Description

An elderly couple asked me to build them a reliable, quick pc for simple needs.

Log in to rate comments or to post a comment.

Comments

  • 74 months ago
  • 6 points

How much FPS did they get in BF4? :P

  • 74 months ago
  • 1 point

LOL.

  • 74 months ago
  • 0 points

Lol... Non I would expect. This PC would be a good office PC. Not so much for gaming...

  • 74 months ago
  • 5 points

Wooosh

  • 73 months ago
  • 3 points

Lol yeah, I meant it as a joke.

  • 74 months ago
  • 4 points

Well done and good choices on the parts, esp. where reliability is concerned. What were their thoughts on the Windows 8?

  • 71 months ago
  • 1 point

Windows 8 took a little bit of training but they were fairly adept at learning the new OS. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone though, and I'm almost certain that a nice linux distro would have been just as good for this situation.

  • 73 months ago
  • 1 point

How did they come about this? Did they walk up to you in the street and said, "Can you build a reliable pc, thanks?" Lol. I want to do something like this for my grandma.

  • 71 months ago
  • 1 point

They saw a computer I had helped build earlier for my parents and were like, can we get one too?

  • 71 months ago
  • 1 point

1 thing I strongly disagree is that there is no hard drive. SSD have significant shorter lifespan, and are not intended for lots of HDD writing (which happens everyday). Bucks saved when choosing a 64GB SSD for 50$ and add 15$ to total price then can get an 1TB Seagate 7200RPM hard drive (55$) for plenty of media storage and data. As long you they don't add a lot of programs on the SSD except for OS, browser, MS Office, 64GB should be fine.

  • 71 months ago
  • 1 point

The reason I didn't go with a bigger hard drive is they really don't have any media they needed to store, just the OS with a few programs. And they love the speed of the SSD. I could have probably gotten away with only a 64 GB SSD. Your absolutely correct though, SSD's definitely have a shorter lifetime..this one lasted about 3 months. RMA'd the OCZ and purchased a Samsung instead.

  • 74 months ago
  • -2 points

Not bad, but if you didn't add an SSD you could have upped the APU to a better model and used significantly higher frequency RAM. The boot would be slower, but it'd probably be faster for most applications when the PC had already been running.

  • 74 months ago
  • 6 points

Personally, I find that most elders just want something that boots up super quick and loads "The Internet Explorer" right away so they can look up whatever. That APU is just fine for whatever they want to do.

  • 74 months ago
  • -3 points

That may be true in some cases, I just find an SSD in a sub-$450 build kind of ridiculous. Since (IIRC) APUs benefit greatly from higher frequency RAM, that would've been my priority in this case. From my own experience, boot doesn't matter as much as a PC running programs consistently faster.

  • 73 months ago
  • 1 point

I agree. SSD should only really be in $750+ builds however, if the client requested it, kudos. Rams fine. Won't notice it as much as an avid builder so... Why go higher. I try to get systems with 4 ram slots though... My part guy disagrees. Why windows 8.1? Windows 7 is the accepted business OS other then OSX or Linux kernel/TCS

[comment deleted]
  • 74 months ago
  • 0 points

Yep, you would be right on that one. I guess I don't deal with APUs enough to keep distinctions like that fresh in my memory... Oh well...

[comment deleted by staff]