I know making your own is cheap as hell but you guys are making it out to be a jigsaw puzzle on putting it together. I'm somewhat computer literate. I know more about my computers, my younger cousin's computer and nearly everyone in my family's computer than they themselves do.


I am not a computer geek though and have made many mistakes while running my own computers and have since learned from them but I still don't know half the stuff geeks know. I'm not even talking about those that have their main occupation in the computer field.


I've searched for instructions on building a computer and I have even opened up one of my computers. I don't have a clue how to even begin about taking one apart and putting it back together to make it function properly. If you guys have resources or tools that could point me that way I would be much obliged as I don't have the resources to pay for someone else's knowledge on computer building as much as my gaming needs are.



As for making computers keep up with the games I highly doubt it but I guess it depends on how fast we reach the Diamond computing age over the silcon age. We have yet to form diamonds at a price reasonable to implement them in mass production of computers. Once this is reached the speeds of computers will change dramatically and the need for cooling devices will also subside.
http://thefutureofthings.com/news/1157/nano-diamonds-might-lead-to-quantum-computing.html

http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/diamond-semiconductors-2003013/

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Mar 14 2010, 8:14 am by killer_sss.

In my neighborhood alone, and I live in northern New Jersey, the middle of nowhere, there are people who build. We don't have a mall, we barely have any food chains of any kind, our school system is a joke, and the last investment our district made was in the football field, not the textbooks or computers. Yet here, in hickville, with under-qualified teachers and a sub-par facility in which to learn, I can name at least twenty other people who can build a computer. We aren't brain surgeons, we're not all basement dwellers, and we didn't spend hours upon hours learning how. Some of us used an old machine to learn, taking it apart and seeing how to make it work again. But truth be told, most of us used a tutorial, google images, and newegg.

Everything about a computer is color coded, and there are very few wires or connections you can possibly mess up, because they just won't fit together. If you can tell the difference between USB and firewire, nothing inside that case is going to confuse you. The fact is, Average Joe could build a computer if he set aside an hour to read, and some time to choose what components are right for him. And you, with the internet as your resource, with me, and the rest of SEN's tech section at your disposal have the gall to come in here and try and make any case about how you can't? Sir you are either mentally challenged or just being stubborn.

You, and any person who wants to put the small investment of time in, can save themselves hundreds of dollars and have a custom built PC that will last them longer than any they could get off the shelf at a comparable price. It can be done, I design a new build for someone nearly every day, and I do it off of no further knowledge than what the internet had available. I have never taken a class, I have no degree, I got a GED instead of graduating HS, and yet here I am one of the best in this section.

If you want to play dumb and stubborn, that's fine, but I wish you'd do it somewhere I didn't have to see.

Incorrect, a computer completely up to date and capable would run 650$ at the most. Anything more than that is being fancy and showing off. I'd know, because that's what I do with mine. Do I need an i7 920 with 8 processing threads running 4GHz? No. But I can, so I do. This is my hobby and I like it.

No, this is what marketing teams would like you to believe. Actually companies like Dell, HP, and Compaq survive on your belief that you can't. They profit on your belief that it is too complicated, too hard, too time consuming. They make the money they make because so many people like you in the most defeatist and pessimistic way waste your hard earned dollars. If it were me, I'd be ashamed of what I was throwing my cash away on.

Really? My father has been in and out of work for the better half of my life. My mother barely makes enough to cover bills, nevermind our family of 5's living expenses. But through my own effort and sheer force of will, again, in the middle of nowhere, I found whatever odd job or task I needed to for the funds to get what I wanted. Every birthday, Christmas, and holiday where I received a single dime, it went into building a bigger and better machine. And it doesn't cost 500$ every 2-3 years, the initial investment is more like 450$, with maybe 150$ every 2 years for upgrades to keep things current. That's assuming you upgrade as much as I do, but really, you don't. So what's that? 600$ after 3 years, with 750$ after 5, 900$ after 7, 1050$ after 9. 1050$ after 9, we're approaching 100$/year here and it continues to go down. Try upgrading your console and tell me how it goes.

My family isn't rich, or anywhere near it, in fact if we weren't getting a deal on renting this house we'd be on the street or in a two room condo. We do what we have to, and in this situation I still manage to field an impressive PC. But I'm not here to compare problems, I'm here to prove you wrong, which I just did.

The directions are out there, mere clicks away, its up to you what you want to do with them.

