Amazing PC prices

[dirty_bass]

After deciding to update my studio system to a multicore, I did extensive searching to find the best price for PC`s.

Looking at both building my own machine again and sourcing best prices for good parts, or best pre built machine prices.

I recently bought an incredibly high spec quad core machine for stupid money.
A machine that would normally cost in the region of 700-900 quid
I got for 350

All the parts are good spec too.
I simply couldn`t source the parts cheaper myself.

Heartily recommend them so if you are looking for a new desktop, try these guys

http://www.palicomp.co.uk/
But look at their ebay auctions as you can get their stuff even cheaper than on their site if the bidding is good.

[p_brane]

real good find that is matey, cheers!

in the market for a new PC at the moment and like yourself have been comparing building again to pre-built.

have you received yours yet?

[ORIS]

thats sum feckin cheap prices! nice one....

[acidsaturation]

Looks too good to be true... what's the catch..?
Hmm... New PC for me rather than fixing my old one I think...

[dirty_bass]

No catch.
they just manufacture about 200 pc`s a day haha
so they can do it real cheap.

They will try to sell you extra bits and a warranty, but you don`t have to go for all the extra crapola
Plus everything is tested and optimised before it gets to you

[fatcollective]

wow!!

now thats what im talking about!!

[techno_smack]

also try novatech

www.novatech.co.uk i think.

got mine for there a while back, they have been pretty good with after sales support too

[techno_smack]

that excaliber quad core beast looks pretty dope

[BloodStar]

what PSU is in that machine? Be sure you get some proper one, or it will not be efficient and also noisy.. Same with CPU cooler and fans...

[dirty_bass]

I ordered quiet fans as extras, only 10 quid extra

[SlimboyPhatt]

Im still a big fan of building them myself.

I built my q6600 quadcore, with 2gig of ram, the top motherboard, and a good enough graphics card for gaming for £500.

I could have done it for a lot less, but i went for the best of everything, that was new hard drives and case as well.

If you guys want the link for where i get the components just let me know, super cheap.

[dirty_bass]

I have until now built my own.
I simply could not source parts, understandably, of this standard, for such a good price.
I have got the best of everything for well under 500 (although I did it via bidding)
So in this case, no way I`m building my own.

[p_brane]

@DB

have you recieved it yet?

is it quiet enough?

[ampassasinbirmingham]

out of interest, what specs did you get?

[dirty_bass]

Yeah, paid the extra for super quiet fans, and it`s good.

Better than my current machine anyway, and I have a small studio so fan noise can be quite noticable.

Nice roomy case too, took it all apart to check all the components to make sure they weren`t scamming me, and it`s all kosher.

[Elvio Neto]

did you format the pc to windows xp ?

if not you are loosing alot of the pc resources... i tested recently many quadcores using vista 32bits and the results are not so good

after a format to windows xp then i saw big big improvements (the only problem is xp 32bits only detects 3.7GB ram , but the performance improvements are far better)

maybe service pack 3 will solve this ram problems

[Barely Human]

maybe service pack 3 will solve this ram problems

Not happening mate. You cant have more ram than that using a 32bit os.

[yellaman]

hey Dirty B... was wondering how your gettin on wiv the new pc u got..... i need to get one myself but a Dual Core coz i want to stay wiv the 32bit crew... any feedback would be great brother!!

Tanks...

[Elvio Neto]

many people switch from XP to windows 2003 server , its 32 bits , faster than XP

uses less ram to work , faster on boot etc etc and you can use up to 32GB RAM :)

the drivers are the same of XP , recently i saw many people producing in 2003 server , and all say its best than XP

[Barely Human]

many people switch from XP to windows 2003 server , its 32 bits , faster than XP

uses less ram to work , faster on boot etc etc and you can use up to 32GB RAM :)

the drivers are the same of XP , recently i saw many people producing in 2003 server , and all say its best than XP

Firstly, XP is 32bit, and they also do a 64bit version.I doubt its any faster for production use at all. I run it on a server I have here at home. Its loaded with more features for networking and administration. Plus you cannot use 32gig of ram in the 32bit version. You can use up to 128gig of ram in XP 64. I have an XP 32bit machine here and it boots up in 14 secs, and shuts down in 5. It all deppends on how well you strip down and optimise your O/S. Personally i wouldnt reccomend 2003 for production, plus the licence for it costs a bomb.

[Elvio Neto]

Firstly, XP is 32bit, and they also do a 64bit version.I doubt its any faster for production use at all. I run it on a server I have here at home. Its loaded with more features for networking and administration. Plus you cannot use 32gig of ram in the 32bit version. You can use up to 128gig of ram in XP 64. I have an XP 32bit machine here and it boots up in 14 secs, and shuts down in 5. It all deppends on how well you strip down and optimise your O/S. Personally i wouldnt reccomend 2003 for production, plus the licence for it costs a bomb.


all you say its true and i know that , i use microsoft products sinze 1986 , and now i use linux and mac too


see this:

i have Microsoft Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition

all tweeked to act like windows XP ( 5 seconds or less to boot , and 1 or 2 to shutdow on a old P4 3200mhz + 2GB ram dualchannel) and only waste 80mb ram without antivirus installed


THIS IS FROM MICROSOFT SITE check if you not beleave:

Microsoft Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition RAM SPECS

"64 GB maximum for x86-based computers; 2 TB maximum for x64 and ia64 computers"


Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (standard version) RAM SPECS

"32 GB for x86-based PCs with the 32-bit version and 64 GB for Itanium-based PCs with the 64-bit version"


im not joking i just want to help!

if anyone want to start using windows 2003 server check this site for tips and tweeks:

http://win2k3.msfn.org

[Barely Human]

all you say its true and i know that , i use microsoft products sinze 1986 , and now i use linux and mac too


see this:

i have Microsoft Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition

all tweeked to act like windows XP ( 5 seconds or less to boot , and 1 or 2 to shutdow on a old P4 3200mhz + 2GB ram dualchannel) and only waste 80mb ram without antivirus installed


THIS IS FROM MICROSOFT SITE check if you not beleave:

Microsoft Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition RAM SPECS

"64 GB maximum for x86-based computers; 2 TB maximum for x64 and ia64 computers"


Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (standard version) RAM SPECS

"32 GB for x86-based PCs with the 32-bit version and 64 GB for Itanium-based PCs with the 64-bit version"


im not joking i just want to help!

if anyone want to start using windows 2003 server check this site for tips and tweeks:

http://win2k3.msfn.org

Try and get more than 4 gig of ram to work on your system without having multiple processors. A sinlge cpu cannot address more than 4 gig in 32bit.