I already have two 24" monitors. Both are Samsung 245BW's. That is why I didn't list them. I know the Dell 24" is far better but I didn't want to spend $700 per monitor. I paid about $400 for each Samsung
I already have two 24" monitors. Both are Samsung 245BW's. That is why I didn't list them. I know the Dell 24" is far better but I didn't want to spend $700 per monitor. I paid about $400 for each Samsung
245BW.
Jon Banquer San Diego, CA
formatting link
The Dell is probably the same thing quality wise. I have a Samsung 242MP. I want a Samsung T240HD.
The Dell monitor had much better color than my Samsung does. Nicest I've seen so far. I can't justify the extra cost for what I do especially because Mastercam makes such poor use of Open GL compared to say SolidWorks.
I think thats a bit overkill.. 600+Watts should be just fine.. Just need to find out the power reqirements of the hardware your using and get what you need.
no comment..
Why spend so much for a case? you going to wear it out on a hot date?
Decent, if you wait till Q1 of next year, intel will be unleashing its mack daddy processor the i7
What all are you going to be running on this machine? if your going to be doing rendering, or using programs like Cosmos, then a quad will help.. but if your just going to be using solidworks and the like, a high end core 2 duo would be sufficient.
What operating system are you getting? If your going with Vista, get
64-bit and run 8GB of ram, more the better I always say..
Card should do just well..
If the boss would give me the go ahead.. this is what I would get..
1-Skip the DDR3 & get a mobo that supports DDR2. There is very little performance increase & there is a HUGE cost increase from DDR2 to DDR3.
2-I for one am not sold on the Quadro cards either. From my own tests running Mastercam I found little to no difference between a Quadro & a high end GeForce.
Buy the fastest dual core processor you can afford instead of whatever quad core you can get for the same money. Most applications out there won't give even 2 cores a workout. Typically the "guts" of the main application runs in a single thread, which results in 1 core near 100% and the other idling keeping the UI and system responsive. The clock speed of individual cores on a quad core will be slower (for the same money) as those on a dual core. So with a quad, the guts runs slower and the UI and system are more responsive!
We bought a quad core a little while back and were hugely dissappointed.
OTOH, if you like to multitask. Then a quad core with lots and lots of RAM is a good choice. Individual apps might not run blisteringly fast, but you can Blog, CAM and whatever, all at the same time (but only if you've got enough ram to avoid paging ti the disk).
LOL! What I have been telling you? OSX is da bomb! If only there were some more mainstream cad/cam apps for it. I currently own 4 OSX boxen. 1 "hackintosh" laptop. A Dell E1705 running leopard, a G4 mac mini, a Dual G4 PowerMac, and a core duo 17" iMac.
BTW, changing the HD out on the iMac is a *MAJOR* pita.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.