From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RP32K-0007VU-O3 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 02:09:40 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9569921C075; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 02:09:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6700421C1F5 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 02:06:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.214.53]) by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RP2ze-000SzV-QP for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:06:54 +0700 Received: by bkaq10 with SMTP id q10so4852693bka.40 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:06:50 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.148.75 with SMTP id o11mr10499163bkv.95.1321063609995; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:06:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.16 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:06:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.16 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:06:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20111112005129.003a54d3@digimed.co.uk> References: <20111112005129.003a54d3@digimed.co.uk> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:06:49 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Another hardware thread From: Pandu Poluan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175cfb4e33121b04b1801776 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info X-Archives-Salt: c85b197a-dc93-4ae8-985c-932742fa4408 X-Archives-Hash: 46619ab7e9e98892170ec9e048912f91 --0015175cfb4e33121b04b1801776 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Nov 12, 2011 7:58 AM, "Neil Bothwick" wrote: > > It's time for a new desktop, I'd rather the the money to Amazon or Ebuyer > than the Inland Revenue. I'm currently running a Core2Duo system, but use > AMD before that, so I have no real allegiances. > > I was thinking of something like an AMD 1100T 6 core CPU, the new > Bulldozers are expensive and initial reports are not that promising, but > an Intel that gives the same bang per buck would do. I'm thinking > Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar threads > (like the one Dale started a while ago). I need lots of SATA ports > (fortunately, I bought a pair of 2TB drives a fortnight ago, just before > the prices went ballistic). > > I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video > performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need > something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the onboard > jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option? > AFAIK onboards very rarely have support for dual monitor. Besides, having a separate somewhat-beefier GPU might be usable in some cases. For instance, Ubuntu's Unity and Windows' Aero both rely on GPU to do their eye candy stuff. C'mon, don't be stingy... spare one PCIe slot for a graphic card :-) > Thoughts would be welcome, and please feel free to start your own ATI vs > Nvidia and AMD vs Intel flamewars. OK, I'd rather you didn't, but I'm not > about to waste electrons asking for the impossible :) > Honestly, I hate Intel for their tendency to confuse people with their CPU features (e.g., I must be doubly sure if a new processor supports VT-x). But then again, AMD still has no answer for Intel's *Bridge juggernaut. Horrible times :-( Rgds, --0015175cfb4e33121b04b1801776 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8


On Nov 12, 2011 7:58 AM, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>
> It's time for a new desktop, I'd rather the the money to Amazon or Ebuyer
> than the Inland Revenue. I'm currently running a Core2Duo system, but use
> AMD before that, so I have no real allegiances.
>
> I was thinking of something like an AMD 1100T 6 core CPU, the new
> Bulldozers are expensive and initial reports are not that promising, but
> an Intel that gives the same bang per buck would do. I'm thinking
> Gigabyte for motherboard, based on comments made here in similar threads
> (like the one Dale started a while ago). I need lots of SATA ports
> (fortunately, I bought a pair of 2TB drives a fortnight ago, just before
> the prices went ballistic).
>
> I'm not a gamer, but I want a system with plenty of grunt. Video
> performance is not critical, on board would suffice, except I need
> something with dual output to drive two monitors. Do any of the onboard
> jobbies do this or is a separate Nvidia still the best option?
>

AFAIK onboards very rarely have support for dual monitor. Besides, having a separate somewhat-beefier GPU might be usable in some cases. For instance, Ubuntu's Unity and Windows' Aero both rely on GPU to do their eye candy stuff.

C'mon, don't be stingy... spare one PCIe slot for a graphic card :-)

> Thoughts would be welcome, and please feel free to start your own ATI vs
> Nvidia and AMD vs Intel flamewars. OK, I'd rather you didn't, but I'm not
> about to waste electrons asking for the impossible :)
>

Honestly, I hate Intel for their tendency to confuse people with their CPU features (e.g., I must be doubly sure if a new processor supports VT-x). But then again, AMD still has no answer for Intel's *Bridge juggernaut.

Horrible times :-(

Rgds,

--0015175cfb4e33121b04b1801776--