Silence/cooling: HR-01 Plus, Scythe 800RPM Slipstream fans, and Zalman Fanmates for convenience. [...] Of course some decent easy to use TIM, too, like Ceramique.
Thanks. I was kinda leaning towards the Scythe Ninja, because that seems to be what everyone's using, but this get's a pretty darn good review
as well. Any opinion on that comparison? I am a little bit concerned about the weight, though, so I like the through-board mounting of the HR-01.
I have a Ninja. The new TR beats it, and Thermalright heatsinks have generally been very nice to work with. My Ninja was not my favorite heatsink install.
You say Scythe Slipstream fans, do you figure two of these (case fan + cpu heatsink fan), or what?
Pretty much. The Solo doesn't give you room for many fans w/o modding. However, without 50-100W extra of video card to cool during hours of gaming with the CPU running hot too...the big heatsinks do good enough.
I have almost no experience with thermal paste, so it's good to get a hint here. What's so good about Ceramique?
Ceramqiue performs well, it is thick, and easy to apply compared to most greases, it is nonconductive, and noncapacitive (for practical purposes, electrically inert). So, you don't have to be a surgeon. Spread on a thin layer, screw down the heatsink, and keep track of your temps for the first few days.
Yeah, the Recommended Hard Drives
page could use a few new 2.5" disks. I'll look into your suggestions!
Maybe so. I can't speak specifically for the largest drives currently, as most of my 2.5" experience is using drives out of notebooks, and replacing them (but typically giving them some use outside of the destination PC beforehand, if new). So, if there are changes to the sonic signature of the 320GBs v. the 160GBs, I don't know of them. But, I haven't found any of the normal Scorpio or Momentus drives to be loud by any stretch. I haven't heard the new Hitachi drives myself, either.
For a little extra snappiness, add "elevator=deadline" to the kernel parameters. [...]
I have never ever heard of this, and the FreeBSD Handbook
makes no mention of it. Is this for Linux?
Yes. I take it then, you're using FreeBSD? In the OP, you just mentioned no Windows, and KEdit, so the most popular option is what I assumed.
Neat, thanks! DesktopBSD seems to have rather complete support for multiple monitors, but without the hardware I can't really tell. The main thing is to find out whether to go NVidia, Ati, or Intel. As far as I can tell, NVidia has the better support (in FreeBSD), but I don't know what effects that has on my mobo options. (I have some idea that AMD boards come with onboard video by Ati, and Intel boards with NVidia? Man, I'm out of touch.)
Multiple monitors are usually a PITA to set up, if a GUI gizmo makes the slightest mistake. Nobody seems to like getting them done in a common, accepted, way. nVidia has a better closed-source driver. The open driver for older Radeons, like 8xxx and 9xxx, though, is quite good. But, you know, PCI-e and all
. Intel has good open drivers, and they are fairly active with them.
Mobos/IGPs: yes, you're out of touch
. ATi = AMD. AMD bought them. Up until then, ATI, SiS, VIA, and Intel offered IGP on Intel platforms. VIA's is not worth bothering with on a new box, and the same for SiS (they just don't offer anything but cheapness). Upon the AMD buyout, strangely, the Intel chipsets from ATi dried up
. nVidia has been itching for more Intel options for a good long while. So, now you have good choices of Intel and nVidia. For the sake of completeness, AMD/ATi, nVidia, VIA, and SiS have IGP chipsets for AMD. VIA choices seem to be dwindling, though. BTW, AMD probably would have been recommended if you were going for Windows-based penny-pinching build, especially a value-oriented HTPC.
In the days of yore, Intel IGP sucked. After making a good chipset with the 865, 845PE and family, they stumbled a bit with the 900 series, causing latency and IRQ sensitive users to avoid them like the plague. Not terrible, but they weren't what you chose Intel for, you know? One bright spot, though, was the GMA series of graphics cores, which rock. Gaming performance suffers compared to the AMD or nVidia options, but they have more than enough features and power for most other desktop use (fine 3D for Compiz, hardware acceleration for many aspects of video playback, etc.), and they have had solid drivers since release, more or less (there were some initial licensing issues, surprise, surprise).
They followed up with the P35/G33 (same chip), which is a rock solid, "just works," chipset, the likes of which we haven't seen since the i810 (the last 440, really) and older AMD chipsets, like th 751 and 760. So, now, there's an Intel chipset that, for all intents and purposes, "just works," and has good IGP. The P45 (more PCi-e), P43, G35, and one or two others are updated versions. Some boards seem to still have BIOS issues (Gigabyte's mainstream P45, FI), but most are going to be fine boards.
I'm sure nVidia's chipsets are generally good, but with Intel's being back up to the standard that kept people from saving with AMD or Cyrix in ages past, I don't see the value, if there isn't a killer Geforce chipset feature that you need.
Look for sleeved/potted toroids, since you're on SPCR, and out of touch. Just in case your eyes glaze over there:Newegg
The gray boxes in that L configuration around the CPU might otherwise look like:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toroidal_i ... ansformers
As they are loaded, the wires tapping each other and the core as they vibrate can cause high pitched whining. Potting them doesn't allow that.
Let me guess: C2D means Core 2 Duo means Intel. Would there be an idea in going for a Quad, since it's more modern? Or is it less better than expensive, so to speak?
Yes, Core 2 Duo. If you run applications, like certain video encoders, that can use many cores, the quads will benefit you greatly. Otherwise, you'll be better served by slightly faster dual cores, for the money spent.
That is good help, sizing these things up really makes my head spin. 525W will do fine, then.
Certainly. Choosing a series/brand is more important than wattage, and then it's more or less making sure you have some power to spare, and keeping it cool. For a sub-200W system (w/o quad core or video card, it will be hard to hit 200W), there won't be a real difference between a 500W and 750W PSU, except that 750W is kind of a waste.