Buyer's Guide - Entry Level, January 2005
by Jarred Walton on January 9, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Memory
Selecting RAM for a budget computer is always difficult. On the one hand, dual-channel memory will help out performance on most of the platforms that we've listed (the exception being the socket 754 system). On the other hand, we hate to recommend 256 MB DIMMs as they are rather on the small side, and two 512 MB DIMMs is too expensive. For the Athlon 64 configuration, a single 512 MB DIMM is an easy choice. The other platforms - particularly the socket A Sempron system - are not so clear cut. If you get two 256 MB DIMMs on socket A and later want to upgrade to 1 GB, you will have to add in a single 512 MB DIMM and end up running in single-channel mode. The Intel platforms both have four DIMM sockets and so, even with 256 MB DIMMs, they can reach 1 GB. For the time being, 512 MB is enough for most tasks, but if you just want a basic system that you can upgrade further in a few months, we would recommend buying a single 512 MB DIMM now and adding a second later rather than starting with two 256 MB modules. Keep that in mind as you look at our memory recommendations because pricing concerns pretty much force us to use 256 MB DIMMs if we want dual-channel support.Something else worth pointing out is that all of the budget systems that we listed before use DDR memory. If you really want a socket 775 Intel configuration, you could also get DDR2 memory support. That might even increase the performance of the integrated graphics, but it will also add quite a bit to the cost. If you're looking at DDR2-533 memory - and there's no point in getting DDR2 any slower than that - the price for non-generic DIMMs is around $60 for 256 MB modules and $110 for 512 MB modules. That's almost twice as much as the value-oriented DDR memory that we're choosing!
Click to enlarge.
RAM Dual-Channel Recommendation: 2x256 MB Corsair Value Select CL3
Price: $68 shipped
For the dual-channel configuration, we have selected Corsair's 256 MB Value Select RAM. The best price that we could find for this RAM was at Newegg, but you can find similarly priced Samsung, Micron, and Infineon RAM at other locations. Corsair is one of the "reliable" RAM manufacturers, and even though the CAS Latency is rated at 3.0, there's a reasonable chance that tweakers could extract more performance from the RAM. The difference in speed between CL3 and CL2.5 RAM is not particularly large, and for a budget system, you would never notice it. Depending on where you live and/or shop, you might be able to find some other brands of memory for a better price. Crucial, Mushkin, GEIL, and Kingston along with the previously mentioned brands are all safe. You could go with other manufacturers like PNY, PDP or Kingmax without too much concern, and even generic RAM will usually work without problems. For peace of mind, however, we prefer to stick with the better known brands. $20 saved is not worth hours of potential headaches in our opinion.
If you really want to cut costs initially, buying one 256 MB DIMM is certainly an option. Windows XP will still run okay with 256 MB of RAM, and adding a second DIMM at a future date is a relatively simple and painless upgrade. Multitasking will begin to take a pretty noticeable performance hit when you drop down to 256 MB of RAM, but if you usually only run one application at a time, it can get the job done. We don't recommend this option to most people, but it's still there should you want it.
Click to enlarge.
RAM Single-Channel Recommendation: 1x512 MB Mushkin CL2.5
Price: $70 shipped
For the single-channel option (socket 754), we recommend getting one larger DIMM instead of two smaller DIMMs. While it ends up costing $2 more, note that we now get CL2.5 latency instead of CL3 RAM. The performance difference really isn't that great, but CL2.5 256 MB modules would have cost another $10 while here, it's basically "free". The same brand recommendations apply, and if you're willing to risk generic memory, you could get it for as little as $45 to $50. Again, we prefer to spend a little more and have some guarantee of reliability.
While it's not really a budget option, you could also get two of these 512 MB DIMMs and run with a full gigabyte of memory. It's definitely more of a luxury than a requirement for typical computing use, but at the same time, you rarely have to worry about running out of memory even in heavy multitasking scenarios. (Graphics artists, of course, can always use more memory, so the previous statement isn't directed at them.) As we mentioned before, starting with a single 512 MB DIMM and adding a second module in a few months is a good plan if money is tight right now, but you know you'll want more than 512 MB of memory down the road.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
31 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Friday, January 21, 2005 - link
Next Guide is due out "soon" - like this weekend probably.As for PATA vs. SATA, the performance difference is negligible. The cables are a different story. PATA (also called IDE/EIDE) uses 40 pin connectors and 80 pin cables. SATA gets by with a cable that's about 1/4 as large, and the connector is only about 1 cm wide instead of 5 cm or so. Rounded IDE cables help, but the IDE connector is still rather a pain in the butt.
