computer IMO are:

Monitor (1920×1200 at least, i’ll go bigger when I upgrade)
SSD
Keyboard & Mouse
Acoustic performance (i.e. it’s quiet!)

THEN everything else.

These things make a big difference to the experience every second of every single time you use it. Every time.

Everything else comes second.

mboy – Yep, I’d agree with that.

IA – Interesting feedback on the SSD. I had a chat with the techies at both ChillBlast and they said that an SSD is noticeably quicker for those who boot up their machine multiple times each day, or are continually opening and closing apps. But for those who boot up once (me) and then tend to open all the apps they need for the day (me) the difference isn’t worth the expense. I wish I could justify the extra £150 or so to switch to an SSD for OS/apps and a normal drive for data, but I’m still not convinced. How are you “using” your machine?

4. No. Fancy graphics cards are all for 3D. 2D will be the same no matter what, these days.

isn’t this wrong now?? Lots of programs, especially image/video processing ones are now written using nvidias CUDA which sends lots of operations to the graphics card.

I have a atom processor in my media center that would be incapable of playing 1080p video, but with the latest drivers, its all done by the nvidia graphics card so it copes fine.

In my last job they were just starting to use ruggedised graphics cards in military image/video processing applications.

Are CPU and RAM (still?) the main factors in getting the best performance out of everyday use, e.g. running say 10 apps and maybe 20 tabs across IE/FF/Chrome?

Whenever in ‘everyday’ use do you need 10 apps / 20 tabs?

Its not like its difficult to open/close apps and tabs. A bit like a recent clients’ citrix users complaining how the systems were slow – of course they are bloody slow, none of you ever close an IE page and its only a 2mb lease line!

HH – not many apps use CUDA except for specialist stuff at the moment. Many apps do however use extensions for video decoding etc, which is what you’re thinking off. Some apps will take advantage of graphics acceleration (NOT the same as GPGPU coding, i.e. CUDA). For anything other than games any gfx card about £50 will be fine.

Spacemonkey – I’ve a mac, I only boot my machine about once a month, sleep it most of the time. Startup time is not an issue. It’s the improved general responsiveness, the tiny pauses are just gone. Though I appreciate that’s not something that everyone would notice, but it makes a HUGE difference to me. (I’d say I was a fairly demanding computer user, I’m a computer science researcher).

Typical use varies from just web browsing, to document processing (i.e. latex work), diagramming, editing presentations etc, coding, running the occasional simulation and the odd bit of photo and video editing etc.

You say you open your apps for the day etc. Do you also open all the files? You never open and close files etc? When you’re waiting for that massive powerpoint to load next, check activity monitor (or whatever the CPU monitor’s called on windows). Bet it’s not pegging the CPU, you’re waiting on the disk…

Infact, leave it running, everytime your machine pauses or you have to wait even a fraction. Is the CPU flat out, or is the HDD light flashing? I’m pretty sure I know the answer…

You ask about top end GFX cards, so I assume this isn’t a budget machine. Find the space in the budget for a (decent! there are bad ones) SSD, doubt you’ll regret it. Though as above, also make sure you have a decent monitor, KB and mouse (I’d budget £100 minimum for keyboard and mouse…).

The only time I would spend on GPU/CPU/RAM over the SSD would be I was gaming, running cpu bound tasks or RAM bound tasks accordingly (and you’d know if you were). What are you using the machine for?

Also, what’s your current machine’s spec?

FWIW my current spec is a cheap (small cache) dual core at 3.5Ghz, 4Gb RAM, 40Gb ssd + 500Gb HDD, 1Gb 9400GT. Just a cheap machine as i’m job hunting at the mo and can’t afford to upgrade. Very little is CPU bound (and this is not a fast CPU setup) and only intensive tasks are RAM bound.

Whenever in ‘everyday’ use do you need 10 apps / 20 tabs?

I do virtually all the time.

And some of those apps are constantly under heavy load, mainly due to masses of images.

Constantly have IE and FF open because they’re the two browsers that our published stuff works on. And Chrome is what I use for my everyday browsing.

BTW you’re other thread about the Aeron. A decent office chair was one of my best “PC upgrade”s ever. Assuming you appreciate the ergonomics of the thing, I can’t stress a decent monitor, KB & mouse enough.

IA, I open most of my apps first thing but naturally open and close files all day long. It’s not the loading time that’s an issue – it’s using/editing heavy image-intense files, especially in PowerPoint. The files themselves might only be 5-15Mb, but some slides can have 30-40 objects on them, hence it’s the “refresh” rate when moving between slides and making edits that causes lag. I also use a fair few plugins and apps that hang off the back, and they too can be sluggish when working with a lot of objects.

CPU doesn’t really seem to get stressed, so I’m thinking it’s more a case of the RAM (4Gb) being unable to offer more help.

Current machine is an AMD dual core 2.3, 4Gb, 150Gb, Radeon 3470, 32bit Vista Bus. Fast enough for everything work-related except the PPT stuff and Mindjet MM8 (which become massively laggy when working with big maps).

Spec I’m looking at is an overclocked i5 760 3.6GHz, 8Gb, HD 6870, W7 Pro 64bit, with the relevant board/PSU/etc to support.

Hmmm

Sounds a reasonable spec (again I’m assuming you have a decent monitor etc..) Personally I’d drop the GFX card down a couple notches and fit an SSD into the budget.

That does sounds like your workload could be both CPU and RAM bound (as in both of more could help). I’d be keeping an eye on CPU/disk usage etc though to see. RAM usage isn’t as easy to monitor (as no matter how much you have, a half decent OS will cache a lot to keep it in us). Keeping an eye on pagefile use would be more telling. If you’re short on RAM for your tasks, lots of swapping will slow things down (a lot).

Have given in to the prospective power of SSD and ordered the full box with a Corsair Force 60Gb jobby.

Not sure it’ll be here for Xmas, so I’ll have a have a word or two with my patience.

EDIT: Current screen and kb/mouse work fine – for now anyway.

True enough, HD video is one area of 2D where a graphics card will help out. I meant 2D as in graphics rather than video.