[Tris]

wheres the best places to get components from nowadays - last time I did it it was Dabs etc.. but they dont seem as good as they used to be...?
T

Like Jim says, Aria are good or Microdirect have 2 shops in MCR. I usually go to them as they are closest to me. I tend to buy components in person (especially MB's) as you are more likely to get DOA's and it's quicker and easier to replace faulty parts rather than buying stuff online and posting it back and forwards.

[slackline]

wheres the best places to get components from nowadays - last time I did it it was Dabs etc.. but they dont seem as good as they used to be...?

More recommendations here 

I rate eBuyer (free delivery which is usually five days often turns up the next day, and before I go to work) and Scan (check out there daily deals for some bargains).

[Jaspersharpe]

Jasper - building a PC is piss easy - like a lego kit (if not easier) the hardest part is if a couple of jumpers need changing.. (all this is assuming its not much different from the last time I built one - about 5 years ago)

I know but my time is extremely valuable at the moment so the less faff the better!

Have sent you a PM Jim.

[Jaspersharpe]

Well after hours and hours of arsing about and tearing my hair out I have eventually bought this:

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/176488

with this monitor

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/136897

Keyboard, mouse and speakers and this external HD

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B002C46042/ref=ox_ya_oh_product

after recommendation from Mr Starfish.

Total cost just under £420 and having had a quick look at pricing up something of similar (slightly worse actually) spec from PC World I reckon that a not dissimilar setup from them would have cost me just short of £700.

Thanks for all the help and special thanks to Jim's mate in Wormwood Scrubs for sorting out my OS nightmare.

I'll be posting on this thread again when I fail miserably to set it all up. 

[Jim]

too late but have you considered an eeebox? good enough performance for everyday usage and very small size
http://event.asus.com/eeepc/microsites/eeebox/en/
I'm sure there must be other companies making similar

[Jaspersharpe]

Don't worry I've considered everything! Looked at them.

[danm]

Followed this thread with interest. I want a PC for general home stuff, but I'm also a bit of a gaming geek. Will this be good value for money and generally kick ass?

Inspiron 545
Intel® Core™ 2 Quad-Core Q8300 Processor (2.50GHz, 4MB cache, 1333MHz FSB)
6144MB Dual Channel DDR2 800MHz [2x2048 + 2x1024] Memory nVidia GeForce GT220 1024MB graphics card
750GB (7200rpm) SATA Hard Drive
Windows® 7 Home Premium, 64bit, English
DVD +/- RW Drive

I've got a monitor etc already, but the PC plus some new speakers, keyboard etc is gonna cost £577. Is it worth shelling out for the 64bit, or should I go for the cheaper jobby off ebuyer like jasper?

[slackline]

Quad core is a 64-bit processor (or are you referring to the OS?)

Speed on the RAM isn't brilliant, I'd want something a bit higher.

What sort of games are you wanting to play, presumably some 3d FPS?

Quad core is probably a bit of an overkill unless the games you want to play are multi-threaded (i.e. written such that they use multiple processors), and anyway, most of the work is done on the GPU, so a system with a more powerful GPU would probably be more sensible.

Consider shopping around for keyboard/speaker/mouse as opposed to going with Dell's basic cheap stock.

[Tris]

Consider shopping around for keyboard/speaker/mouse as opposed to going with Dell's basic cheap stock.

dell standard keyboards are shiter than shite. If we buy a dell machine, the keyboard goes straight in the bin.

[Jaspersharpe]

Isn't this similar spec to what you're talking about but £100 cheaper?

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/172711

Ignore me if not!

[danm]

Hmm, looks like some more digging around. I mostly play MMORG's and strategy stuff, but sometimes FPS as well. Don't really need anything that fast, but also want it to be upgradable so thought a 64bit machine would be better for this (can't 32bit machines only use 4GB of RAM or something?)

I'm one of those people with just about enough knowledge to be dangerous to themselves cos they think they know what they're doing, when in fact they ain't got a clue. And I'm not only talking about computers...

[Tris]

For 32 bit desktop (windows not linux or otherwise) OS's you ain't gonna be able to see more than 3gb, so there's no point putting 4gb in the machine... if you want 4gb or above you need to put on 64bit.

