PC Upgrade recommendations

[John Doe]

I've read several tech reviews in the past that give the "sweet
spot" for PSUs as the 20-60% of max rating range.

Provide some citations.

But seriously. You should suspect something's wrong when told your
system should use 20% of your power supply rating. That's just
silly.

 

[John Weiss]

Provide some citations.

But seriously. You should suspect something's wrong when told your
system should use 20% of your power supply rating. That's just
silly.

The ATX 12V Design Guide calls 20% a light load and 50% a typical load:
http://www.formfactors.org/developer/specs/ATX12V_PSDG_2_2_public_br2.pdf

Silent PC Review has a rather extensive discussion, and includes examples of a
66% load as a "good match":
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article28-page1.html

PC Power & Cooling says, "For overall power supply wattage, add the requirement
for each device in your system, then multiply by 1.5." (which equates to a 66%
load at peak usage, or 53% load at a more typical 80% of peak total usage).
They continue, "Furthermore, power supplies are more efficient and reliable when
loaded to 30% - 70% of maximum capacity.":
http://www.pcpower.com/technology/power_usage/

FWIW, using various on-line PSU calculators, I got recommendations ranging from
330 to 820 watts for my system...

 

[John Brown]

Well your hardware is probably close to 275W total. That's not much, but
that's over 50% of the total rated maximum capacity of your current power
supply. As I wrote in another thread... it will probably work, but don't
expect the power supply to last very long under that type of load. It's a
bit under-sized. You should aim for no more than 40% of your power
supply's
maximum capacity. That would be about 650-700W. Or, an Antec Earthwatts
650W would be a PERFECT fit, as this one is very efficient. Note that the
Earthwatts series is made by Seasonic (earlier) and Delta (later) but
expert
reviews generally agree that both versions are good.

Don't get me wrong. Your true blue 480 will probably run that system.
But
it will be working VERY hard to do so. I can't tell you not to use the
trueblue 480. But I can tell you that I, personally, would not run your
hardware on a trueblue 480. -Dave

===============
Dave, ref the Antec 650...any idea of the quietness or lack of it...and how
it would compare with my existing Antec 480...can't find any info about
this.
Thanks.

 

[Robin Bignall]

===============
Dave, ref the Antec 650...any idea of the quietness or lack of it...and how
it would compare with my existing Antec 480...can't find any info about
this.
Thanks.

I've got an Antec Truepower TP3-650 in an Antec P180 case. Totally
silent as far as I'm concerned. In true Antec style I let the PSU
control its own fan and the two case fans; the HDD fan is set to
medium and the M / B controls the CPU and chipset fans.

 

[John Doe]

The ATX 12V Design Guide calls 20% a light load and 50% a typical
load:
http://www.formfactors.org/developer/specs/ATX12V_PSDG_2_2_public_b
r2.pdf

Thanks. See Table 9 "Loading Table". The 400 W power supply at full
load equals 396 W.

FWIW, using various on-line PSU calculators, I got recommendations
ranging from 330 to 820 watts for my system...

Dell's XPS 630 gaming system uses a "750 W" power supply. But they are
supporting every possible addition like dual (SLI) video cards.

In any case, an oversized power supply can't hurt. Another power supply
also enables a hand-me-down computer.

Good luck and have fun.

 

[John Brown]

===============
Dave, ref the Antec 650...any idea of the quietness or lack of it...and how
it would compare with my existing Antec 480...can't find any info about
this.
Thanks.

I've got an Antec Truepower TP3-650 in an Antec P180 case. Totally
silent as far as I'm concerned. In true Antec style I let the PSU
control its own fan and the two case fans; the HDD fan is set to
medium and the M / B controls the CPU and chipset fans.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
============
Robin - Q- Do you consider the 650 Truepower a better option than the
Earthwatts of same size?

 

[Robin Bignall]

[Antec PSUs]

I've got an Antec Truepower TP3-650 in an Antec P180 case. Totally
silent as far as I'm concerned. In true Antec style I let the PSU
control its own fan and the two case fans; the HDD fan is set to
medium and the M / B controls the CPU and chipset fans.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
============
Robin - Q- Do you consider the 650 Truepower a better option than the
Earthwatts of same size?

John, I have no idea. I just looked at the specs and it seems that
the Earthwatts is a "greener" supply, but as to the superiority of one
over the other, one of the experts here in alt.c.h.pc-homebuilt will
certainly be able to give you advice. I calculated my PSU to need
500w, so I went for the next more powerful Antec at 650w and the
Truepower was the first I came to.

