Okay so how's this...

[Scottler]

...for a START, anyway?

Soyo - P4VTE 3.0 Prescott

P4VTE:-VIA PT800 chipset Pentium4 1.4GHz to 3.4GHz Celeron 1.7GHz to 2.8GHz DDR400/333/266 4X32-bit Bus Audio ATX with cpu - Pentium 4 3.0GHz 800 FSB 1MB Cache Prescott 478 Pin w/Heatsink Fan

Then I throw in 2 GB pc3200 RAM.

I'd keep my current 200GB HD and my DVD/CD writer.

Pick up a new case and a new video card.

Is this a good start, or should I completely start over?

[Jared]

Well I don't know what others think of the SOYO motherboards, but I've bought two of them with no problems so far, so I would recommend them myself... :-)

One thing I noticed is it's not 64 bit compatible... ;-)

for a 64 bit motherboard check out...
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... 2&NoMapp=0

I'm sure there are others out there which know more than I do about this sort of thing.. ;-)

[congo]

The VIA PT800 chipset is nearly two years old now, and was released at a time when Intel had market dominance with their I875 and I865 chipsets, which had dual channel memory controllers, an 800mhz FSB and other great features.

The PT800 chipset uses a single channel memory controller yet it performs quite well.

If you decide on that board, just get a single 1024mb Ram module (a good one) and whack the biggest CPU you can on it with the money saved.

Personally, I would look for a newer chipset, and stick to mainstream brands. Soyo have been around a while but they are not world beaters and I see them in PC's where the builder has obviously gone "cheap".

Just have a look at the size and position of the capacitors on that board. That's frightening.

I said in another thread that I wasn't up to date on P4 chipsets, and this chipset is one I studied a long time ago.

I'll try to have a look for a newer chipset Hyperion, if you are sure you want to go the P4/ Intel route, let me know and I'll see

[Scottler]

Well, I know I'll be spending some cash, that's not an issue.  My main goal is to get the most bang for the buck.  That said, I don't consider it to be much of a bang if it's not stable, know what I mean?

Thanks guys!

[congo]

Woo Hoo!

[Scottler]

Well, I've still gotta be reasonable...the goal is to complete the project and still be married in the end.

[congo]

I knew there was a catch......  :-X

[xFLAMESx]

Well, I've still gotta be reasonable...the goal is to complete the project and still be married in the end.

That's asking an awful lot there mate!

[Scottler]

Oh also...I'm not necessarily LOCKED into Intel, if I find an AMD that is worthwhile.  I've just only ever had Intels, so that's what I'm comfortable with, ya know?

[GunnerMan]

Was not able to find the post on what you did not like about AMD but as Congo said AMD had good 64 bit solutions I have one and stability is not an issue except with this damn ASUS Motherboard and overclocking

AMD is due to relise the their new Desktop core called "Venice" someone got a 3800+ and it was stock 2.4 Ghz said it easly went up to 3.0 Ghz. Not shure what you plan on doing with your new system but if you are a crazi gamer and OCer you may do better with AMD, a good theory I heard on why MD games better is the pipelines.
Intel has longer data pipelines alowing a higher clock but if data gets sent down te wrong pipe its gets back through the pipe and finds the right pipe. In theory Video editing, and encoding etcc has a pretty predictable structure so it does not go down the wrong pipe as often making Intel have an advantage over AMD in the multitask, encode department for shear speed.

AMD games better because they have short pipelines wich dont allow for the higher clocks but in games with unpredictable data it takes less time for data to get to the right pipeline. AMDs run a a lower vltage and cooler making for easyer overclocks also. I am shure there are other factrs but thats one theory.

Not to say Intel wont game and AMD wont encode of course but one has the edge of the oter in dif. departments.

I personally am an AMD guy, they just seem to work better for me...

Back to 64 Bit Intel said a few months ago "we have no plans for a 64 bit desktop CPU at this point, there is no place for it on the desktop at ths time." Something of that ature and they just ame out with one wich is expencive so it is quite clear where computing is going in 32 bit/64bit area but there is no telling when we will see 64bit apps (some games are in development)  but with Intell and AMD going and gone 64 bit they shold be comming soon. I don't know any benches on Intels 64bit CPU but IMHO AMD is your best Bang For The Buck at this point.

[Scottler]

It isn't that I don't LIKE AMD, the truth is that the only chips I've ever had were Intel chips.  It's just one of those "comfort" things.

I'm not at all opposed to an AMD chip if I find the right chip for the right price.

I'm not at all an overclocker, and I probably wouldn't OC this one either.  I wouldn't say I'm a hardcore gamer.  99% of my time on the PC is spent either playing FS or doing desktop video editing.  I want my sim to run as beautifully as possible, but not to the point of selling things to pay for food.  lol

[GunnerMan]

Ahh well Video editing I guess Intel is good for you and very very very if any decrease in performance in FS. Id say you do not need 2 gigs of ram unless that Video Editing needs it. 1 Gig is really all you need unless you are working big time in Photoshop, AutoCAD, or your Video Editing

[Scottler]

The reason I'd go with 2 gigs is to allow for just a little extra kick.  It isn't essential.  lol

[GunnerMan]

Well just for extra kick you will see almost if not any kick from 1 to 2 gigs but if you are usein your old RAM then well of course use all you have!