Buyer's Guide - Mid-Range, January 2005
by Jarred Walton on January 21, 2005 11:09 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Optical Drive Recommendations
With the maximum speed of dual and single layer DVDR topping out at 16X and future replacements like BluRay and HD-DVDR in the works, not much has changed with our optical drive recommendations. We strongly recommend to anyone investing this much money in a computer to not skimp on the DVD drive and go with a DVD+RW 16X model. They work well for archiving old data and backups, and the price is low enough that we would recommend every new computer now to incorporate the technology.
Click to enlarge.
DVD+RW Recommendation
NEC DVD+RW 3520APrice: $64 Shipped
Some individuals swear by Plextor drives and will pay more for them, but our pick for price/performance continues to be NEC. The ND-3500A [RTPE: ND-3500A] received our Editor's Choice award in our last DVD+RW roundup based on its overall features, speed, reliability, and media compatibility. The ND-3520A [RTPE: ND-3520A] adds support for 8X DVD+RW and 6X DVD-RW recording, along with some firmware updates. As the price difference between the older 3500A and the new 3520A is only a few dollars, we see no reason to purchase the older drive.
If you actually plan to do a lot of DVD-to-DVD copying - we'll leave the legality of any such endeavors to you - adding in a DVD-ROM drive for $20 or so might also be desirable. For most people, however, a single DVD+RW functions well as a Jack of All Trades. The only real competitor in terms of price/performance is the Pioneer DVR-108 [RTPE: Pioneer DVR-108D] drive, so if you're averse to purchasing an NEC model, go that route.
Another option that a few people have asked about is SATA DVDR. With our talk about how much easier SATA cables are to deal with than the old IDE cables, wouldn't it be great to get an SATA optical drive? When you consider that some motherboards come with a whopping eight SATA connections, what's holding us back? The problem is that you currently have very few options for SATA DVDR, and all of them are from Plextor. The SATA connection will do nothing for actual performance, as even at 16X burn speeds, the maximum data rate is only about 21 MB/s, and compatibility is a bit questionable (check Plextor's compatibility guide before purchasing). Other than those concerns and the price, if you really want an SATA connection on an optical drive, the Plextor PX-716SA and PX-712SA are your two choices.
Floppy Drive Recommendation
NEC, Sony, TEAC, Samsung, or anything elsePrice: $8 Shipped
While we're on the subject of drives, let's not forget the old floppy drive. If you absolutely cannot stand the thought of putting such old technology into your wonderful new computer, that's okay. For us, however, we like to keep it around just in case. BIOS flashes - or in some case recoveries - can make good use of a floppy drive, and sometimes you'll need one with drivers if you want to install Windows XP onto an SATA drive. A driver disk will also be required if you want to install XP onto any sort of RAID array, so keep that in mind if you're considering that option. With such old technology, we haven't noticed any difference in reliability or quality among the various brands of floppy drive, so just get whatever's cheapest.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
46 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Sunday, January 23, 2005 - link
35 - Damn. Foiled. :) I forget these things over time. Wasn't the original Raptor TCQ and the newer version has something like "TCQ-II" which was supposed to improve on standard TCQ somehow? Anyway, our NCQ article didn't really show a major benefit for desktop use, but I've fixed the error now. Thanks!REMF - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
"On the other hand, if improved performance is what you're after, the best two choices are either one of the 16MB cache Maxtor drives or the 74GB Western Digital Raptor [RTPE: WD740GD] with its 10,000 RPM design - both of these also offer NCQ, in case you were wondering."the Raptor offers Tagged Command Queuing, not Native Command Queuing.
