Looking for input/info about parts

ExCyber is right. The CPU behind so-called "Centrino" systems is the Pentium-M I was referring to in my last post. Never compare that to a Celeron. ... A Pentium-M is a low-power, efficient, fast chip. It doesn't have the clock speed of a P4, but much like Athlons, it doesn't rely purely on clockspeed to perform well. ... But the laptop one is decent on battery life and runs cool, too.

Good. I had some concerns about the processor, but not so much anymore. She spent $1500 on a Centrino system with a 1.5 GHz processor, 512 MB of RAM, 60 GB HD, CD/RW/DVD Combo drive, built in wireless, and XP Pro. It's a Gateway though, which does have me a little concerned. Her brother has one that seems pretty solid, but he hasn't had it all that long. I guess her parents technically bought it for her as a graduation present, but still. She told me she was going to wait until we got our place to order one, then one day was like "I ordered it." Could have been worse, I suppose :blink:

For the GPU, I'd stick with the 9800 Pro, or maybe by then an XT. Who knows, the whole landscape could shift by then. If you succeed in getting a place, just PM me and I'll tell you if my opinion on anything in particular has changed. I frequent Newegg myself, so I have an idea of what they have in stock, too. They aren't always the best in price, but I've never bought from a place with better customer service.

Well, I'll keep an eye out and see what's changed when I go to order. Plus I plan on posting my final choices here so people can give it the once over before I actually buy everything. Though right now it doesn't look like much will change. Most of my primary issues have been addressed. And I still have a few options to consider, but I know they're equally as valid. I appreciate everyone's input and advice!


Established Member
Originally posted by mal@Jul 21, 2004 @ 03:29 AM

Isn't that where Intel is believed to be heading with it's desktop processors?

Maybe. They might just keep chugging with the P4 alongside something else, as long as possible. I mean, what's 500 watts to dissipate? It's petty heat for a system with three compressors and magnetic shielding (in case of reactor overload).

Maybe when I replace my car's radiator, I'll use the old one for my next computer.
*grumble*. i dont know if theyve gotten better since Hitachi took over, but the Deskstar line is NOTORIOUS for failure. when IBM made them people had their drives die left and right. usually, oddly enough, right after their warrenty expired. mine died two days after and when IBM stopped making them Hitachi picked up the RMA's. just food for thought.
Really? I heard that IBMs were some of the best, most reliable (albiet expensive) hard drives available. And it has a three year warranty on it, which is good enough in most cases.


Established Member
IBM's later Deskstars (or DeathStars as they are affectionatly called) were notorious for dying. They were only rated for 8 straight hours of use. We had a few die here at work (in Dells)
Originally posted by racketboy@Jul 27, 2004 @ 06:06 PM

However Seagate just upped all their warrenties to 5 years

is this proactiive or just on new purchaces? ive got a seagate and i love it so far.


Established Member
Originally posted by Quadriflax@Jul 27, 2004 @ 11:12 PM

Really? I heard that IBMs were some of the best, most reliable (albiet expensive) hard drives available. And it has a three year warranty on it, which is good enough in most cases.

They are great. They were great before Hitachi took over. It was just certain series (note to world: Not all Deskstars are the same series). Some people will never piece that together though, they just hear "deskstar baaaad" and that's all that sticks in their heads. Anyway, since I already own a 160GB 7K250, I'm not terribly interested in that deal.

As for Seagate, that only applies to drives shipped after June 1. So when did you buy it? http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,117040,00.asp

The newer Seagates are quiet and cool, and apparently reliable, too. But they're not going to win any speed awards.


Established Member
Originally posted by racketboy@Jul 28, 2004 @ 02:10 AM

yeah I realize not all IBMs were bad -- some were fast and such, but that one series was really bad

Unfortunetely, some people don't realize that. I've got an IBM Deskstar 120GXP that has been working great for years, and now my main HD is the 160GB hitachi. The 40GB WD400BB I had worked great for years, but I don't like having to uninstall my games when I run low, only to have to delete stuff and make room for those same games at the next LAN.

Anyway, all I am saying is that it bugs me when the entire line of HDs is judged based on one bad design.


Established Member
Originally posted by ExCyber@Jul 28, 2004 @ 04:09 AM

Yes, and a reputation should be based on trends rather than anomalies.

Agreed. Otherwise I'd have to say that all the modern car manufacturers suck. They produce crappy unreliable cars. All of them. All the cars.