Technology Recommended Desktop PC specs for Windows 7 (64 Bit)

[THEV1LL4N]

Okay, so as some of you may know. ive had hardware problems with my desktop pc.

i was thinking of upgrading the specs and then upgrading from Windows XP to Win7 (64 bit).

Now, i know that there have been some problems with integrated graphics cards and certain processors (RAM) not being used efficiently on 32 and 64 bit versions of the OS.

so i was wondering what specs you would recommend for the OS to make the most out of the hardware?

thank you.

 

[Bobby Sands]

i think for 64 bit Windows 7 you need a minimum of 4gb ram.

 

[Rukas]

^^ You dont need.

Right now Im about to get the following:

Intel i7
Gigabyte GA-H55M-UD2H motherboard
4gb kingston ddr3 ram

It has an onboard graphics card, I dont need anything more this is just a studio workhorse. Should purr along nicely.

 

[masta247]

You don't need more than 3gb of ram but it's worth having just to see the difference between 32bit and 64bit.

Except of that my Pentium M 1.7ghz laptop with 1gig of ram works smooth with Windows 7. However it all depends on how much you want to spend and what you want to do with it.
To fully experience Windows 7 (as if you want all of its functionality including Aero and 3d) you need any 64bit processor and any average graphics card (it would be better if it wasn't just an integrated card). Right now geforce 9600 gt is quite awesome for performance/price ratio. Just go for the 512mb gddr3 version with 256bit memory rail. The one from Gigabyte is the best from what I've experienced.
Also 1gb of ram is enough but will limit you while using any newer programs. Ram is quite cheap but you should buy the amount depending on your needs.

My gaming rig is Phenom 2 quad 940, 8gig of ddr2 ram overclocked to almost 1ghz and a decent version of radeon 4890 (Toxic from Sapphire).

However I can't see the difference in how the Windows 7 operates between that and my casual home PC which is an AMD64 7750+ Kuma, 4gig of ram and a gf 9600GT from Gigabyte (the passive cooling version as the normal Zalman one can get quite noisy).
To be honest it maybe boots slightly faster and is better at games and that's all. Everything works flawlessly and fast on both machines though.

 

[Flipmo]

I have a:
Win 7 64 bit
Dual Core AMD Athlon 5000+
2 GIG Ram
Geforce GTX 260 - 896MB

Going to be upgrading to 6 GIG Ram and throwing in Quads soon.

What I have now does the job though.

 

[THEV1LL4N]

Because I'm considering getting a HD graphics card and then a HD monitor later on.

 

[THEV1LL4N]

so in order to use windows 7 for multimedia purposes i.e. music, video, internet, conferencing, gaming and also using an array of packages such as office, spss, photoshop, movie/dvd creation etc...

what would be recommended for those, keeping in mind i would like a super fast high-def experience with a sensible price?

of course that means getting a hdmi ready monitor and graphics card.

the intel i7 chip is far too pricy.

thank you.

edit: not really a pc gamer, but i might download an nba game some time and just use it rarely for emulators.

 

[Cooper]

i think for 64 bit Windows 7 you need a minimum of 4gb ram.

Nah I've got 2. It's just that you need 64bit to address more than 4 gig

 

[Cooper]

Just get one of the quad core amds and 4 gig RAM. Win 7 will run smooth as fuck.

 

[THEV1LL4N]

i thought that intel would be better because the motherboard required for the chip would be futureproof; so in case i wanted to upgrade again i wouldn't need to upgrade the motherboard along with it.

 

[masta247]

Actually for the past 4 years AMD seems waaay more futureproof. I still work on my AM2 platform which is 4 year old and still supports newest processors while Intel entirely switched their sockets a few times during that time.

 

[Cooper]

Actually for the past 4 years AMD seems waaay more futureproof. I still work on my AM2 platform which is 4 year old and still supports newest processors while Intel entirely switched their sockets a few times during that time.

Yea....if you get a new AMD board you'll be fine.

 

[Rukas]

Dont get AMD. They really suck nowadays.

If you get an I5 750 for example (cheaper than the i7), and a motherboard to match, you'll be able to upgrade to an I7 later or whatever comes next.

 

[Flipmo]

Dont get AMD. They really suck nowadays.

If you get an I5 750 for example (cheaper than the i7), and a motherboard to match, you'll be able to upgrade to an I7 later or whatever comes next.

Blasphemy.

Then again, the processor power pendulum always swings back and forth. One day Intel comes out stronger, the next AMD. I prefer AMD cause I've never had an issue, compared to Intel rigs I've had. It doesn't help that Intel is everywhere you turn, the shit is shoved down your throat constantly.

 

[masta247]

Yeah and AMD is usually cheaper for a similar power and rocks cheaper mainboards. I agree that Intel at the moment has the faster CPU but AMD has a wider choice while some decent 64 bit processors start at a really nice price. Plus the AM3 rig seems waay more future-proof judging by experiences with AMD and Intel and their "socket-changing habit".

 

[Flipmo]

Yeah, what he said... sockets and shit, yo.

 

[Rukas]

Right now Intel has the faster chip. i7 for the win. Case closed, for now, and we're buying in the NOW.

Ill worry about the future next time I upgrade. Right now I want the best, and for me, thats i7.

 

[Flipmo]

Disrespect AMD in front of me, and I cut you boy.

*licks knife*

 

[Rukas]

AMD is for sissy girls with nail files for knives!

 

[masta247]

If you want to replace your whole rig every few months AND it has to be the best there is at that time (even if the difference is very little) then sure, go for Intel.
The fastest commercial AMD (x4 965) is almost on par with the fastest I7 (it's better at encoding, benchmarks and some games thanks to its faster clock and 1-5% slower at other things) BUT it's 50% cheaper and mainboards for it are cheaper. Also it keeps its temperature lower. So "similar performance for a way lower price".
Then it's based on AM3 socket which is compatible with Am2 (released 5 years ago) and Am2+. AMD said that their future processors will also be on AM3 which means at least 2-3 more years of compatibility.
That means you'll have to change only the CPU instead of changing the whole mainboard and ram.
For example my 5 year old computer can be top notch at the moment and I only replaced graphics card, added some more ram and replaced my CPU twice to keep it "above average" so I could run anything. I could easily install a Phenom too, I just don't need to pay that much for some more speed.
If I had Intel I'd have to replace the whole thing at least 3 times already (okay I could keep HDD and dvd) and that would cost me multiple times more for a similar performance.