inahandbasket | (no subject)

So, like many gamer geeks around the world, i'm about to embark on building a new computer for the upcoming DirectX9 games. Namely, HalfLife2 and Doom3.
But I need some help on a major decision.
Sound card, hard drive, vid card, and monitor are already procured or decided on.
the question is the processor/motherboard, and more specifically:
64bit processing

The new Athlon64 and the AthlonFX that were released are sick, sick processors, and I fully expect them to rule in about... 6-8 months when the rest of the hardware and software catch up. Motherboard chipsets always suck for the first few iterations when something majorly new comes along.

But I'm going to need a new puter before those 6-8 months go by.

My question is this:
Buy an expensive 64bit processor(and assorted kit) now and upgrade the motherboard in a year?
OR
Buy a nice 32bit processor at the current sweet pricepoint (Intel 2.8 with HT) and use the saved cash in a year to get a faster 64bit processor and 2nd/3rd gen motherboard?

Let me know what you think, and why. :o)

(currently running Athlon 1ghz, 1GB PC133 RAM. sloooow.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

all the parts i've got are in my current system, but my box isn't going to play HL2 without a mobo/cpu/ram upgrade, and if I'm going to upgrade I'm going to upgrade. no use going halfassed when upgrading IMHO.
So with that said, and from stuff said in the geeks community (new 64bit socket in 6-12 months), I'm probably going to go with a 32bit processor and basic modern mobo, but splurge on the quality DDR4000 RAM and sick vid card that I can use on the 64bit when I upgrade.

Other question is do I go SATA or PATA for a harddrive? I just got a 120GB PATA recently, but I can find server work for that with some upcoming projects and go to SATA with the new personal machine if I want to. haven't found a compelling reason to yet though other than the cables being smaller and easier to deal with. heh.

What's your budget like? If you have extra $$$ go SATA, if not stick with PATA. PATA drives are really pretty cheap, and you could do a RAID0 if you really want to make a fast system. You could do SATA RAID too, of course, but that'd be a bit more than I'd want to throw at a box purely in the interest of high gaming framerates.

i've never cared to go messing with RAID for personal use honestly.
too much hassle for not enough reward.

I never liked RAID0 anyway.

If you want that much speed, you're probably doing something important with large amounts of data.

If you have that much data you want to work with, it's probably important.

If you use RAID0, you spread it across two drives and have nothing complete, thusly you are twice as likely to lose everything.

Personally I wouldn't bother with anything less than RAID5, but maybe that's just me. Also, it would have to be hot swappable. Guess I got spoiled watching my dad work on the big iron. :-)

...I mean, if you're gonna have a redundant array of something, it might as well be just a little REDUNDANT, eh?