If you need a guide, I've been meaning to write one, so it might give me an incentive, but there are plenty of resources:
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/how-to-tech/build-a-computer.htm
http://lifehacker.com/5151369/the-first+timers-guide-to-building-a-computer-from-scratch
http://www.pcmech.com/byopc/
http://www.kitchentablecomputers.com/index.php

Know what those are? First few results off google. See how easy that was?

Lol those articles look interesting.. I'm going to read some..

Yeah when I first came into this Tech Section of SEN, I didn't even know what RAM did. Eh, I found out, and did a little research on my computer. I found that my computer's CPU was constantly overworking because I didn't have enough RAM to do anything. So, I went out and bought twice as much RAM as my computer could ever dream of using

Again all your calculations are based off of upgrading your self built pc not buying PCs but whatever.

My father doesn't even work. My mother has been a nurse for 20years mainly for the health insurance and she likes her field. When I grew up we never really had that much we spent time at playing board games or cards for fun outside of activities. We had one TV and didn't get it until I was about 10. Since my grandparent's passing we have been a bit better off and it has helped my sister's and my education tremendously.

Unlike you every dime I earned from lawn mowing birthdays whatever went into savings and intrest bearing CDs so I could go to college. Since then I've had trouble finding a job since all I ever did for work was mow lawns which over the year I did it netter me at least 6k. I dunno how much I wasted when I was younger but I had about 6k for college. Our town has pretty much died and the neighboring town just lost a GM plant 6-12months ago. There has been little work and nothing in my field of passion (culinary arts) except the Ma n' Pop Diners. I have worked for one restaurant that has closed and a grocery store.

I'm now trying to save up to go back to college yet again for a different field. I should have stuck to math since I've used that my entire life and was always good at it but it really didn't excite me like cooking does.

I would like to move out on my own so I no longer need to burden my parents but haven't saved enough money for that either. Our local economy is bad which is why I would like to move elsewhere as well. But anyhow, this is why I play so many video games to keep my mind off of things. Yet again why I don't have the resources to pay for that crap.


Thank you for the sites I will look into reading them and hopefully they will help me. Btw I have an older computer I would say five years older than this one would I be able to steal the RAM from it to boost this computer's power if I figure out this computer building stuff from those resources?

Yeah, if you get any more RAM you should see a significant ease on your computer's performance. You're computer is pretty similar to mine, so I'm using my situation as a basis.

You can use this website, and it will tell you how many extra slots you have available to add in more RAM. http://www.crucial.com/systemscanner/index.aspx

You could also just look inside your case and tell, if you know which slots to look for (google DDR RAM slot or something).

You'll be wanting DDR1 (DDR), and you won't need more than 1GB of it. I couldn't tell if you had more available slots from CPU-Z, but you probably have 1-2 slots. If so, you can probably have a max of 2GB of RAM, which you definitely would never need.

I suggest either buying a 1GB stick, or another 256MB stick, depending on whether or not you have an extra RAM slot, or just a single RAM slot. If you have only a single RAM slot you could switch out your 256MB one with a 512MB, or a 1GB stick. If you have two slots, you could just get another 256MB stick, and I think you'll be fine.

I myself upgraded from 256MB of RAM to 2GB, and I have never gone over 600MB of usage (and I do some ridiculous multi-tasking for this old machine). I lied, just today I had a peak charge of 855MB

Oh that reminds me, open up the task manager, hit the performance tab, take a screenshot and post it up. The numbers there can tell you if you could use more RAM effectively; that's exactly what I did before I bought mine.

Hehe, I just opened up Flash CS3, Photoshop CS4, 8 Chrome tabs, Itunes while playing music, and the Python IDLE, while running a test program on Flash, all at once, plus a few other minor programs including my webcam. I hit 755MB of usage; I have no idea how I hit 855MB earlier.. And, everything was running decently smoothly. Although, my cpu was at ~95% usage the entire time. Lol.

Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Mar 14 2010, 9:10 am by CecilSunkure.

JACK'S QUICK AND DIRTY GUIDE TO THE INSIDE OF YOUR COMPUTER

OK, it's very simple. There are 6 main components, pretty much the only 6 that Average Joe will ever bother with.

RAM
CD/DVD drive (aka the Cup-holder)
HD (hard drive)
CPU (maths)
GPU (graphics)
PSU (Power supply unit)

RAM is generally about 6 inches long, 1 inch high, flat, green, with a bunch of black chips along the sides. It's so simple to plug in and take out, I won't bother explaining. There's normally several slots for it.

DVD drive. Shouldn't need to describe this. Put it in the top of the box facing out, screw it in. Plug any cables that fit into it, there should be two.

