Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
88 Posts
0
16435
Dell VS Hewlett Packard
While doing some online shopping to amuse myself I found that while Dell does sell a pretty darn good PC with the XPS 400 it still can't run Oblivion that well. I tried everything I can think of and it just can't handle it. On a more introspective level I thought to myself maybe Hewlett Packard would've been a better choice for performance and price, it turns out I may have been right.
Configuring my Dell system I chose:
Pentium® D Processor 830 with Dual Core Technology (3GHz, 800FSB)
Genuine Windows® XP Media Center 2005 Edition
Remote Control
256MB PCI Express™ x16 (DVI/VGA/TV-out) nVidia GeForce 6800
2GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
160GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache
Single Drive: 16x DVD+/-RW with double layer write capability
Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
This should've made for a fairly kickin gaming rig, the issue comes in when you actually get to running games on it. The bloatware they include is just terrible. I'm not saying it doesn't have it's uses, however it does impact on performance making it a downer. You might ask how can it when it's small applications and they barely are noticable? I didn't believe it either but after reformatting and doing a clean install I noticed a huge difference.
So is this configuration better then one from HP? Yes and no. HP sells some really high-end stuff compared to what's in this system, like Dual Core AMD processors. Why do those beat out Intels? They have HyperTransport (communication within the chip between each core) instead of through the Frontside Bus like with Intel's. This improves the transfer of data, mechanically speaking.
Here's a comparable system from HP I might've liked:
Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP Media Center Edition
AMD Athlon(TM) 64 X2 4400+ dual-core - 2.2GHz, 2MB
2GB DDR-400MHz dual channel SDRAM (2x1GB)
160GB 7200 rpm SATA Hard Drive
LightScribe 16X DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti dr
9-in-1 memory card reader, 2 USB 2.0, 1 IEEE 1394
Remote Control
256MB DDR ATI Radeon X 1600XT, TV-Out and DVI
Sound Blaster Audigy X-Fi, 24-bit Xtreme Fidelity
What's the difference in price you may ask? Take a look..
Dell
Final Price $1,328
As low as $40/month
Hewlett Packard
Price $1,534.99
Mail-in Rebate -$150.00
Final Price $1,384.99
As low as $46 / month
Things to consider here are:
The XPS 400 uses DDR2 and a BTX Form Factor.
The HP System uses HyperTransport but only manages DDR.
The question is which could, in the end play my game Oblivion?
It is my belief that after trying the XPS 400, the HP system would achieve a better result. It has a higher level of performance from all I read online, so I urge you all to consider what you desire and will want. I have had problems with AMD in the past, the thunderbirds overheated because they had to many transistors closer together, the AMD XP 2400+ ran slower then my friends Intel Pentium 4, so you decide.
I myself am somewhat glad I didn't buy the HP, I can't afford to keep wasting money on AMD's faulty chips.
Message Edited by sam1486 on 05-02-200602:39 PM
T3raYon
342 Posts
0
May 2nd, 2006 22:00
If you shoot for GAMING AMD is clearly a better choice of processor as it is simple more cost/performance efficient on this segment.
Calling the Pentium-D 830 a strong processor for games is wrong. First of all as of today most of the games does not benefit from Dual Core (and NEITHER Hyperthreading) so it acts simply as a 3Ghz processor. This is going to create you a bottleneck as soon as you switch to higher than 1024x768 resolution. (just for example my 3.4Ghz "old" P4 runs on 80% utilization on AVERAGE when playing 3D games.)
Future will change but be wise here.
Videocard GeF 6800 and X1600XTX is not comparable. for a high end game "rig" you should aim either the ATI X1900 series or the Gef 7900 series in these days.
On the processor cores: future will bring more games dual core optimized. it's a long term choice.
Last: I don't understand why you deal with XPS400 where XPS-600 is available from Dell and it has much stronger processors.
sam1486
88 Posts
0
May 2nd, 2006 22:00
Partly I mention it because that's what I bought, another reason is that it is a new generation of computers, unlike the older types based on ATX it uses BTX.
SLI is available with a single PCI Express configuration, so naturally there isn't to much improvement for the XPS 600 merely because it supports 2 instead of only 1, It's not going to make much difference.
Finally, I didn't say it would be the fastest gaming rig, but it would be fairly kickin. It runs Doom 3 with 4x Antialiasing and 800x600. That's pretty darn impressive.
Also you really need to think for a moment, they're coming out with Physics processors solely for gaming now, it won't matter what card you're using in the future because you'll need one just to play them! So it would probably be logical to say the speed of the cards won't matter as much as the physics processor you select, which will offset the mid-level videocards and make them more lasting.
Message Edited by sam1486 on 05-02-200606:46 PM
T3raYon
342 Posts
0
May 3rd, 2006 00:00
Gamerig - sorry I did not know your expectations. If you're OK playing in 800x600 it is definatley a good config for you (in your original post). I use a 19" TFT with a native resolution of 1280x1024 and I use every game I play on this setting to make sure picture quality is OK (TFT in non-native resolution looks terrible :))) )
Physics - you're right it's coming out. My problem is that it is very early and I'm not even sure what this is going to add to the gaming experience. I have seen demos. There is 1 (ONE!) game coming out supporting it. Also the physics is not standardized yet. Every manufacturer can have a different solution. No umbrella exists like DirectX or OpenGL. It will help the CPU for sure but if you think about it: in today's game there is not a lot of physics because it's too complex to calculate. This extra card will help but the CPU is still going to be "in charge" of managing and calculating the 3D space, moving the objects, players, calculating the sounds, etc..., dealing with the network, etc... you still need a lot of performance there.
sam1486
88 Posts
0
May 3rd, 2006 16:00
Well I couldn't afford the higher end system running 3 grand, I'm not that financially able.
As for the SLI option, you're not entirely up to date. They have Dual GeForce 7800 that occupies 1 PCI Express slot while running 2 GPU's, effectively creating SLI. Take a look
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=175&type=expert