> Socket 775 is dead, in the longterm that is. In that saying, it is a very > short life socket. Right now, it is your only choice. By early next > year, > it is expected to be replaced, making it one of the shorter lived sockets > that I can remember. >
Nice answer there! Thanks. Quick socket changes is hell on trying to stock motherboard replacements for boards that go out in warranty. For those that go out outside of warranty, tough! I guess they will need a new CPU to go with their replacement motherboard. Maybe most suppliers will at least stock obsolete motherboards for a year after the socket changes for replacement boards. I can truthfully say that 90% of my motherboard replacements are due to the customer not following my advice to use a UPS. My customers even admit they had a huge bolt of lightning pop just as their computer went dead. I pride myself in being able to make any repair in less than 24 hours even if I have to replace the motherboard. Sudden changes in sockets may put an end to this.< Or, will more likely mean that you will change boards & processors as well.. which is something Intel doesn't mind at all. >What would you do if you wanted to build long lasting durable work horse computers that you could sell for around $950.00 and still make a decent profit and performance was secondary to endurance? Most of my customers are very happy with my Celeron 2.93 $700.00 computers as it meets their needs. I do not cater to the gamers who need high end computers.< Ok, you want solid performance, low cost but great durability? At about $950? I wouldn't use a 2.93Ghz Celeron. Let's go a different way. Let's say I use a 3000+ AMD Venice Processor ($147) So, I'm spending $50 more then your Celeron 340.. but performance is better, and heat output is less. I'm not sure if you're using Integrated video boards or not.. let's say that you are.. ATI's RS480 is both durable and very well supported, it's not a screamer, but it's very functional.. several companies make those boards (Asus, MSI, etc.) Or, I can go a bit better, a Nforce4 board from Foxconn for $78 and a X300 card for $50. So, now I'm at $280 or so. 512MB of memory? $50. An NEC DVD Writer? $50. A 80G SATA HDD? $70. So now I'm less then $500. Add an Enlight case, maybe $70. I'd still make a $100 on a board that, unlike an Intel board for a CeleronD would upgrade and support PCI-Express, would support dual core processors and have a far greater "upside" in the longeterm to the end user. However, for a cheap solution, I'd use an RS480 board; so I'd be $147 + $70 + $50 + 50 +70 = $387. Add an OS? $470. So, at $700, I'd have a box that would be monumentally faster, single driver chipset support, and I'd pocket $230.. if you're selling Celerons at this price point, (which is great, good for your bottom line) this kind of design should go for more.. and better for the end user. My wife has been using a RS480 board for about a year.. it was a cheap build, and the performance is pretty good. >> > When Intel originally announced Socket-T (775) they had promised these > speeds: > > 3.8Ghz, 4.0Ghz, 4.2Ghz, 4.4, 4.6, 4.8, 5.0, 5.06, 5.33Ghz. > >Next joke? Well, at some point, it wasn't a joke.. Intel did propose those, and they noted them on their website as the plan for the future.. they just couldn't deliver any of it. >Minimum performance for a work PC that surfs the Internet has already been far exceeded. The general public would be content with the Celeron 2.93 that I build with 512 MB of RAM. It is only a small section of the general public that is wanting performance that is not readily available in a Celeron 2.93 with 512 MB of RAM. True, the general public who has these are not satisfied with performance but it is due to the junk loaded and bugs etc., not the hardware specifications. Simply put, how much performance does it take to run things like Quicken, Peachtree Accounting, Microsoft Office applications etc.? Gamers are not even in my conversation. They are an entirely different breed with needs that are always increasing.< I think you've got a shock to the system coming. :) As more and more people avail themselves of the internet, more and more online content becomes of a higher demand. Peachtree 2005 offers online training courses. Yes, part of it is bandwidth, but try doing the training courses at the same time as other things on a CeleronD which multitasks poorly, especially with graphic intensive issues. More and more products are doing things that (IMHO) may be fluff, but which clients are after. And it's getting more and more intensive as to what those things are.. we're not talking games, we're talking basic programs that you use. Look at the task tray on most computers that come in: Antivirus, Firewall, decoder software, anti-spam, and so on. The more tasks you need to do, the slower those tasks actually perform. Look at some of the "great" color inkjet printers that are so mindless that on slower computers (2.4G and less) they just crawl because their print engine is 100% CPU driven. I know this sucks, but software manufacturers grow more and more reliant on the fact that the CPU power is there for them to use, so they use it. Have clients using GoogleDesktop? Or looking at MS's sidebar? Those thins can be tuned, or they can suck processor time like mad. So, let's point out one big difference between that Nforce4 board that I use above and the Celeron configuration you're looking at: the Nforce4 has a hardware firewall built into the southbridge; and running it takes -far- less CPU time then running even the WindowsXP Built in firewall (which is mostly junk) and definitely less then most of the garbage software firewalls that are out there. That's one part (amongst many) why the NForce4 sells like mad.. wether it's for an Intel CPU or an AMD CPU. >And I repeat that the highest end computer I sell right now is the Intel P4 3.0 MHz 775 on the Asus P5P800 motherboard which supports AGP 8X and DDR RAM.< Understood. Hey, if that's the "high end" where you are at, you have dedicated clientele who know what they are after. And there is nothing wrong with that. I have several clients who also don't need super intensive product. Then again, I've got people (like an Architectural firm I meet with tomorrow) who worry about generating 100Gbs per terminal and multi-homing it across DFS shares to load balanced servers and rendering boxes ;) At the same time, I have a psychiatrist office who has been very happy with a Celeron 2.4Ghz that they've had forever because they run 1 application; and a hotel that still runs Windows98 because they have a program that must run from GW/Basic in DOS. *shrug* it takes all kinds. And you know your customers far better then we do. I'm just saying, I would not take the Intel promo of Socket775 to heart. I have several who use 775 setups, but for the life of me, knowing the expected life cycle of the product, as well as the issues with the product as it sits now, I have a pretty hard time recommending it over anything else. CW
