My 4 year old system is AMD64 3200+ (2.0GHz). It's a single core processor. If I were the user, I could probably get by with the existing desktop we have as I am not into gaming, and collecting music or videos. My need for computing power does not arise from video processing or playing games. But one wants to fulfill wishes of one's wife and children even if a new PC might not be absolutely necessary. :) My older son starts college this fall and has got enough in scholarships and grants to cover his room and board for 4 years, providing he maintains his grades. It's time to celebrate and reward my family with something, but I want to keep cost within reason, as I haven't got a job at the moment. Building one with my son would be a good project for us but the price of retail license of Windows 7 (legal) and retail price of individual components pretty much guarantees that you will not save much. Plus the headache of installing individual drivers can turn fun into frustration for a 12 yr old and myself.

Yes, I understand that. Graphics of any kind are CPU intensive, which is why the overhead of a windows OS is so much higher compared to DOS or OS's that rely on command lines.

I am so happy and thankful that you are going to the heart of the intent of the OP by talking about configuration by addressing requirements one by one. I see that you have excluded Athlon II x2 I had ruled out Phenom x4 too as I do remember reading that an Phenom x4 did not offer much advantage over Athlon II x4 , I can't recall the reason now. What is the advantage of PhenomII X4 over Athlon II x2 besides the obvious number of cores and the L3 cache, which I forgot to mention and a much smaller L2 cache? Is the Phenom II X4 architecture able to take advantage of DDR3 memory? What about Athlon II x4 and Athlon II x2 architecture? I know there are dozens of different processors in Athlon IIx2, Athlon IIx4 and Phenom II x2. But each class must have some unifying features that allows processors within a class to be discussed as a class, instead of as individual processors. Athlon x2 would be cheaper, albeit slower than the x4 processors.

I would go for 4GB too if the memory allocation was 2x2GB, but that's hard to find. I would go with 8GB (4x2GB) as opposed to 4GB(4x1GB), but go for 4GB (2x2GB) over 8GB(4x2GB). Does that sound like a rational choice?

My son and my wife are not likely to have a lot of critical data. My son has a 250 GB (2.5") portable hard drive all to himself and m,y wife, as well as, he has a partition of half that size on a 1TB network drive, which might go away when my older son goes to college this fall. Nonetheless, I am thinking about an HD between 500GB and 1TB. Is HD speed, 7200 r.p.m versus 5400 r.p.m of much consequence? Obviously, other things being equal, a faster r.p.m will provide faster access than 5400 r.p.m. Real critical data, can also be saved on optical media from time to time.

That was one thing I was concerned about. Will the onboard graphics chipset be enough for light gaming or a separate graphics card is a must?

I presume you are talking about graphics cards here. I don't know much about graphics cards either and was wondering what if I bought a graphics card that didn't offer substantial advantage over the onboard graphics chipset. Rather than spending time on researching graphics cards, and make deciding on a configuration more complicated, I could go with the onboard graphics and think about buying a graphics card when and if the need arises.
Will a graphics card that offers a gain in performance over onboard graphics chipset require more memory than 8GB?
Once again msb0b, I thank you so very much for taking the time to address all the issues related to configuriation one by one. Your post has been most helpful. :) ^

What features of an all in one PC, like the one you suggested meets my requirements? As far as I know, an Acer Aspire revo kind of a system is a modern day version of WebTV. Am I wrong in that thinking?

Makes sense to me, these days the jump from 4GB to 8GB should not cost you too much (even if today you won't need the 8GB).

But if you go the 8 GB of RAM route, you must (well, "very much should") use a 64-bit OS (and not XP 64-bit). Reason being, 32-bit OSes can't natively address memory above about 4 GB (i.e. 32 bits = about 4 billion possible combinations). Even with only 4 GB, it is recommended to go the 64-bit route, as you will never get access to the full 4 GB using 32-bit (the limit is not just based on main memory, but graphic cards and other memory areas). As for XP 64-bit, it is very hard to find drivers for consumer products for XP 64 (since it in fact Server 2003 64-bit backported to the XP GUI); best bet is Windows 7 64bit. 2+ years ago, finding drivers and support for 64bit was hard; nowadays, every vendor wanting to stay in business is releasing 64 drives.


