I am getting a headache trying to figure out what I should buy for non-gamers system build. Many of these forums are dominated my Gamers & Overclockers talking about volts, capasitors and whatever else that's over my head. I don't need any of that, just some simple advise on a 64-bit mobo+CPU that will meet my needs. (No insult intended to gamers, it's just that your discussions are most often above and beyond my techno threshold)

I have chosen the powersupply (NeoPower), case (Antec Solo), & 2 500gig harddrives (Western Digital SE16) already. What I'm confused about is what mobo/cpu combo might best suit my needs and be quiet!

What *Don't* need:

I am NOT GAMING. But do wish to use Aero when Vista comes out for all-round fun gui experience)

I will NOT OVERCLOCK. (But I might under-volt?? if it will make my system cooler and quieter)

What I DO need:

System that will not cripple when ripping CDs into MP3 and FLAC using EAC Secure. (My current Socket A 2500+ system to grinds to a halt so I can't do much else on the computer at the same time).

1) So I'm thinking I need Dual 64-bit CPU to solve the ripping/multi-tasking problem? ie. so I can have process dedicated to Ripping and then use the other processor for whatever else I wanna do (surfing, wordpro etc)

2) I have heard that many of the newer mobo's on-board video is in fact quite adequate, but will they do OK with the new Aero gui? Id like on-board as I don't game and don't want to shell out big bucks for a video card.

3) I'm starting to convert over my 6 current ATA drives to bigger SATA's so Id prefer board with a least 4 SATA2 connectors.

4) If possible the mobo will still have a parallel port as I have an old laser I like. (I don't need any 9-pin serial ports)

5) Want quiet mobo with passive chipset cooling and whatever else mobo's need to keep quiet.

6) I'm interested in either mATX or ATX. I am more familiar with AMD CPU's as they are usually cheaper, but I'm willing to consider Intel if I can't find what I need in the AMD CPU/mobo scenario.

Any help anyone could give me as to what you think is a good mobo/cpu scenario given the above needs would be greatly appreciated. THANKS IN ADVANCE!!

Well, I have to go to work, and I'm sure some here will be able to give more precise answers, but I think the state of the art answer would be Core2 Duo.

However, there's definitely been a LOT of good discounts on older socket Athlon 64 processors over the last few months as retailers are trying to dump all the 754/939 product. So keep an eye open for a Athlon 64 X2 at a good price.

You can just get the cheapest dualcore you can find, and cheapest amd dualcores are cheaper than cheapest intel dualcores.

Its a no-brainer to find cheapest prices on dual-core, what I need is suggestions on mobos that will run cool and QUIET and an answer about whether or not Dual-core will solve my EAC ripping woes.

If dual-core won't do anything to give me a more available system while ripping, then the extra expense to go to dual-core may not be justified. Can someone tell me if it will solve my ripping problem?

Also, could someone point out the advantages to having dual-core in general. Will it work better with Vista for example? I do multi-task a lot, like running several apps and utils (not games) at the same time for instance. Is dual-core that important for that sort of thing, etc.?

Thanks to all that reply.

I'm not familiar with EAC secure, but I looked it up and I see why it can be a bit I/O intensive. Does your current system have the hard disk and optical drive on the same IDE cable? Do you have high quality, 80-pin IDE cables? Are all of your drives using DMA?

Athlon X2 3800 (65W)
ASRock ALiveNF6G-DVI

The AsRock board meets all of your requirements and has a very flexible BIOS. The GeForce 6100 should run Vista with 0 problems. If you ever need a cheap DX10 card, there's always the PCIe-x16 expansion slot.

Yes. In general a dual-core system will be much more responsive than a single-core system of the same clock speed when multiple applications are being run; quad-core processors even more so, when the OS supports it (XP doesn't, Vista does).

XP handles Intel's quad core solution just fine (in fact most reviews of the Kentsfield uses Windows XP Pro). You might be thinking of AMD's solution that uses two sockets. Versions of Windows XP below Professional can only use one socket whereas Pro can use 2.

Even if for some crazy reason XP considers the Intel chips as two processors, Pro can still handle it.

Also, the only versions of Vista that can recognize 2 processors is Business, Enterprise, and Ultimate.

jackylman

Thanks for your specific answers. I think the CPU you suggested will be good if I can find at 65W version here in Canada (BTW: NewEgg won't ship to Canada at all for some damn reason). But I do have access to a reasonably good supplier in Vancouver (NCIX.com)

RE: EAC ripping. Yes, Yes and I dunno. I use DMA, my optical is on separate channel (Secondary Master). I'm using some rounded IDE cables, Iv'e also used the flat 80-wire cables too. I think I am using generic no-name stuff right now. I don't know what exactly constitutes "high quality" as far as cables are concerned. Do you know some brand names that are considered "high quality"?