 

[Dave]

===============
Dave, ref the Antec 650...any idea of the quietness or lack of it...and how
it would compare with my existing Antec 480...can't find any info about
this.
Thanks.

Well, one review I found (in a quick search) has the Earthwatts 650W (the
newer Delta made version) as quiet. Don't know how it would compare to your
existing one though. -Dave

http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story&reid=110

 

[John Brown]

Well, one review I found (in a quick search) has the Earthwatts 650W (the
newer Delta made version) as quiet. Don't know how it would compare to
your
existing one though. -Dave

http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story&reid=110

======
OK, Thanks guys. J

 

[Geek Dad]

As its about 5 years since last upgrade and now out of touch with what's
what I'm seeking any recommendations.

Is 5 years the standard? heheh it's always 5 years for me it seems and
whenever there's a thread like this it always seems to be the same
timeframe.

=)

Not a big gamer but would like an up-to-date reasonably high end system for
e-mail, internet, general office processes together with photo and some
video work and not too worried about the costs.

My current system is AMD Athlon 2500 Barton. Existing Screen and Power
Supply etc will be ok.

Thought I'd invest in something like:-

CPU - Intel Core 2 Duo E8500

Motherboard - Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3L

I recommend the ASUS P5Q Pro.

Graphics card - Have a Sapphire 9600xt 128mb - Wondering if to invest in AMD
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512mb

Definitely. Good choice. Get Visiontek's - comes with lifetime
warranty.

Memory - 2 (or perhaps 4) GB 800Mhz Corsair

2 GB is plenty, but I would buy Vista Home Premium 64-bit OEM For $100
and then 2x2GB's of RAM since it's really cheap right now.

Hard Drive - Wetern Digital Caviar 640GB 7200 RPM

I prefer Seagate Barracuda 7200.xx

Operating system - Have XP - Wondering if to invest in Vista Home 64

Yup, Vista Home Premium 64-bit + 4GB's of RAM is sweet bliss.

Corsair 520HX PSU.

Acrtic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro over the stock HSF that comes with the
CPU for added longevity and in case you ever want to overclock when
the system gets older (thus the other reason for the ASUS P5Q Pro).

 

[Geek Dad]

I'll get flamed for this, but I would wholeheartedly recommend it!  Just
make sure that it's home premium, and I don't personally think that vista
ultimate is worth the extra cost.  But Vista is great.  Don't listen to all
the idiots who like to bash it, most of whom haven't even tried it.  Vista
is an upgrade from XP.  I run several operating systems including Vistaand
various linux distros and XP (on my older laptop).  I believe Vista is the
best OS that microsoft has released so far.

Here, here! Finally, Windows does what it should - doesn't get in the
way. It's an afterthought. No more reinstalling every 3 months. No
more BSOD's. No more sluggishness (at least not with 4GB's RAM and
3ghz CPU!).

Just add an Earthwatts 650W or something like that, and you should be all
set.  -Dave

I suggest Corsair 520HX or higher. But on Newegg.com allthe Corsair's
(500+ watts that is) are all around $100 or less after MIR. And
Corsair is one of the best.

 

[Geek Dad]

The only reason you should get flamed is because it's a silly
question. John already has Windows XP. Unless he is afraid of
installing Windows, there is no point in buying Vista unless and
until his applications need it. An operating system upgrade should
be based on need.

I disagree. I don't *need* Vista 64-bit, but I like having all 4GB's
of RAM being used by Vista.

OP says money is not an issue.

Putting the 32-bit versus 64-bit question aside.


It could be. Obviously you think so. What I don't see in your
repetitive praise for Vista is the reason it's a better operating
system. The question isn't "is anything wrong with Vista" the
question is "how will Vista improve my personal computing
experience".

Applications are what matter to a user.

Do applications run better on Vista than they do on XP?

IMO, yes.

Are applications more stable on Vista than they are on XP?

Again, yes.

Besides paying my personal computer user dues to Microsoft, why
should I upgrade to Vista?

Because Vista is the better OS. And can be had for only $100 if you
buy the OEM version.

 

[Geek Dad]

For a large number of people who seldom rebott their computers, that gives
little if any advantage.

I think there are equally a large number of people who DO reboot, and
I'm one of them.

Again, I'm not sure that is an advantage.  I'd rather have the possibility of
some control over the boot process, and I'll willingly give the OS 5 or 10
seconds to sit and wait for me to decide to intervene if I want.  Note that the
context of this discussion is a forum of PC homebuilders, so they are likely to
be reasonably technically savvy...

You have the possibility, when something serious happens a screen pops
up and asks how you want to reboot. Normall, safe mode, etc.