HD. Like the DVD drive but smaller. Same installation but underneath the DVD, handy racks there. Plug any cables that fit into it. Again, should be two.

CPU. Big, square, with a big fan whirring on top. Should be obvious. Normally a couple of clips on the sides to put it in. Don't bend the gold pins on the bottom, and DON'T FORGET TO PLUG THE FAN POWER CABLE IN.

GPU. Placement may vary, but there should be some slots like for the RAM. Plug it in wherever it fits, put a cable on for the fan if it has/needs one.

The PSU. Big, grey, with cables out one end, this cube goes at the top and back of the case. Put it in with the cables facing inwards, and the sockets for the power cable facing outwards. Screw it in, DON'T PLUG THE POWER IN YET. Put the cables on the inside into the DVD, HD, motherboard, and possibly CPU and GPU, although the last two have different cables AFAIK.

That's the main stuff. There should be onboard sound, USB, and internet sockets. Close up the case, plug stuff in, close your eyes and hit he

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/7149/performancee.jpg


I have two open slots not including the one that has the 256 already in it. How do I tell if the RAM from another machine is compatable or not? Because I have one machine that is so old it doesn't even get used anymore and I may have access to another that I could take from If either of the RAM pieces were compatable.

Ouch, yes you could definitely use more. If your peak commit charge is greater than your total physical memory, or even close, then you need more RAM. Yours is like 62MB over.

So yes, you can take RAM from another computer if the stick is DDR1 RAM, which is also just called DDR. More common and newer RAM comes in DDR2 and DDR3.

The bad thing is that these older DDR sticks are old, and that means a little more expensive than the newer stuff, since they aren't really manufactured anymore.

I suggest you get between 512MB - 1GB more RAM than what you have now. So, you could cannibalize whatever is in those other ones, assuming they are DDR (they probably are), or you can just buy a 1GB DDR stick for like 25-35$. I think I got two 1GB sticks for 55$.

And to add on to what others have said about speeding up your pc, defrag your HD and your RAM. Check for registry errors. I suggest you download this trial version: http://www.auslogics.com/en/software/boost-speed/

I use this periodically to defrag, clean registry errors, manage my startup menu, uninstall programs, and delete junk files. Once the trial is up you just have to set your system clock back before you run the program. Once you are done running the program, put your system clock back to normal.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Mar 14 2010, 9:30 am by CecilSunkure. Reason: Typo.

I know that in this economic situation 500$ seems a lot. But I would not call it insane. 500/(2 x 365) = 69cents per day. I think the average joe can afford that.
I think many of us do not just buy new computer parts on a quick whim. We do have to save and work for our computer money.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Mar 14 2010, 10:22 am by MasterJohnny.

Except that it's the exact same turnover rate as any console.
You don't need to buy a new monitor. Monitors are also much cheaper than TVs. And actually, I had to buy a new TV to play my n64, since it didn't have RCA inputs.
Playstation: 1995. Playstation 2: 2000. Playstation 3: 2006. Looks like there's a new system out ever 5 years to me. Nintendo goes back even further.
I disagree. With computers every game that comes out has remarkably low requirements because most people have older computers. SC2 requires a P4 (some of the shittiest processors Intel ever made back in 2000) and a Radeon 9800 pro (Excellent budget card for its 2003 debut). You can run SC2 with SEVEN YEAR OLD TECH.
okay
You can't upgrade the PS3. You have to buy the next gen console.
okay
There isn't a need when most people don't own an HDTV. Yeah, you have to buy a new TV to get the PS3 to work properly.
It costs about that much now for a computer minus monitor twice as good.
You have some high standards. My computer cost $1000 over the past 3 years. I am about ready for an upgrade. I can run EVERY GAME made for the PC at a playable level. Top of the line performance only lasts as long as there isn't a new fab process, which usually occurs twice every three years, scattered between the graphics and the cpu makers. That's because it's TOP OF THE LINE. Only idiots with disposable income buy top of the line (I suppose the i7 920 was an exception, but intel has now released many processors faster than the 920 but are terrible price/performance).
If I upgrade my computer, I will be paying for better graphics--something you can't do on the ps3. The ps3 has no/low AA/AF settings, which make the game look terrible. The fact of the matter is that PCs generally perform less efficiently than consoles, but have the ability to have much better graphics.

4200 is a low end graphics card. You're pissed off that a 10 year old computer can't play starcraft 2? Let me tell you this then: your computer can play oldblivion just fine. Oblivion came out in 2005--5 years after you got your computer. Oblivion runs on high detail for me at miserably low framerates. So the quality of the picture can vary from shit to gorgeous.