[slackline]

For 32 bit desktop (windows not linux or otherwise) OS's you ain't gonna be able to see more than 3gb, so there's no point putting 4gb in the machine... if you want 4gb or above you need to put on 64bit.

You forgot a crucial caveat there, in so much as this only applies to M$-OS's.  Its linked to the fact that no single application/process can have more than 2Gb of RAM allocated to it.  There's an informative outline of this and the implications for one of the stats packages I use here.

Under Linux you've been able to have >4Gb RAM (and > 2Gb RAM per app/process) for years, even under 32-bit.  Just requires enabling in the kernel (its tiered so you can specify > 4Gb RAM or if you're really rich or have some specialist kit then you can specify >10Gb RAM (last time I looked at these options anyway)).

[Jaspersharpe]

Eh? I thought that's exactly what he meant by.......

For 32 bit desktop (windows not linux or otherwise) OS's you ain't gonna be able to see more than 3gb, so there's no point putting 4gb in the machine... if you want 4gb or above you need to put on 64bit.

[Tris]

Thanks Jasper

[slackline]

Eh? I thought that's exactly what he meant by.......

For 32 bit desktop (windows not linux or otherwise) OS's you ain't gonna be able to see more than 3gb, so there's no point putting 4gb in the machine... if you want 4gb or above you need to put on 64bit.

  I managed to miss that bit, apologies Tris.

I skim read too lightly 

[Tris]

Tis ok - it was added afterwards as an edit (afterthought), but obviously before you replied

[slackline]

Tis ok - it was added afterwards as an edit (afterthought), but obviously before you replied

Ahh, so I'm not that crazy!

[Jaspersharpe]

ME AGAIN!

All my kit's been delivered and I have a copy of Win7. I'm not going to get the chance to sort it out til the weekend (probably) but I have one (hopefully last) query.

Jim's explained how to install the OS but I also have a CD with motherboard drivers on it and another one that came with the monitor (can't remember what it said it was).

So my query is, which do I stick in the computer first once I've connected all the bits together? Sorry for being so basic but I may as well ask rather than cock it up and have to start again.

[butters]

So my query is, which do I stick in the computer first once I've connected all the bits together? Sorry for being so basic but I may as well ask rather than cock it up and have to start again.

Load up Windows 7 and that will hopefully everything will work - you are probably not going to need the other disks but keep them handy just in case. 

[slackline]

Motherboard drivers is likely whats called the BIOS which is what gets your computer to start up initially.  You'll likely find that these are already installed and the disc is a back up, so you probably don't need to worry about it (thats a guess though!).

The monitor disc will have drivers for the monitor, and these are something that Windows will use so you'd have to install Win7 first and if it doesn't automagically get your monitor up and running at the maximum specified resolution/refresh rate then you'd fall back on using the supplied drivers on the disc (whether it actually includes drivers for Win7 is a different matter though).

Either way what ever is on those discs can be obtained from the internet (or newer versions if and when released).

[tomtom]

OK, chances are (greater than 90%) that it has W7 alraedy on the Hard drive so you just switch it on and follow the instructions.

If that fails, you start with the W7 DVD and go from there. Chances are W7 will have most/all of the drivers you need (or will download them) so you will not need the other CD's - but it may ask you for drivers later on during the install...

Of course if you recieve a brown envelope in the post from another part of Sheffield containing a DVD with 'ubuntu' mystically scrawled on the top in felt-tip - insert in the DVD drive and await eternal salvation 

[Jaspersharpe]

No the copy of Win7 I have is on a CD not pre-installed (keep up with the thread tomtom!).

OK that's what I thought. Just go with the OS install and see what happens. Ta.

[Tris]

OK that's what I thought. Just go with the OS install and see what happens. Ta.

Yeah unless you are doing something fancy with RAID on your disks, the Win 7 DVD will be all you need. Just pop it in and boot from it, you may need to press a key (to boot from CD/DVD) when you first switch the machine on though if it doesn't boot from it automatically. A lot of manufacturers use the F9 key for the boot menu, just see what options flash up - it may be different.

The Win 7 installation process is really easy, you can't go wrong...

[Jim]

as previously stated, just stick the Win7 DVD in and follow that. There is a very good chance you won't need the motherboard driver CD as win7 has a very comprehensive amount of drivers already built in.

I've really no idea what slackline is waffling about. best ignore him