It's different.  For those used to the NT/2K/XP evolution, it's ridiculously
convoluted to find many of the "standard" functions.  For those who start using
computers in earnest from scratch on Vista, it may be "intuitive"...



That is, assuming those apps run on Vista to begin with...

I don't want to have to replace my apps and utilities every time I upgrade the
OS.  Many of us were forced to do so with XP, and for many of those, having to
do it again for Vista is not worth the cost...

You don't have to replace any Apps. XP was a monster when it came to
this. Vista is your best friend in this regard.

 

[John Doe]

On Nov 29, 7:35ÿpm, "Dave" <now... noway2.not> wrote:

Here, here! Finally, Windows does what it should - doesn't get in
the way.

I couldn't agree more with that.

No more reinstalling every 3 months. No more BSOD's. No more
sluggishness (at least not with 4GB's RAM and 3ghz CPU!).

Sounds like Windows XP.

I suggest Corsair 520HX or higher.

In many cases, that would be a waste of money, but it least it's not
hazardous advice, if the vast majority of system owners have money
to burn and don't mind a tiny decrease in energy efficiency.

 

[JR Weiss]

I disagree. I don't *need* Vista 64-bit, but I like having all 4GB's of RAM
being used by Vista.

OP says money is not an issue.

However, OP may not know if all his hardware and software is supported in Vista
(or XP) 64. Driver and application support still is a big issue with the 64-bit
OS...

IMO, yes.

That is, if they run at all...

 

[JR Weiss]

You don't have to replace any Apps. XP was a monster when it came to this.
Vista is your best friend in this regard.

You are VERY misinformed! There are NUMEROUS reports of applications and
utilities not working on Vista, or requiring an "upgrade" to run on Vista.

Moving from Win9x to XP was a MAJOR step for most home users. it was a move
from a 32-bit overlay on 16-bit DOS, to a true 32-bit OS. Those of us who
evolved to XP from NT and Win2K didn't have anywhere near the application
compatibility problem, because the apps we chose already, for the most part,
worked on XP. However, the evolution of all the hotfixes and service packs for
XP tended to "break" a lot of older apps, so we upgraded as the need arose. I'm
STILL trying to fix macros and other stuff in Word and Excel from when I was
forced to upgrade from Office 2000 to Office 2003 just 2 years ago, after
several years running fine on XP.

In contrast, Vista is another 32-bit OS, and there should be virtually NO
incompatibilities with apps that run on the latest evolution of XP. Since MS
had already introduced the alleged universal hardware driver model with XP,
there should have been few, if any, driver conflicts, either. I will admit the
exceptions for games and other ill-behaved apps that try to access hardware
directly, because Vista does offer more protection in that regard.

 

[Dave]

Here, here! Finally, Windows does what it should - doesn't get in the
way. It's an afterthought. No more reinstalling every 3 months. No
more BSOD's. No more sluggishness (at least not with 4GB's RAM and
3ghz CPU!).

I find it works great with a 2.3GHz single core CPU and 2GB of RAM.

Just add an Earthwatts 650W or something like that, and you should be all
set. -Dave

I suggest Corsair 520HX or higher. But on Newegg.com allthe Corsair's
(500+ watts that is) are all around $100 or less after MIR. And
Corsair is one of the best.

Corsair is good. I'd probably still go for a 650 or so. -Dave

 

[Geek Dad]

I find it works great with a 2.3GHz single core CPU and 2GB of RAM.  

Oh yeah before I upgraded I was running Vista 32-bit on a 2.1ghz
(E6420) PC with 2GB of RAM also. Ran fine then. Just runs better now
being 64-bits and 4GB's RAM =)

Corsair is good.  I'd probably still go for a 650 or so.  -Dave

Yeah 650 is good =) I just have 1 HDD, 1 DVD, HD 4850 and E8400, 4GB's
of RAM so 520 is just right for me.

 

[Geek Dad]

You are VERY misinformed!  There are NUMEROUS reports of applications and
utilities not working on Vista, or requiring an "upgrade" to run on Vista..

Sources please?

I built a rig with 64-bit in July 2007. On that rig there was
Photoshop, eventually Lightroom too, as well as MS Office, Eset
antivirus suite... audio studio software (Ableton Live!, Propellerhead
Reason)... what else... I can't remember. I don't recall any apps that
gave me trouble.

There are plenty of people that have been running 64-bit that didn't
have any problems like me.

So I'm not misinformed.

 

[Geek Dad]

However, OP may not know if all his hardware and software is supported inVista
(or XP) 64.  Driver and application support still is a big issue with the 64-bit
OS...

No, you're wrong. What drivers and applications please?

That is, if they run at all...

Sure, right. OK.