Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Mon 23 October, 2017 - 05:27 pm
Home Help Login Register Chat Personal Messages Logout
News: The Rules - updated 23/01/2012


+  Last Post
|-+  General Category
| |-+  The Lab (Moderator: Stu)
| | |-+  $1000 challenge
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: $1000 challenge  (Read 1495 times)
Coach
Supreme Loser
******

Karma: -237
Offline Offline

Posts: 20,802


internet grinch since 1998


« on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 01:03 pm »

If, just for the sake of argument, you had $1000 to spend on a PC [or lappy], and you didn't need a new monitor, what would you go for?
Logged

This is pitiful. A thousand people freezing their butts off waiting to worship a rat. What a hype.
Stu
Site Admin
*****

Karma: 1527
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 49,824


AssHoly Internet Bastard


« Reply #1 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 01:35 pm »

Depends on your preference, portability and low space usage get a laptop, bang for your buck, get a desktop machine.  I've been looking at what's on Trade Me lately, and you can get some pretty grunty desktops for under $1000 with no monitors, if you can handle not having Windows, you can get something even gruntier, of course you'd need to be confident in your ability to install and operate Linux, but it's not that hard
Logged
Stu
Site Admin
*****

Karma: 1527
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 49,824


AssHoly Internet Bastard


« Reply #2 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 01:37 pm »

and don't get anything with a Celeron or Sempron CPU, they're s**t, and that pretty much rules out 95% of sub-1k laptops
Logged
The Fat Controller™
Buzzard
*******

Karma: 1112
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 79,994



« Reply #3 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 01:41 pm »

and don't get anything with a Celeron or Sempron CPU, they're S**t, and that pretty much rules out 95% of sub-1k laptops
           
Logged

1121 (+2087/-966) 
BoB exist in his dog.

       
bytey
Supreme Loser
******

Karma: 333
Offline Offline

Posts: 33,759



« Reply #4 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 05:42 pm »

I already have a lappy so Id probably get a desktop....not rally fussy about type as long as the specs are decent
Logged
Coach
Supreme Loser
******

Karma: -237
Offline Offline

Posts: 20,802


internet grinch since 1998


« Reply #5 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 06:33 pm »

and don't get anything with a Celeron or Sempron CPU, they're s**t,

Do explain............
Logged

This is pitiful. A thousand people freezing their butts off waiting to worship a rat. What a hype.
The Fat Controller™
Buzzard
*******

Karma: 1112
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 79,994



« Reply #6 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 06:39 pm »

Both are (to try and speak in layman's terms) like 'sawn-off', cheap-ass, low end (performance-wise) processors. They are used because they are cheaper to supply to the units and so can keep the overall cost down. It would be like looking at two identical cars to buy, but realizing one had a smaller, less powerful engine in it.
Logged

1121 (+2087/-966) 
BoB exist in his dog.

       
Coach
Supreme Loser
******

Karma: -237
Offline Offline

Posts: 20,802


internet grinch since 1998


« Reply #7 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 06:51 pm »

Okay..............so this particular computer is 5 years old, running a Celeron 2.8Ghz processor with 2 gigs of memory.Works just fine for most of the stuff that I'm currently doing on it, what would changing to a better brand with the same capacity achieve?
Logged

This is pitiful. A thousand people freezing their butts off waiting to worship a rat. What a hype.
The Fat Controller™
Buzzard
*******

Karma: 1112
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 79,994



« Reply #8 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 07:29 pm »

The Celeron '2.8' processor will be like running a much better processor but at a much lower speed; it's equivalent might be a non-Celeron or Semperon Intel, or an Athalon at only 1:8Ghz. The fact that it's a Celeron or Semperon severely undermines it's posted Ghz number
Logged

1121 (+2087/-966) 
BoB exist in his dog.

       
Stu
Site Admin
*****

Karma: 1527
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 49,824


AssHoly Internet Bastard


« Reply #9 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 07:33 pm »

brands don't mean much if the capacities the same, you'd usually pay more with no advantage.

the main difference between celeron, semprons and faster processor is on-chip cache, which is high speed memory 1000's of time faster than your ram, the better the processor, the larger the cache and the less time it needs to use the much slower RAM, and when the RAM is full, it uses the hard-drives which is many times slower again which is why lots of RAM will speed you up as well.  You really need to use both types of machines to notice the difference.

