why not just upgrade a few of the parts and stick Windows 7 on it?
would take you like 2-3 hours tops.
would take you like 2-3 hours tops.
Recommend a new computer
- Thread starter dsiomtw
- Start date
One thing to keep in mind if you ever plan to dual boot Linux, most machines with Windows 8 pre-installed has varying levels of UEFI integration which can make dual booting very difficult and/or buggy. Someone smarter than me can explain why, but if you don't give a shit about Linux then I guess it doesn't matter.
Because the computer I just bought for $1000 with the I7 processor is literally twice as fast as the 4-5 year old Q9550 processor in my existing computer.
Yeah I don't really care about running linux on my desktop ... haven't come across any reason to??
^^ ok, but have you came across any reason to truly have an i7 processor either?
If you were running an old Dell with XP, something tells me you were not doing anything intensive to begin with. You only gave it "up" because of the XP service, not the speed of your CPU.
When you buy new things just because " oh its 4 times faster" with no real reason to have the speed, you're doing it the wrong way.
To each their own though, enjoy the new desktop.
I definitely wish my computer was faster every time I use photoshop, camtasia, or work with big files, etc. I always get a new, faster computer every 3-5 years. Just makes sense to me, especially with how cheap they are these days ...
Win8 was annoying at first, but I've never had any problems with it. I wouldn't pay more to avoid it. But I certainly wasn't happy about having it pushed down my throat. The only thing I hate more is apple lol fuck, I use a mac almost daily.
If your programs you run aren't 64bit they won't use more than a few gigs of ram even if you have 32gigs. Most are, but some aren't.
I use an $800 generic dell desktop at home, I have a decent i7 with 32g ram + 2gb vid + ssd drive at work, a $1500 mac mini, a big mac pro, and a micro desktop with i7+16gb+ssd, and it always seems like I'm waiting the same amount of time.
I did a profiling test with each to report a bug in the unity game engine and they were all within a few %. My beast i7 with 2gb vid was 1% better than the $1500 mac mini that only has an integrated intel 4000 hd graphics.... Better being more 3d objects with physics being able to be rendered at the same fps (on the gpu) while also running some heavy pathfinding code(runs on cpu). I was disappointed.
If your programs you run aren't 64bit they won't use more than a few gigs of ram even if you have 32gigs. Most are, but some aren't.
I use an $800 generic dell desktop at home, I have a decent i7 with 32g ram + 2gb vid + ssd drive at work, a $1500 mac mini, a big mac pro, and a micro desktop with i7+16gb+ssd, and it always seems like I'm waiting the same amount of time.
I did a profiling test with each to report a bug in the unity game engine and they were all within a few %. My beast i7 with 2gb vid was 1% better than the $1500 mac mini that only has an integrated intel 4000 hd graphics.... Better being more 3d objects with physics being able to be rendered at the same fps (on the gpu) while also running some heavy pathfinding code(runs on cpu). I was disappointed.
Yeah I have 2 Intel SSDs sitting here in a drawer. I purposely bought the new computer with the shittiest drive possible because I'm going to throw it away and setup the 2 SSDs in a RAID.
Hmmm....are those Intel SSD's SATA II or SATA III? If SATA II you will still be losing about 33% speed over a SATA III SSD even if you put your Intel SSD's into a RAID-0 setup. (Which of course IS NOT good for your SYSTEM DRIVE!!)
I haz a SAD that you are spending like $1,400 and getting about HALF what you could have done by building it yourself. But, I kinda understand if you don't have the time to do the proper research and LEARN what you need to know to put it together properly.
Just a FYI on future computers, most OEM computers have only a 1 year warranty but when you build your own, 3 years is the average warranty for the parts you use and some are 5 years and lifetime.
If you have a WEBSITE for your business, it's nice to have some form of Linux available on your local machine. Whether in a dual boot configuration or on a VM. (I prefer a VM instance of Linux myself.)
