> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tom Brinkman > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 3:50 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [newbie] Mobos and RAID > > > On Monday 17 September 2001 12:19 pm, Terry Smith escribi�: > > Ah, what's a newbie to do in searching for the best box :-)). > > Your own research. Arguing what's best is right up there with > religion and politics ;> Even worse, what's 'best' hardware > is a fast > moving target, and getting faster. Bottom line is you do the > choosing. > You just said more'n you might realize tho. The 'best box' > starts with > a good case and power supply. > > > OK, I've calmed down on the RAID configuration. Clearly I'm > not ready > > for RAID (or RAID's not ready for me). > > RAID is fine, Linux has had it for a long time. You just > don't need > or want windoze hardware to accomplish it, even with windoze. > Study up > on 'Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks' + linux'. Google's your > friend ;> IMO tho, it's not needed or desirable for a desktop system. > > > Tom made the excellent suggestion that I review what AMD was > > recommending. They reccommend 4 Asus boards three of which use the > > VIA KT133 chipset and the other the AMD-761/VIA-686B. The only > > recommended board that uses the Ali chipset is one offered by > > EliteGroup. How do I interpret this info? > > They recommend various boards based on the cpu to be used. > IOW's, one > board that is approved for a 1.0gig/200FSB Tbird, might not be for a > 1.4/266. Still, this is no guarantee. Boards that were approved were > dropped as soon as new problems came to light with their design (eg, > Abit KT7*). > > If you're tryin to use a lot of legacy hardware (as I did), the > kt133a chipset could be a good choice. If you build completely from > scratch, I believe I'd go with a K266a board at the present moment. > BUT, like I alluded to above, hardware is a rapidly moving > target. Your > choices should be based on your own needs and research when you're > ready to buy and build. > > I mainly suggest AMD approval because as fast as hardware options > change, I'd still be hesitant to jump into the latest and greatest > without some assurance that it's good, reliable, and > somebody's tested > it first. For this I give 'official' approval must greater > weight than > users experience. People tend to defend their recent purchases. > > Case in point, the very recent exuberance over the SiS > 735 chipset > boards from ECS. They're already showing performance and > compatibilty > problems in just a matter of weeks. Also, be leary of the major > hardware pages. They're mainly win-hardware reviews, even if > they give > Linux a mention. > > > Tom (in a note in June) and Charles both suggest rolling my > own. That > > may be wise but I've never done it before (well I did hand modify my > > Kaypro - cutting some traces on the mobo -soldering in a new clock - > > but that was a long time ago!). > > You have nothin to fear but fear itself. Buildin a computer is > simple if you're at all handy with a screw driver. Here > again, Google > is your friend, http://www.google.com/search?q=build+computer > Like with anything tho, preparation is 90% of the job. Study up. > > FWIW, I recently built a 1.4, overclocked to 1.55 gig Tbird on a > Soyo K7VTA Pro reusing old sdram. I'm happy as heck with it. BUT that > was some months ago. My choices today might be quite different. I > sort'a keep my ear to the ground all the time, but I spent six months > of intensive research before making choices and actually buying my > current hardware. Well, 'cept for my decision to go over to the dark > side and buy a Geforce2. Their Linux support sux. I knew better. > > I've been 'rolling my own' for years (since 386 was the hot setup, > oc'ing 'em all), and I've found it's sometimes better to shun the > latest and greatest, in favor of the tried and true. I'd also advise > that your decisions should be with a eye toward where you'll be > hardware wise in a year or two. As soon as you screw the cover on and > boot your new system for the first time .... it's obsolete. > -- Just wanted to add my agreement to nearly everything Tom stated above. Any question as to the best hardware to use will always be subjective. Benchmark test of varing natures are used to determine and compare product performace. These test are necessary because the normal computer user can not even notice the difference in performance of the compared products. And yes these test are windowsised. 2 factors to use in deciding are the amount you have to send and the reliablity records of the products/components in question. You can build/configure a very good system without using the greatest and latest. Taylor your system to how you will be using it the most. A P4 2Ghz with a GeForce3 will not do a thing to enhance checking your email or surfing the web and even for gaming, unless you are looking into the future at those that have yet to be written, will play no better on this system than 1 with half the power or cost. (Soapbox) And I do not care how many others tell you how great they are. If you intend to use Linux stay away from Nvidia GeForceII and above graphics cards. Because of the binary drivers involved they will end up causing you nothing but fustration. When 8.1 is released the best supported and performing card will be the ATI Radeon. There is nothing hard to building your own PC as long as you do not let the prospect intemidate you. The wisest computer purchase I ever made was Scott Mueller's "Updrading and Repairing PCs" published by QUE. It should be in its 14th or 15th edition by now. I will caution you though that it did cause an additive reaction in me. Now it seems that I can not Stop building PCs. If I upgrade a component in 1 then I Have to build a system around the conponent I removed. It is a viscous never ending circle. Charles (-: Forever never goes beyond tomorrow. And for too many there are now no tomorrows.
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
