Getting used PC--which is the better one?

Frisco

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Sep 24, 2002
2,475
69
Utopia
I can get either of these for around $300. Both have Windows 7--good thing. I am looking for a fast Windows desktop for high end Office work that also supports multiple displays and Aero. I don't game.

1) http://newjersey.craigslist.org/sys/4881670665.html
It Has an Amd 3.2 ghz Quad Core Processor
A Nvidia dedicated graphics card
750gb hard drive!!! Lots of space
Windows 7 64bit ultimate
4 Gigs Ram
From the screenshot it looks like it has a AMD phenom ii x4 965

2) http://newjersey.craigslist.org/sys/4881830411.html
Windows 7, 64 bit fresh install
Amd FX quad core 4100 3.60 GHz (can be over clocked)
8 GB Ram DDR3 (upgrade to 16 gb.)
Nvidia 1Gb graphics card
Gigabyte Motherboard
Lg dvd Re- writeable
320 GB hard drive

I talked them both down to around $300. Which processor is better--both have a fresh install of Win 7 Ultimate. One has a lot of memory. The other has a huge hard drive--memory is more important to me.

From what I researched it look like the AMD phenom ii x4 965 is a better CPU than the Amd FX quad core 4100 3.60 GHz?

Thanks for any input!

__________________
 

Essenar

macrumors 6502a
Oct 24, 2008
552
186
The Phenom II is oh so very slightly the better chip, and I've heard nothing but bad things about Gigabyte motherboards. I'd say overall, Option 1 is the better of the two.
I don't know where you got that information but it's either incredibly outdated or incredibly false.

I use nothing BUT Gigabyte boards in all my PC builds. They actually are the closest in conformity to Apple's very own hardware conventions and that's the reason Gigabyte Intel based boards have out of box compatibility with OSX. Combined with a three year warranty and the fact that I have personally built over 100 custom gaming machines on Gigabyte boards and 0% of them have failed, versus every ASUS board me and my friends have used has had capacitors blow, SLI slots fail, 4-pin CPU connections drop.

That being said, you should find out which graphics card each PC has.
 

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,006
11,823
I don't know where you got that information but it's either incredibly outdated or incredibly false.

I use nothing BUT Gigabyte boards in all my PC builds. They actually are the closest in conformity to Apple's very own hardware conventions and that's the reason Gigabyte Intel based boards have out of box compatibility with OSX. Combined with a three year warranty and the fact that I have personally built over 100 custom gaming machines on Gigabyte boards and 0% of them have failed, versus every ASUS board me and my friends have used has had capacitors blow, SLI slots fail, 4-pin CPU connections drop.

That being said, you should find out which graphics card each PC has.
Agreed. I've had nothing but success with every single Gigabyte board I have purchased, whether it was for an AMD or Intel processor (My last one was built as a hackintosh). If anything, I'd rank Gigabyte over ASUS, MSI, and nearly the major brands (Intel's own boards, EVGA, and nVidia).

With that said, I'd opt for #2, especially given the fact that if this is a mid or full tower, there is definitely room for growth. You can throw another drive in it; with hard drives cheap these days, you could score a 1TB or more on the cheap from Newegg, especially if they have them in their Shell Shocker deals. All that would be needed is to slot it in, plug it in, turn on the PC, and format it.

If you can find out the model of the motherboard, you could also upgrade the CPU as well; if you can find that out, you can look up the board at Gigabyte's site and see the list of CPUs it supports. You could find that on the cheap as well.

While #1 may be slightly faster, #2 gives you room for growth.

BL.
 

Renzatic

Suspended
Agreed. I've had nothing but success with every single Gigabyte board I have purchased, whether it was for an AMD or Intel processor (My last one was built as a hackintosh). If anything, I'd rank Gigabyte over ASUS, MSI, and nearly the major brands (Intel's own boards, EVGA, and nVidia).
Essenar's right. I was mistaken. It wasn't Gigabyte I was thinking of. It was MSI.

Though my two go-to brands have always been Asus and EVGA. I've never had problems out of them.
 

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,006
11,823
Essenar's right. I was mistaken. It wasn't Gigabyte I was thinking of. It was MSI.

Though my two go-to brands have always been Asus and EVGA. I've never had problems out of them.
MSI has been on the low end for me as well. I'd actually rank them as such:

Gigabyte
EVGA
Intel
nVidia
ASUS
MSI

I put Intel and nVidia's boards down that far just because of the availability of them, and how high priced they are, based on that availability. but as lng as the OP gets it and has room to grow, that makes his new PC a bit futureproofed, to a degree.

BL.
 

cube

macrumors P6
May 10, 2004
16,430
4,436
The Phenom II is a 125W 45nm AM3 CPU from 2009 with 4 FP units
The FX is a 95W 32nm AM3+ CPU from 2011 with 2 FP units and support for newer instructions

The FX supports newer memory (and the PII board could even be DDR2)
It also overclocks higher.

Both are faster or slower than the other for different things.

Get the FX. AM3+ and DDR3 makes it much better for upgrading.
With the caveat that with the PII board you might be able to upgrade to 6 FP units, and only 4 FP units (but with additional capabilities) with the FX.
 
Last edited: