If we are talking LCD monitors I suggest keeping a eye on the local pawn shops. I got my wife's Dell LCD at one for a good price.

If AMD has released its new generation CPU's by the time I'm ready to upgrade in April/May 2010, I may very well be interested in what they have to offer. If, for example. they've produced a quad, six or 8 core that's comparable to/better than the i7 series, I could easily be persuaded to go AMD again.

Then again, I do so like the look of the Core i7's.  Decisions, decisions!!

As for 22" LCD monitors, I already have a dual 22" setup... it has other uses, but the second is mostly for watching telly/video while still on my PC... saves having to go into the loungeroom.

 

I7's may go down, too, when AMD releases their Bulldozers, but it would probably be like 3 weeks later; whereas AMD would probably slash their Phenom II's to coincide.

What about the look is appealing?  Is it the heat sink?  Personally I'd rather have a CPU that didn't need a world-class heat sink. 

My wife worked at Dell and her opinion of Dell is not good.  With their monitors, though, it may not matter.  I regularly see their 19" LCD's for $99.

The Core i7??  No, it's not the heat sink... I'd replace that with a good after-market cooler, anyway.  No, it's the performance and efficiency I'd be looking at... and not just from the say-so of technical mags/reviewers.  Several people who actually own/have Core i7's have commented most favourably on much improved performances, as compared to earlier quads/duals they had, both Intel and AMD.

It's not about needing a world-class heatsink/cooler... more about preserving the life expectancy of your CPU.  The cooler you keep it the longer it is likely to last... and most stock coolers are largely inadequate, partiularly for overclockers.

I wouldn't touch a Dell or any other proprietry brand PC with a 40' pole... no way, no how.  Why would I when most are loaded with crap and bloatware, are made to the cheapest common denominator and do not come with a (pure) Windows installation disc.

What?  No Windows disc????  That'd be like buying underwear without a crotch.  And when you NEED extra HDD space, Dell (other OEM manufacturers) will charge S300+ to add another 250gb... otherwise you screw your warranty if you add it yourself.  Bugger that... $99 later and I've added 1tb to my home-build, no warranty issues.

 

This argument has a false premise.  Fabrication techniques improve over time for any given factory, so a core i7 920 found in stores today is likely to be far more stable (and overclockable) than a core i7 that you bought a year ago.  Oftentimes the only difference between specific processors from a given line is how they "test."  I'm not sure if this is the case between the 860 and 920, but it's likely that they come from the same factory and production line, they simply label and assign different clock/multipliers to them depending on how they test.

Not exactly.  It's also about reliability in the now as well.  As it runs hotter, the atoms are randomly bouncing around faster and faster.  And when you're at 45nm technology and running at 1.2V (which is ungodly low), that matters.  You'll start getting random 1's instead of 0's.  And as you know with computers, that only has to happen once and your whole session crashes.  But still, the Phenom II's run at 125W while the I7 920's are at 130W, so it's a wash.  Yeah, the stock coolers weren't designed with overclocking in mind.  Last I remember, Intel was engineering their processors to last 7 years.  But with the heated competition (pun intended), it wouldn't surprise me if they lowered that to 5.  You of course lower that further with overclocking, but the idea is, who cares...it was 7 years to begin with.  I only need 3.




Yeah, the basic idea is, if the processor passes at 3.33 GHz it's labelled a 965.  If it fails but passes 3.0 GHz, it's a 950.  If it fails but passes 2.6 GHz, it's a 920.  So for overclocking, you want the top-of-the-line.  Unfortunately with i7's that runs a cool $999.  You can still overclock the lower-ends, but what you're doing is cutting into the margin Intel built in to account for reliability, like I mentioned earlier.

Fabrication techniques do improve over time, but when you're talking the same processor, on the same process, you're talking incremental improvements intended to improve yield.  What they do is enrich silicon (just like enriched uranium), and then they try to get the maximum number of working parts off of one wafer that they can.  More working parts = more money for them.  And of course they make more money if they get more passing 965's than they do 920's, so they are trying to make it incrementally faster.  I don't know that that means a given 920 off the shelf will be more stable, though.  Just means they will slash the prices on the 965 one day, when they get suitable yield on it.  Which is what you want, because that is what you want to overclock.