Also, I was kinda hoping for a mATX mobo as I might wanna make it into an HTPC down the road after I retire it as a main system. Do you know any mAtX mobo that would be good for my needs? Also I'm looking for a PASSIVELY COOLED Chipset (ie no fan on the north/southbridge etc chips) if at all possible.

RE: the onboard GeForce 6100. You said that it would run Vista fine. Will it run AERO (the glass-like) interface part of Vista? I think most vids would run Vista without AERO fine, but I'm most interested if it can handle AERO. The AERO requirement I believe is that it will have a minimum 128mgs of available RAM. Assuming that I will install a min of 1gig RAM, will the bios allow me to allocate a minimum of 128mbs to this video card?

Thanks

jaganath,

Can a user assign certain apps and/or processes to a core? Or does the OS just shuffle them by itself as it sees fit?

I was thinking if possible I would assign one-core dedicated to ripping duties and the other core to all the other apps I wanted to run. Can that be done?

If so, sign me up for dual core yesterday!

You might also want to check your ripping program to see if there is an option to set the processing (thread) priority. If so, you can set it lower so that processing priority will be given to whatever you are doing OTHER than the ripping program. It will most likely make your ripping process longer, but you won't notice as much if you're able to do other things at the same time.

I'm using CDEx right now for converting my entire CD collection into VBR MP3s. I have a 2500+ Barton OC'd to 3200+ levels, so I do notice a slowdown, especially during the converting phase, so I just don't play games or watch movies when burning CDs. It's a little annoying when Firefox stops responding for the 6 sec it takes to convert a WAV to MP3, but I can handle it--as I don't really have a choice.

Normally, you let the OS decide how to do the load balancing. 99% of the time that's good enough.

You can tell the OS which core you'd prefer an app run on by setting it's affinity. In the task manager under processes, right click on a process and choose the set affinity option. You can check the core(s) you prefer the process will run on. Some multicore/multiprocessor aware but single threaded apps will let you change the settings within their own configuration settings.

I'd recommend NOT setting affinity for ripping CDs because a lot of the rippers/encoders are multithreaded apps. You'll see a sizable increase in performance by letting the app use both cores.

I'm also a non-gamer, so I'll share what I know.

I have an Asus A8N-VM CSM Socket 939 mb that I built a year ago as an HTPC, and everything I need is onboard (except for TV Tuner, of course). I'm not a gamer, so spending on a discrete video is a waste of money. However, I wanted DVI on-board, and there are only a handful of mbs with DVI.

I'm looking at upgrading my main PC soon, and even though C2D is the better chip, there aren't many choices if I want DVI onboard. Getting my hands on an end-of-life S939 6150 mb and a 3800+ x2 might not be a bad choice, since I can reuse my 2x1024 DDR ram given today's pricey RAM. I'm not able to make up my mind though because I'm hoping to install Hackintosh on it, and C2D has the better compatibility.

The DFI RS482 is a good 939 board, esp. with the latest BIOS. Quite efficient too. It has DVI & VGA outputs, might even let you do dual monitor... Best thing: Lets you undervolt in the BIOS w/o killing CnQ -- means you don't need any special windows utility to get lowest possible CPU power draw at both idle and max load. I've built a new A64X2 PC around it to replace my old P4-2.8. The processor is a 4800x2, 2GB RAM -- when I was using just the onboard graphics, I was seeing 40~42W idle with Vcore dropped 0.1V in the BIOS. (w/ a Seasonic 80+ PSU.) Very nice.

So maybe AndyB's 35W idle with an AM2 3500 is not so unrealistic?

Maybe. I think I need to get hold of one of those boards. A gigabyte.... right?

Yep, Gigabyte GA-M61PM-S2.

mx-5

What is C2D? You said above that it was "better". Is it a new cpu type? or a chipset or what? If a CPU, is it AMD or Intel?

It's been a while since I've upgraded and even longer since I've used an Intel cpu in my system. I have no clue what the generational map is for Intel CPUs

I have seen that intel has

Socket 478
Socket 479
Socket 603,
Socket 604
Socket 775
Any others?

What is the latest and say 2nd lastest of this bunch (for desktop home use)?

What socket types are there in dual-processor?

Thanx in advance

C2D is Core 2 Duo, a new Intel CPU:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_2

socket 478 is discontinued. Socket 775 (or socket T) is for dual-core procs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_t

Geez, now that makes sense. Fliipin acronyms drive me crazy. Thanks for clearing that up.

I read an article on Wikipedia about Athlons and corresponding Intels, so I'm now more up to speed on the generations of CPUs (sorta, I think)

Just to confirm though: Pentium D is/was also "Dual-CPU". correct?

yes. however they run a lot hotter than C2D, and a lot less performance.