Also, SATA is point-to-point, which means there are no worries about master/slave settings. Each SATA device is on its own channel. The theoretical performance of SATA is higher than PATA, but in practice all current hard drives are limited by the hard drive's sustained transfer rate.
Fauno - Thursday, January 20, 2005 - link
Dumb question: what´s the difference for SATA and PATA?Tkx for all.
Fauno - Thursday, January 20, 2005 - link
Mr. Jarred, thank you for the great newsletter!I would like to see an improved, i mean, something
better than the Budget and Performance scenarios.
How long may i have to wait for your next guide?
I´m anxious because i´m in hurry to make a brand new computer.
Thank you vey much.
micronot - Monday, January 17, 2005 - link
Show me the Benhchmarks ---I have no complaints about the selections, but it would have been nice to also see how these systems compare on a few benchmarks. This would help show a price to performance ratio.
erinlegault - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
How do think nForce motherboards have instability at default settings?I know VIA has been very reliable since their Apollo Pro 133 chipset, I have owned several. But, to say Nvidia nForce chipsets are unstable is unfounded. The various flavors of nForce 2, 3 and now 4 are the probably the best chipsets ever made.
I have no opinion about the initial nForce chipset, I personally never give first timers a chance. This is probably the chipset you call unstable, but what company does not produce a first generation product that isn't perfect.
bob661 - Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - link
I don't recommend Nforce boards to non-enthusiasts because of instability or just plain quirkiness (sp?). I figure a geek wouldn't mind troubleshooting and tinkering but I don't assume that for newbies or general users. VIA has always treated me kindly and I don't have people coming back to me after I build them a computer complaining about quirks. I remember when VIA was the quirky, problem-ridden chipset but I haven't seen that for at least 5 years. We use computers with that chipset at work as CAD workstations (29 machines) and there's no instability.Live - Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - link
If the 6600 is an option in PCIe why not as AGP it is available in both?woodchuk - Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - link
Have to agree on the VIA and SIS chipsets, not only because they tend to lose sound drivers and such occasionally, but the nVidia solutions seem bulletproof.Also, the Semprons I've built recently are very disappointing in anything that likes a lot of cache, either Tbird or Barton equivelents are faster.
justly - Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - link
Thanks again, although I really wasn't expecting a responce to my last post.I understand the reluctance tward integrated video, but to be fair there are two reasons for building a budget system one is obviously because you cant afford the alternitive, and the other is because you know you dont need the alternitive. If someone is simply trying to make a performance system fit a tight budget then I would expect them to have problems simply because that is not the correct way to make a performance system. Is this the type of person that you are making a budget guide for? if so then I guess I misunderstood the purpose of the budget guide.
I'm NOT intentionally trying to argue with you, it just irritates me that the impression I (and I think others may also) get from the article is that Nforce is not just the chipset of choice but that it seems to be the only chipset that is acceptable, and now I see you say "a less expensive chipset isn't necessarily inferior". That was the point I was trying to make.
A lot of what you say makes sense, but a few things don't (at least to me), one being that you assume cheaper capacitors, resistors, fabrication facilities, etc (along with cheaper chipsets and less features) are used to make a budget board, but unless the Nvidia chipset is cheaper or the board has less features then the only way a Nvidia motherboard can compete in price is to use as cheep or cheeper parts or fabrication facilities yet you still claim it is more stable/compatible, how can this be? ok maybe it is the BIOS, I guess I just have a hard time believing that every non-Nvidia moterboards out there has problems with their BIOS.