I have a Pentium 3 server which is only 1.2 GHz with 512KB L2 cache, and a Celeron 2.4 GHz with 256KB L2 cache, and the much older p3 is noticeably faster than the Celeron machine, and the old p3 only has 1/4 the RAM as well
Logged
Coach
Supreme Loser
******

Karma: -237
Offline Offline

Posts: 20,802


internet grinch since 1998


« Reply #10 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 11:08 pm »

I like Stu's answer best.

So....your ideal unit would have a premium brand processor and an open source OS?
Logged

This is pitiful. A thousand people freezing their butts off waiting to worship a rat. What a hype.
The Fat Controller™
Buzzard
*******

Karma: 1112
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 79,994



« Reply #11 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 11:15 pm »

Logged

1121 (+2087/-966) 
BoB exist in his dog.

       
Coach
Supreme Loser
******

Karma: -237
Offline Offline

Posts: 20,802


internet grinch since 1998


« Reply #12 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 11:25 pm »

You have a problem Dan?
Logged

This is pitiful. A thousand people freezing their butts off waiting to worship a rat. What a hype.
The Fat Controller™
Buzzard
*******

Karma: 1112
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 79,994



« Reply #13 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 11:34 pm »

Nopie
Logged

1121 (+2087/-966) 
BoB exist in his dog.

       
Stu
Site Admin
*****

Karma: 1527
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 49,824


AssHoly Internet Bastard


« Reply #14 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 11:41 pm »

I like Stu's answer best.

So....your ideal unit would have a premium brand processor and an open source OS?

depends if I have to do much graphical work, opensource OS's don't have very good graphics/photo editing software, and that's pretty much the only fault I can find with them.

I also recommend staying away from brands like Dell, Compaq and HP, they use propriety hardware parts, and can make them hard to upgrade, no brand units like the ones on Trade Me are generally constructed from off the shelf parts that can be upgraded easily.  And they're generally cheaper.

If you're doing heavy multimedia stuff(editing dvd's, gaming etc), go for one with a separate graphics card(as opposed to integrated), but you won't need to worry about that most of the time - separate graphics cards usually allow multiple monitors as well, which can be handy, but most people won't need to worry about that either.

and just get the most RAM and hard-drive space for your budget.

this is good for checking the cpu performance of advertised 'puters http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php
Logged
The Fat Controller™
Buzzard
*******

Karma: 1112
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 79,994



« Reply #15 on: Sat 22 May, 2010 - 11:42 pm »

Dell's crap
Logged

1121 (+2087/-966) 
BoB exist in his dog.

       
Brain
Buzzard
*******

Karma: 1375
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 59,947


« Reply #16 on: Sun 23 May, 2010 - 10:50 am »

jmtcw...
for photo manipulation & graphics work the GIMP works very well on linux
Logged
Stu
Site Admin
*****

Karma: 1527
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 49,824


AssHoly Internet Bastard


« Reply #17 on: Sun 23 May, 2010 - 11:33 am »

I'm a Photoshop user, and have tried gimp, and in comparison, it's s**t.  I was trying to delete the background on a image with it the other day, but simple things like that are tedious, in photoshop you magic wand the background and press the delete button, how do you do it in The GIMP?  The quickest way I found was to duplicate the image as a new layer, then hide the original layer and do the magic wand, but I'm sure there were a few more steps in there as well.  Even resizing a photo, in photoshop you resize and save for web in one simple dialog, in GIMP you have to scale, then use the save as window that always extends out the bottom of the screen so you have to keep resizing the save as window to access the save button that's below the 100 un-required options they provide just to save a f**king image, and then it goes to another screen with even more options, I simply don't have time to piss around doing simple tasks in 100 steps
Logged
Stu
Site Admin
*****

Karma: 1527
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 49,824


AssHoly Internet Bastard


« Reply #18 on: Sun 23 May, 2010 - 12:20 pm »

there's this though:

http://www.gimpshop.com/

I might have a look at it this week
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length


Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
All Content © 2007 The Last Post all rights reserved
Page created in 0.12 seconds with 21 queries.