Massive. I would only use 5400RPM for backup purposes (i.e. a destination for a daily backup). As the main boot drive, you will rip you hair out with a 5400. Make sure to get at least 7200 RPM with a decent cache size (at least 8 MB).

Dedicated graphics boards are generally better than onboard. Nowadays, serious gamers will have the multi-GPU configs that will cost $1,000+. But for just your basic game, onboard graphics are fine.

Good. Then I am thinking along the right lines.

That's not an issue for two reasons. Firstly, I am planning to get the 64 bit Windows 7 OS only, secondly, I also know the limitations of addressibility on some OS's not being able to address memory beyond certain a certain address. There was a similar issue with Windows 95 also. I had bought a system with 128MB or RAM only to find out later on that Windows 95 could not address addresses beyond 64 MB. Thank you for pointing it out nonetheless.

Why massive? Speed alone will give an advantage of maximum of 33%. DOES the technology or controller/interface used in 7200 r.p.m HDs have faster seek times for the same speed than a 5400 H? If it's the speed alone, in normal read and write situations, other than ripping or burning a DVD, it should not make a massive difference, not more than 33% EVEN IN RIPPING OR WRITING A dvd. It's likely that there maybe other factors besides r.p.m and the reading/writing mechanism, that I am not aware of. I would like to learn, provided it can be explained to a layman like I am. If the price difference is not that much, I will go for 7200 r.p.m.
P.S.: The performance of a HD also depends on the sector size, and the block size. What kind of gain can one typically expect from a 7200 rpm drive over a 5400 rpm drive?
There is no serious gamer in the family. If onboard graphics is adequate, I am sure my son will be happy with it.
Thank you for addressing topics one by one. I really appreciate it.

Agreed - and if you do want to improve the graphics (for example to watch HDTV or a BluRay), add a video card later - $50 buys you a nice ATI Radeon HD 5450...

I honestly don't know about the Intel vs AMD chipsets. I know one of my laptops was a AMD and it was so slow. It could have just been what the less expensive laptops were like at the time. Other than the one Apple my daughter has, it's all been PC, with about 90% being Intel chips.

Yes, I hate some of the new trial versions. My HP Mini that I got at Costco and that I'm using on my first extended trip, has this. I guess you can't expect too much to be included on a $350+ mini. I returned a couple of Acer minis before this, since I didn't like the keyboard on the smallest one, and the slightly larger version would just seem to lock up sometimes for 30-60 seconds which got annoying.

I think if you use a Costco gift card, anyone can buy from Costco. I know people who were buying these on ebay with some cash back scheme to buy the Hyatt Certs at Costco without a normal membership. I haven't done this myself, since I have an executive membership and when in town go to Costco once a week.

In benchmarks, Phenom II x4's 6MB L3 cache gives it 10% performance edge over the Athlon II x4 at the same clock speed. The hit on the pocketbook is about 45%. The street price for Athlon II x4 2.8GHz is $100 and Phenom II x4 2.8GHz is $145.

Fortunately, there are not that many differences. At the moment, Phenom II and Athlon II use the same dies. Parts of the processors get disabled when they don't pass validation. There are also perfectly fine chips that are binned lower to meet market demand. With the right motherboard and CPU, it is possible to unlock a dual or tri core processor to a quad core.

It sounds like a perfectly fine plan. Do keep in mind that some computer makers place an artificial premium on choosing the top spec parts. Often the price to select a better part is greater than the difference in cost of the material.

I think this is a prudent course of action.

Video cards have its own onboard memory that is separate from the system memory.

Dell Refurbs - HD speed - Educational discounts
 

I bought my first Dell refurb unit 7 or 8 years ago. I think I bought a total of 3 or 4 of them, and they all had full 1 year warranties on them. Never had a problem with any of them.

My old pattern of computer buying was to get my personal computer that I do photo and graphics work on with a fairly good setup for graphics speed and memory/HD. I primarily use it for Photoshop, Pagemaker and general web use. Then after 2 years, I'd upgrade again, and then either transfer this computer to my shipping department that doesn't need much in the way of computing power to run it's programs. In fact, I had the same computer running for almost 8 years, and didn't have much problems.

I also have given the 2 year old computer to relatives who needed something better, or taken them down to my second house in Costa Rica. On the odd occasion, I have sold the older units too. I know I sold 1 desktop unit and one laptop in Costa Rica for about 50% more than I would have gotten for them in the states.