My experiances are a little different than yours. I have had very little or no problems with SiS or ALi drivers in the past (VIA is a different story). When the K6-2/III was popular I had both ALi and VIA based motherboards and I would say without a doubt that I liked the ALi better. On the Athlon platform I can also say without a doubt that I liked the SiS better than the VIA. While I personally haven't owned a Nvidia chipset I do know of more than one person that had problems with them (and they where not budget builds either, in fact they where top of the line in most cases).
Having a bias is normal everyone has them, I just think with a following as large as what Anandtech has you should try to hide that bias a little better. Maybe it is time you try a SiS or ALi/ULi chipset again, you might be pleasantly surprised. Then again maybe you know yoou need more than SiS or ULi can give you in that case continue on with your "self-perpetuating bias. :p" just kidding, have a nice day and thanks for the insight regarding your recommendation.
JarredWalton - Monday, January 10, 2005 - link
Let me go back to an earlier statement, just to make sure we're all on the same page. I said the following on page 2: "There are boards that use the VIA K8M800 chipset with its S3 UniChrome Pro graphics, and there are also boards that include the SiS Mirage graphics. Performance and reliability of either one are questionable in our opinion." Just to make this clear, the "questionable" aspect is specifically in regards to the integrated graphics - lowest common denominator graphics almost always cause me grief. Some will only support 24-bit color, which is not 100% compatible with all applications, forcing you to use 16-bit mode at times. Others simply perform very poorly even in 2D applications, and then there's the supported refresh rates which may end up being 60 Hz at any resolution above 1280x1024.Okay, now back to the topic at hand....
Memory compatibility issues can come from a variety of areas. For example, even with an Intel 865PE chipset, you're not going to see identical performance or compatibility across all motherboards. It probably has a lot to do with the BIOS, not to mention some other items like quality and location of capacitors, resistors, etc.
THG did a memory comparison maybe six months back where they tested about 10 to 15 different brands of RAM on 10 to 15 different motherboards. I don't recall the specifics, other than the ASUS K8V SE Deluxe was the most compatible motherboard (working with all the RAM types used) and that the Corsair RAM was the most compatible RAM.
As I'm not a BIOS programmer or motherboard manufacturer, I can't say for sure what causes the issues that some boards experience, but I can hazzard a guess. Let's assume you're trying to make a budget board that will sell for $25 less than other motherboards. The first step is usually to go with a cheaper chipset, i.e. SiS or ALi or VIA as opposed to Intel or NVIDIA. (I don't know how expensive NV chipsets are, but I know that Intel is regarded as the most expensive out there.) Now, a less expensive chipset isn't necessarily inferior, but I have a feeling a lot of motherboards that use cheaper chipsets also use cheaper capacitors, resistors, fabrication facilities, etc.
I would guess that this is why the ASUS A8V Deluxe and the Abit AV8 are still very good boards even with the VIA K8T800 Pro chipset. They also cost nearly as much as competing NVIDIA boards. As with all things, compromises are made to reach any price point. If most motherboards with a certain chipset sell for $85+ and a new board comes out that only costs $70, you can be almost sure that either features or quality were cut - possibly both. Long-term reliability of cheap motherboards has never been good for me, although I'm sure others have had okay experiences.
Beyond that, I don't have any real concerns with the VIA A64 motherboards. SiS and ALi/ULi are a different matter, although I freely admit that I have avoided using motherboards with those chipsets for years. Finding comprehensive chipset drivers for NVIDIA, Intel, and VIA motherboards is generally a simple matter; not so with SiS and ALi (in my experience). Drivers always end up mattering, and the easier it is to get all the drivers installed, the better.
In the end, it's a Catch-22 situation: I don't trust SiS and ALi/ULi based motherboards as much as NVIDIA and Intel based motherboards due to some bad experiences. The only thing that would really convince me that they no longer have problems would be extended use of such a motherboard over a two year period. However, when I look at the prices and it's only $10 more for a board that I already trust, why take a chance?
I'm only one person, with limited access to hardware (even if I have more access than most people, I can't just get anything I want). No one has perfect knowledge of how specific boards will work over a 4 year period, so we end up guessing based off of previous knowledge. My previous knowledge says that SiS and ALi boards are more likely to have issues over an extended period of time, but what I really know is that *previous* SiS and ALi boards had a lot of problems. Yup, it's a self-perpetuating bias. :p