This way you can test out stuff if you want without setting up a LAMP on your Windows OS.
Using linux on my local machine back in the day helped quite a bit with understanding and using my HOSTS services. (I grew up on Windows and was Linux challenged!! LOL )
For a faster and more productive computer with the programs you mentioned I would suggest this:
1.) Be sure to be using a SSD SATA III drive as your system OS drive and make SURE it is big enough to handle having ALL programs installed on it with room for program updates.
2.) Get a couple of say 1TB WD RE4 SATA III HDD's to setup in a RAID-0 to handle your images and video files. You could also use your two Intel SSD's for that if your files aren't that large. If they are SATA II then they will be about the same speed as Enterprise SATA III HDD's in RAID-0 or maybe even a about 15% faster.
I suggest the using 1TB HDD's for the RAID-0 since they will be faster than 2TB and above.
Depending on the HDD and it's capacity, you could use it for your nightly system backups and then do a weekly External or offsite backup of your data or BOTH!!!
It sounds like you've found a computer to suit your needs for now. So, I am happy for you.
I would suggest sometime in the future that you actually build your own computer. Once you do, you will have a much better understanding when shit goes wrong with it and you might even feel it is a A LOT more stable than an OEM.
BTW, you are using something like an APC 1500 Smart UPS with your system and not some PLAIN [ame="http://www.amazon.com/APC-11-Outlet-3020J-Surge-Protector/dp/B0012YFXSW"]Surge Protector[/ame] (Surge Protector) right?
LOL
It's much easier just to buy a new computer that will run several times faster than his old one, for less than a grand (i7 and everything), without having to dick around with replacing individual components, which is something he said he wasn't interested in doing. Besides, Dell aren't renown for their upgradeability. You say 2-3 hours tops... yeah right. I guarantee you it wouldn't just be a 2-3 hour job and that all kinds of compatibility issues would arise. Not to mention the time he'd have to invest in researching and deciding exactly which parts to purchase as replacements. Fuck that shit. Time is money.
He explained he's got two SSDs, but they are Intel 320 series SATA II drives. His old computer wouldn't have had SATA III on it.
They're 320 series. The same as the one you said you're running in one of your own boxes in your post above.
Yeah I understand the drives won't be the fastest. I don't think drive speed is the "bottleneck" in my setup, but if it turns out I'll benefit from faster drives I'll surely get some.
You will surely notice the difference between a SATA II and a SATA III drive, the later being twice as fast. This will be the most noticeable bottleneck in your new system IMO. If I were you, I'd just bite the bullet and drop $200 on a Samsung or Intel 240-250GB SSD and quit fucking around with old shit.
Here's a KILLER deal on a Samsung 250GB for $139 (about $50-60 less than normal) [ame=http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00E3W1726/?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&linkCode=ur2&tag=mysimon]Amazon.com: Samsung Electronics 840 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5-Inch SATA III Single Unit Version Internal Solid State Drive MZ-7TE250BW: Computers & Accessories[/ame].
Do that and put two regular HDs in the box in Raid or mirroring for storage and backup and you'll be a happy camper.
Your OS should be on an SSD.
It makes the biggest difference.
Some people also put their games on there.
I would avoid storing important data on them though since they are not as reliable.
SATA II is more than adequate, read/write of 250MB/s is still lightening fast for a system drive, and more importantly, the measure of an SSD as a system drive is IOPs.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/solid-state-drives-320-series.html
spec of the drive is more than decent, it's only when you compare to current top performers it looks "slow", real world, it certainly isnt.
Before one even bothers to have this argument, the motherboard specs should be checked. If the MOBO only supports SATA2 it wont do any good at all to put a SATA3 in it.
A SATA3 *drive* is likely to be newer and have a higher IOP speed, which isnt dependent on transfer speed explicitly.
While readwrite speed may be restricted to ~250MB/s, it'll still get the benefit of IOP increases, but imo, above 20k IOPs it's not noticeable real world unless doing very demanding disk operations.