I think it's been 3 years since I bought my last Dell Refurb. I've looked at ones since then, but the price differential is so minuscule the times I've looked, that I've always gone with something else.

As I mentioned in my original post, I would not get a HD with a lower speed (5400, etc). I've had two similar computers in the past one with a 5400 RPM SATA, and one with a 7200 RPM SATA. A big difference in load times, if you have a lot of stuff that automatically loads. Just like I wouldn't buy a 2GB desktop computer, I wouldn't get anything under 7200 RPM. I think all mine have a decent cache too, which I understand makes a difference.

It sounds like you're using educational licenses for software. That's often a very good deal. I was running an 8 year old Adobe package, and picked up a new educational bundle this year for a reasonable price. Some colleges may have additional discounts available on desktops too, but at your price range, it might not help you any.

I know Apple only knocked $100 off a Macbook Pro for education rates. Some schools may have better discounts, though.

In a modern day system, the hard drive is often the biggest bottleneck. While things like CPU, RAM, GPUs, etc have been growing at an exponential rate, hard drive RPM has not. Workstation class systems have been sold with the 5400/7200 choice for over 10 years; with 10k and 15k RPM only penetrating the high end server markets. Technology improvements like SATA, larger disk caches, ReadyBoost, ReadyDisk, and SuperFetch all exist to work around the fundamental problem that reading/writing to a spinning platter is extremely slow (relative to doing the same in RAM).

This can be difficult to answer
 

I will start with the OS you will need to make sure you have a 64 bit version of the OS since 32 bit versions can not access memory greater than 3 GB.
Next the processor while Intel vs AMD debate will rage forever, I like Intel (becasue that is what I am familiar with). Both have recently introduced 6 core models so the 4 core models price has come down. Make sure you have a large l2 cache (or L3 depending on model), this can make a slower clock speed out perform a faster chip with less cache. Since you stated for the next 3 to 4 years I would look at the Intel I7 or corresponding AMD chip.
Memory is the next item get 8GB now and forget about it.
Hard disk yes 1TB should be the minimum but do not let this drive your decision. If you find a machine you like with 500GB get it. You can buy a 2nd HD in the 1.5TB range for less than $120 when you need to.
Graphics not to important since it is not a gaming machine. I like Motherboards in this case with integrated graphics and sound as well as Ethernet just makes things easier.
Hope this helps.

And before you jump to a 64-bit OS, you need to make absolutely sure any and all peripheral devices you have (i.e., printers, scanners, etc.) all have drivers for 64-bit operation systems. Not only that, you also need to make sure they actually work!

I have an older Canon laser MFP, and the drivers do not support 64-bit OS'es, which has been quite the annoyance.

Me either.

I've purchased laptops and a desktop system.

here's a linky:

http://www.dfsdirectsales.com/

For your purposes, you probably should get a dual core processor instead of a quad core processor. For the same thermal envelope (and I think the same can be said for budget), you can have four slower cores or two faster cores. The amount of multi-threaded applications out there is pretty small, and it doesn't sound like the PC will really be used to multi-task much. So you are better off having a computer that can do two things faster, than to be able to do four things slower simultaneously.

If you are interested in an Apple desktop, there is a decent option near your price range.

The imac previously suggested to you (and vastly outside of your price range) includes the computer in the display unit. Frankly, I think that is an unwise purchase in any event, because owners are accordingly forced to replace their display if replacing their computer. See http://store.apple.com/us/browse/hom...co=MTM3NDk2Nzc

Instead, I'd suggest the mac mini, at $599 (and Apple does offer educational discounts). See http://store.apple.com/us/browse/hom...mco=OTY2ODEwMw You'll need a separate display, but prices have come down significantly for them, so you should be able to get a pretty inexpensive one.

I fairly recently switched from PC to mac, and have found the latter to be a much better experience.

Have to watch the power supply capabilities here. Most Dell and HP desktops (I have one of each) come with anaemic power supplies - 250-300W - which aren't recommended for most add-on video cards.

I added a nVidia 6-series fanless card for the HP and an ATI 4670 fanless for the Dell (which serves as my HTPC). Not easy to find fanless.