JarredWalton - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
Regarding post #30 and the NEC 3520A, a reader sent me an email informing me that the 3520A uses a new chipset and thus the 3500A is *not* upgradeable to the 3520A via a BIOS flash. Barring any contradicting views, I'll stick with that.JarredWalton - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
31 - our RTPE doesn't currently differentiate between the ST3160023AS and the ST3160827AS, unfortunately. For example, the Newegg listing currently priced at $111.50 + $4.69 shipping is the appropriate NCQ model. In reality, the NCQ doesn't seem to be a big deal for non-server systems (just like RAID), but if it's only a few dollars more why not get it? That was my feeling. There are even a couple listings in the RTPE for the ST3160021AS. Basically, the RTPE bots match items according to size and features, but NCQ doesn't seem to be something they're aware of yet.kamaboko - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
you know the saying, "can't please all of the people all of the time". i think that applies here. in any case, i found this guide useful since i'm looking at a near total ground up rebuild--minus dvd burner, audigy 2zs, and monitor.beakerman - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
"With the added benefit of Native Command Queuing (NCQ), the Seagate drives continue to impress. The Seagate 160 GB SATA [RTPE: ST3160023AS]"According to Seagate, the ST3160023AS does not feature NCQ. I believe the drive you want is the ST3160827AS, which is actually a few $$ cheaper. Both drives are 160 GB SATA.
JarredWalton - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
26 - Sorry, I got the wrong "updated burn speeds" in there. The 3500A is indeed capable of 16X DVD+/-R recording. The difference is that the 3520A can do DVD+RW at 8X and DVD-RW at 6X, while the 3500A is stuck at 4X for both. There's a reasonable chance, of course, that a BIOS flash of the 3500A can turn it into the 3520A. I updated the text with this information.28 - The "alternative" was meant as a closer to high-end option. 50% more for the CPU for 10% more performance is a rather expensive upgrade. The jump to the 3800+ is even worse, coming in at 100% more than the 3500+ for a 9% performance increase. I've updated the text slightly to make this more clear. For overclockers, I definitely wouldn't bother with the added cost of the 3500+.
27 - I did mention the home theater aspect for the speakers (last part of the 5300e paragraph), but we're certainly not going to spec out an entire home audio setup, so there's not much to do other than mention it. Your comment ties into the next point:
29 - 2.1 speakers aren't much cheaper than the 5.1s, and you can always just leave the rear speakers disconnected. Still, you have a point that some people really don't want more speakers. In that case, I'm not sure why they would bother with anything more than 2.0 speakers, though. There *are* great 2.0 and 2.1 speakers out there, but then you're almost better off looking at the home audio equipment instead of PC speakers. I dunno... I suppose the Swans are always an option. Anywat, I modified the text to include 2.0/2.1 speakers and headphones as something to consider, along with home theater audio. I moved this into a separate paragraph to draw more attention to it.
Dranzerk - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
One suggestion for next buyers guide, I think all kinds system setups like 2.1 speaker systems, you should offer a 5.1 and 2.1 for each type instead of just 5.1.I know some personally don't like 5.1 sounding speakers, and prefer 2.1 speakers.
The logitech Z3 2.1 fit that bill perfectly, you can find them for under $50 also, and they get great reviews.
Pjotr - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
I think you are fooling buyers into a wrongful purchase when it comes to performance. In the AMD "Upgraded" PCIe Athlon 64 System you have gone from 3200+ for $215 to 3500+ for $334. The performance increase from 2.0 to 2.2 GHz is smaller than 10 %, in many applications like games it might even be close to 0.Instead of adding $119 for this 0-10 % performance gain, I think sticking with the 3200+ CPU and changing the graphics card from 6600GT to 6800GT (Leadtek A400) is a MUCH better choise, It will cost you £377 minus $190 = $187. If you want to come down close to the $119 difference don't get an SLI motherboard.
This graphics upgrade will make wonders in anything graphics related compared to a 10 % CPU clock speed upgrade that is seldom noticed in anything.
Caligynemania - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
Great article, just one comment. With your reccomendation of speakers and sound card as alternatives, you really should mention that a receiver/speaker combination would probably be most people's best bets. A good receiver will run slightly more than the sound cards you mentioned, but the selection for real speakers is infinitely better than computer speakers.