Dual or Quad, DDR2 or DDR3

[jkohm]

I plan to build my first computer. I'm retired and have tons of photos and video to organize for the grand kids. I'm not interested in gaming and will install vista (home premium?). I will do a lot of video editing and rendering while surfing the web, working with excel, media player etc and eventually media center.

I'll use the Asus p5e3 deluxe MB. Either the Intel Q9450, Q9300, or E8400. Would a slower Quad be more reliable and productive than the faster dual (assuming the video software uses the multi processors). Would the extra L2 cache in the Q9450 provide noticeable improvement Over the Q9300.

How much and what kind of memory should I use. Would the premium for DDR3 provide noticeable improvement over DDR2.

Would a 10,000 rpm HD for OS be advisable. Suggestions on a graphics card and video hardware would be appreciated. I'm not interested in the latest and greatest or skimping. I want the best bang for my buck and something that will last. TIA, JMK

[Khalil]

DDR3 with current boards and processor will do nothing and the price is way too high. for video editing and rendering, the more processing power you have the better, so the quad core is what I recommend. The more cache the better the performance with such applications.
If you are not going with Gaming then you don't need a hot rod video card, but 512MB or even 1 gig memory would be good for video editing. Here is one I would highly recommend for video editing but not rendering for a great price http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814103053.
10K Hard drives are definately the way to go for music and video editing because the latency is around 2.9 ms compared to a 7200 RPM drive which is around 8.9 ms, the 10k will give you much faster write speeds.

[Lespaul20]

Originally Posted by jkohm I plan to build my first computer. I'm retired and have tons of photos and video to organize for the grand kids. I'm not interested in gaming and will install vista (home premium?). I will do a lot of video editing and rendering while surfing the web, working with excel, media player etc and eventually media center.

I'll use the Asus p5e3 deluxe MB. Either the Intel Q9450, Q9300, or E8400. Would a slower Quad be more reliable and productive than the faster dual (assuming the video software uses the multi processors). Would the extra L2 cache in the Q9450 provide noticeable improvement Over the Q9300.

I doubt you will have software that will fully take advantage of all 4 cores. There isn't a whole lot of software that uses 2. But...If you are wanting to multi-task like crazy 4 core will make the overall system faster but not necessarily individual tasks. I would suggest just a dual core since it's less expensive.

How much and what kind of memory should I use. Would the premium for DDR3 provide noticeable improvement over DDR2.

From what I know, DD3 isn't worth the premium yet.

Would a 10,000 rpm HD for OS be advisable. Suggestions on a graphics card and video hardware would be appreciated. I'm not interested in the latest and greatest or skimping. I want the best bang for my buck and something that will last. TIA, JMK

I wouldn't bother with 10K drive for what you said you are planning on doing. I think a good 7200 with at least 16MB of cache should be sufficient and 32MB should be even better.

Video card, like everything else, is depend on your budget. Tell us a budget and you more likely to get specific suggestions that is what you need.

[Khalil]

Jkohm here are the links to both a 10k HDD and a high end 7200k HDD, read the specs and you can see for yourself what will work better for you.

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/produ...90&Language=en 10K Raptor
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=298 7200 RPM with 16MB cache

Like LP suggested, if you can give us an idea of what your budget goal is we can give you better advice. Rendering is very hardware demanding, just want to make sure we give you the best advice based on how much you are looking to spend.

[jkohm]

I'm not limited by a budget, but I'm not into wasting $. Bang for the buck. Like I said I'm retired and have time to wait while an application grinds on but I have a lot of video work to do so I don't want to be sitting at a computer when I could be golfing . If spending an extra $100+ will make a noticeable improvement in speed I'll spend it. System longevity and being upgradeable is also important to me. Thanks, JMK