A new computer, at $500 will last you a great 3 years, good 5 years, a mediocre 7 years, and a bad 10 years. That is if you want to play games. If you don't, your 10 year old computer is just fine.

Finally, get a credit card. The only reason you shouldn't have a credit card is if you have no self control.

Actually you can buy adaptors for this or use a vcr/dvd which most people have and don't cost near the price of a tv

ok five years-six years when companies were advancing fast. computers will still be in this same time frame for a while yet where as console systems are expanding there coverage.

actually most computer games are designed to meet the tech that is predicted to be out when the game is released (since computer technology has a pretty smooth curve of doubling current tech every 6 months). granted they can run with some low requirements but the performance is shitty I know from playing guild wars. released in 2005 my system met the requirements but there were major loading problems going to different areas of the game.


yes but every game created for the current console runs smoothly and efficiently where as if a newerer game is released for Pc even a year later you will notice performance issues.

um no. all you need is either vcr or dvd player if you already have one or a simple adapter which costs the most of $20 probably even cheaper online.

ok no mopniter just a system built costs about same as console. Which means computer wins graphics wise and the console wins performance wise.

Um my $1000 was over the same time period and I was looking at store bought vs self built. but meh $1000 over 3 years vs $600 for a brand new console 5years ,if you wait 6months its going to drop to $500, so you are paying half what you pay for a console for a longer period of time and that is assuming your keeping your top performance standards up.

So you get better graphics for a shorter period of time for twice the price while the games are just about as good.HMMMMM.

ok you win on the graphics personally I play games for the gameplay not the graphics. Which is why I play blizzard games. I have yet to find someone else that produces that kind of quality of game.

kinda considering I could at least play diablo 2 with a 15 year old PC.

Credit Cards have one use. Building credit for purchasing things that you will need a loan for such as a house or car. The intrest on them is insane now due to laxed restrictions from the government.
If somehow your mail gets lost and they don't recieve a payment your looking at paying all the intrest on whatever you owed that month.
Something you purchased will now cost you 1.2x as much because of the standard 20% intrest over something that wasn't even your fault (stupid post office).




so I could run the same thing He told me to run on the old pcs to see what kind of Ram they have and canabalize if they match. This sounds very good.

also can't you just defrag using the tools that come with the computer? I use that defrag every so often.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Mar 15 2010, 3:58 am by killer_sss.

@the bit about consoles running smoother and more effeciently, of course they do. The games were made and finetuned for a specific console, game consoles are optimized for gaming whereas computers can do gaming or millions of other things, and consoles don't have 101 different processes at once. Having said that, computers above the minimum spec can run games that look better and run smoother than on a console.

As for running Diablo 2 on a 15 year old computer, you clearly don't understand the difference between 2D and 3D when it comes to performance.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Mar 15 2010, 8:12 am by Jack.

It follows moore's law, which is that the number of transistors on a chip doubles every two years. This is going to slow down dramatically since 32 nm tech is so hard to produce, and they're having terrible problems with 40 nm tech. It sounds like you were playing guild wars on a setting that wasn't conducive to your hardware.

Oblivion looks terrible on the ps3 and stutters far to often for my liking. There are many others which either don't look very good or stutter far too much.

you need an hdtv to get them to work properly at 1080p.

Nintendo produces that quality game. There are thousands of games for n64, nes, snes which are excellent and have terrible graphics, but awesome gameplay.

You can't play Diablo 2 with a 386. Minimum requirements was a 233 MHZ pentium, which corresponds to a pentium II. There's a huge difference between a 3 year old computer and a 15 year old computer.

I have never once payed interest on a credit card. My parents have never payed interest on a credit card. My grandfather payed interest ONCE on a credit card. Credit card companies want your business more than your money. You have to learn to complain should something happen.

The fastest you could get at the end of 1995 was a Pentium Pro 200 MHz (basically like a Pentium II without MMX, IIRC), and not everyone buys the best available when they buy a computer because it can be expensive. At least a decent video card from back then (in 1995 or 1996) would have been required to handle that game. Such a system also would not have had enough RAM to be able to run it well; it would slow down often from having to load things. I Know all of this from experience. I played Diablo II on a Pentium Pro 200 MHz with 64 MB of RAM (the max the system could have, I think, when all slots filled with the maximum and had the maximum number of slots a desktop would have back then) and a Matrox Millennium 4 MB PCI video card. All of this was about the best you could get when that computer was new, IIRC. (which wasn't new when Diablo II came out)

If the other machines are prior to 2000, it is unlikely that the RAM will be compatible.