Actually at micro center in boston, the core 17 920 is 199.00 and the core 17 860 is 229, go figure

 

huh? the 860 and 920 may or may not come from the same factory and production line. that i'm not sure about. i can guarantee you that they don't "simply label and assign different clock/multipliers to them depending on how they test". since the 860 is a socket 1156 processor and the 920 is a 1366 proc, there is no possible way they "simply label and assign" them depending on tests.

Just checked on Pricespy and the i7 860 best price is $339.00 AUD... and the i7 920 is $350 best price. However, top price for an i7 860 is $503 AUD and $548 for the i7 920.  There's also a couple advertised with a Microstar x58 for $966 - $988.  Hmmm, way out of my price range.

Was reading yesterday about a new series of i5's and i3's here and here.  The i5 661 has graphic support, apparently, and is supposed to be a mid-range, mid budget CPU to compete with AMD's pricing on its mid-range inventory for OEM's.

AMD Fusion should be out soon. Did you look into that Starkers?

Not as yet... only saw the Intel reviews because Majorgeeks had links.  However, I no doubt will get to read about the AMD's at some point soon.

On another note, there have been some hefty price hikes here in Oz on the Nvidia GTX200 series .  I was all set to pick up a Gigabyte GTX260 this week, but my PC store said that 200 series cards are now hard to get and have gone way up in price just in the last week or so.  Apparently it has to do with limited availability due to manufacturing going all out on the 300 series.

Anyway, I ended up with an ASUS EAH5770 @ 1gb... only I got mine for $220 AUD, whereas the GTX260 had to be ordered and would have been about 3 - 4 weeks away @ $299.95... was previously $219.  Bugger!  I knew I should have put down a holding deposit while he still had one.

Oh well, the 5770 is a decent card and stacks up well against the GTX260 for what I need.  The GTX streaks away in some games (framerates, etc) but that is of no consequence to me... I don't have/play those games anyway.  I've heard that ATI drivers are not as good as Nvidia's, but again, that is mostly related to high perfomance gaming, and that is of no consquence to me.  For standard home use, video watching/editing, etc, the 5770 and drivers will be more than adequate.

As for a new CPU, board and RAM, I've decided to attach a separate account to my general savings and save all the spare cash I can to build a new PC at the end of the year.... by then I'll have a better idea if I'm going Intel or AMD.

It's true that there's no way they bin 860's vs. 920's based on how they clock at testing.  The manufacturing process they use is different, as is some of the peripheral design.  However, the process they both use is very similar:  they're both manufactured on Intel's in-house 45nm process.  The cores themselves are virtually indifferentiable:  same process, same architecture.  It's how you fuse the quad cores together that they differentiate.

Now, when you get to 975 vs. 965 vs. 950 vs. 920:  now THAT they bin based on how well they clock.

So much for the best laid plans of mice and men, eh!  Not getting around so good these last few days, so I got my sister to go in and pick up the ASUS 5770... yeah, right.

When she got there it hadn't come in from the supplier, so Pat, having to pick up some things anyway, decided to go get it himself... yeah, right.

When he got there he was told somebody walked in off the street and bought it... despite it being on order and the last one they had.  Anyhow, to cut a long story short, they replaced it with their (also) last Gigabyte GV-N260OC-896... thankfully still in stock because a customer changed his mind.  Instead of having to pay the new price of $299, however, I got it for the pre-hike price of $219 cos Pat argued that it was only right after they'd stuffed me/us around so much.

All's well that ends well, as they say.  I originally wanted the GTX260 and now I've got it.. installed and running like a dream.  Dunno how system builders and upgraders will go, though, cos apparently new shipments of 'older' hardware aren't arriving often enough, just container loads of the latest and greatest.

it is very confusing - my pc has quad processor and tons of ram and yet is still slow at times. as for hyperthreading i never understood what that was  lol

best laid plans, starkers? yeah, i know what ya mean. i have a gtx285 sitting on the shelf behind me that i can't use. there's nothing wrong with it. it's nvidia's drivers that are the problem. any nvidia card i try sees my monitor as a high def tv and pushes everything to the left and up. the only way i can get the display right is to hack the driver's inf file. but after doing that, i can't run the windows experience control panel applet. a couple other things are wrong but i don't remember what they are at the moment. so, i'll stick with my 4890.

 

anyone want to buy a gtx285? LOL