DDR RAM was introduced in 2000, so older computers will use the old SDRAM standard. Here's a picture from wikipedia of SDRAM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SDR_SDRAM-1.jpg note that it has 2 notches on the bottom amongst the gold 'teeth'.
Here's a picture from wikipedia of DDR: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Generic_DDR_Memory_(Xytram).jpg note that it has 1 notch in the centre of the gold 'teeth'. It is also possible, although quite unlikely, that the other computers could have RDRAM in them. This RAM was much more expensive than SDRAM, so generally didn't make it into home-user computers, here's a picture from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RAMBUS-Memory.jpg note that it again has 2 notches in it.

The RAM in your current computer is DDR, and it is not compatible with the old RAM. The quickest way to tell is to yank the old RAM out, and if it's got 2 notches, don't bother going any further. If it's got 1 notch, plug it into your new computer and turn it on. If it boots into windows, you're good (assuming the RAM isn't faulty). Note that although it may be DDR ram, it still may not be compatible with your computer, particularly if it is quite old/slow.

Worst case scenario is that it's an old DDR200 (you are using DDR333 in your computer) 64MB stick, and putting it into your computer will actually make things worse due to it being slower than your current RAM and not providing a big enough capacity gain to offset this speed loss. If the old RAM does work in the current computer, run CPU-Z again and take a screenshot of the RAM tabs, and we can tell you if the old RAM has slowed everything down or not.

If your options are limited to "using the RAM from this old computer" or "doing nothing", there's really no point researching whether the RAM in the old computer will work or not - just plug it in. If it works, good, if it doesn't, then you could consider other options.

I tried different settings the loading was rediculous and is what made me eventually give it up, once they destroyed the ability to actually kill groups of monsters by yourself instead of with a party.

The arenas were the only fun things left and every battle there was a delay before we began to fight but by the time I loaded we were in the middle of fighting which made it nearly impossible to win unless we faced a crappy team.

Again you are after maximum graphics My friend has no problems running this on a normal tv.

Sorry those games were good and I'm even willing to say they are better than most of the games produced today but at the same time they are only fun to play through once every time you play your system, which may be ever couple of years.

Diablo 2, Warcraft2, and Starcraft are the only games I have played over and over so much that I have needed to buy new discs for each of them because I wore out the CD before I got tired of the game. Diablo 2 is still the only game of this group I have played for nearly ten years as well.

Nobody makes quality games like blizzard I'm sorry. wasn't really a fan of warcraft 3 or WoW but they are great games nevertheless. I have yet to find a replacement for Diablo 2 and doubt I will until Diablo 3. There just isn't that kind of gameplay out there. Guild Wars made by somewhat the same team as Diablo 2 really had a lack of items and was more team oriented which is why I didn't care for it nearly as much although it was good as well.

It may not be exactly 15 years old but read below.



Well the Os was orignally win 95 and it wasn't our computer to begin with; Originally it was my uncles. I assume he bought it from the store but I suppose I could be wrong. We upgraded it to winn 98 after it was given to us. I've never had that many problems with playing d2 on it. Granted all I use it for now is xfering items with d2 because I mainly use this current computer as it is much faster. Before that though I never complained about it being slow so I don't know.



Ty guys for all the help on my Pc issues I'm sure I will be back here to ask for more help when I go to build a computer when I have the funds to do so.

Heh, my point was about playing it, not just running it, and that most computers of that time would not have been fast enough - probably only the fastest ones would be. The main issue was probably the ram, though. 64 MB was only barely enough. With more ram, if that system could have had more, it probably would have run a bit better. I don't remember whether that system came with 32 MB or was already at 64 MB.

I have played it. I no longer do because i have a better machine now. Would you play a game on a faster machine or a slower machine? I think thats retorical at least I would hope so.

@Ex: I... have AGP. Is there any way to rectify this problem, or am I right in thinking that I'm completely and totally fucked when it comes to SCII? D:

You're missing my point.
1985: 386
1995: Pentium Pro
2000: Diablo II
2002: Geforce 4200
2010: Starcraft II.
Eight year old hardware isn't going to run Starcraft II (2010-2002) well. 5 year old hardware (apparently) manages to run Diablo II (2000-1995 = 5). 15 year old hardware has NO CHANCE of running Diablo II (2000-1985).
Do you know that you can set your computer to play games at 640x480 graphics? Did you do that for guild wars?