Is this PC worth buying?

I've been saving up money for a new desktop PC, and this one looks like it might be the best for the price (309 USD)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883241031It got good reviews on the site, and all I need it for is some web surfing, school/work, and some moderate gaming

i wouldn't get it...it's got slow RAM (DDR2), it's got an on-board graphics card, which is good for no gaming at all, and the operating system is crap >.>EDIT: i found one that may be of use for moderate gaming, and is like 100% better...http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883114085it's about $70 more though..and i dunno your price range, but if not building one, this one seems best for ya..http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883229199it's got stats for moderate gaming, fast speeds cuz of RAM/CPU which will make web surfing and school/homework easier...the only downfall i see (which is an opinion) is it has an intel processor.

The DDR2 RAM slot can go like 1066MHZ but the one that comes with this PC is probabily 667MHZ or 800MHZ.
The processor has 2 cores only, which today isn't enought for gaming.
Avoid DDR2 since you gonna buy a new one, like get a DDR3.
There's only the Onboard GPU, you can buy one later.
Post how many is thew maximum you can spend in the computer.
And, is it for gaming or just personal use?
If is just for personal use, no gaming, go for it, but if you pretend to play some games, I suggest to not go in it.

The DDR2 isn't really a big concern for me, and I have a video card to upgrade with. I plan on using it mostly for work and school stuffThe most gaming I would do is probably just games like Call of Duty Modern Warfare, or Borderlands... Both of which I can easily run on my current PC.300-350 USD is currently my maximum price range

Replying to #4

Depending on the GPU you gonna put there, you gonna need a more powerful voltage source, I mean, those that comes are the "generics", you gonna need one with reak voltages, CORSAIR provides it real good.
Which GPU you gonna put there?And if you gonna use for more work, it's ok, if you don't care much about runing games on VERY HIGH quality, then go for it.

This comps perfect for casual gaming. Unless you plan to play Mass Effect 2 on highest settings then the ZT Element with a cheap video card upgrade would be able to easily handle any game released from at least mid 09 and before.If you plan to get a vid card i would recommend a Radeon HD 3450. Im sure that their are other cards that outpreform this in that price range (The 4xx0 and 5xx0 entry models) but thats the only off market card i've used and its served me well since i bought it.Sides... no real use in getting the best thats avaliable. It'll just be outdated in a month anyway.

The GPU I intend to use for now is an Nvidia 8400GS, so the PSU included with the PC should be good enough, since I run this GPU with a 250watt. I will eventually get a new PSU and videocard though

phscarface · #3The DDR2 RAM slot can go like 1066MHZ but the one that comes with this PC is probabily 667MHZ or 800MHZ.
The processor has 2 cores only, which today isn't enought for gaming.
Avoid DDR2 since you gonna buy a new one, like get a DDR3.
There's only the Onboard GPU, you can buy one later.
Post how many is thew maximum you can spend in the computer.
And, is it for gaming or just personal use?
If is just for personal use, no gaming, go for it, but if you pretend to play some games, I suggest to not go in it.

I game just fine on a dual core. Its the speed that matters, not the number of cores.avoid onboard graphics, they rarely cut it.also you mean intend, not pretend

I would not buy this PCwhy?I use in this PC a AMD Athlon X2 255 (3.1 GHZ)
and I've got a ASUS M4A78L-M Motherboard which has a
socket of AM2+ and my CPU is AM3 (it fits)On this board I've got 2 DDR2 slots
The funny part is because I use a AM3 CPU
I can use the new DDR2 1200MHZ memory to
have the same result as DDR3So in other words DDR2 can be fast but you need the right setup:AM2+ socket supports AM3 and only then you can use DDR2 1200 MHZ
or higherThen there is a videocard you're planning to use a 8400 GS
It will play games but for games a Assassins Greed 2 and
Fifa 2010 you'll need a 9 series card or a GTX series card
to have those games run smooth.With my setup I can play Assassins greed 2, Mafia 2, Fifa 2010, Mass Effect 2,
smoothly and some of them on the highest settings.Here are my specs and
then look at the add you gave usAMD Atlon X2 255 (3.1GHZ per Core)
PNY Nvidia Geforce 9400 GT (512 MB pixelshader 3.0)
2 SATA HDD 1 with 160 GB and 1 with 250 GB
SATA DVD Re-writer 22x
2 x 1GB DDR 2 667 MHZI bought my CPU and motherboard together for only €169
The rest I still had from my old PC,With this PC I can play every game I encounter.I'm only planning to upgrade my Video card to a GTX seriesI hope this helps you clear things up and helps you decidegood luck with it.

even though I will only be doing light/casual gaming I don't really need an awesome cardBut, I do plan on buying this card eventually
http://www.compusa.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4035118&CatId=1558

I'd recommend the Radeon 3450 over the 8400gs either way. Especially the ASUS Passive Cooling version.Anyway i'd recommend one of these over the 9500. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814134089
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102843

Now I think I might go for the Radeon HD4650

Fire_Ice · #9On this board I've got 2 DDR2 slots
The funny part is because I use a AM3 CPU
I can use the new DDR2 1200MHZ memory to
have the same result as DDR3

incorrect, DDR2 and DDR3 have different timings, even if the DDR2 Mhz is higher, the DDR3 is still effectively faster.

Fire_Ice · #9AM2+ socket supports AM3 and only then you can use DDR2 1200 MHZ
or higher

not all AM2+ boards support AM3. The one I have does not, for example.

Fire_Ice · #9AMD Atlon X2 255 (3.1GHZ per Core)
PNY Nvidia Geforce 9400 GT (512 MB pixelshader 3.0)
2 SATA HDD 1 with 160 GB and 1 with 250 GB
SATA DVD Re-writer 22x
2 x 1GB DDR 2 667 MHZ

you're not using ddr2 1200, you're using 667 which is the second slowest ddr2 speed. Just because your processor may run ddr2 1200 (It can't, I have the same one and also I checked AMD, it maxes at 1066 for both ddr2 and ddr3) doesn't mean your board will.

Loonylionincorrect, DDR2 and DDR3 have different timings, even if the DDR2 MHz is higher, the DDR3 is still effectively faster.not all AM2+ boards support AM3. The one I have does not, for example.you're not using Dr2 1200, you're using 667 which is the second slowest DDR2 speed. Just because your processor may run ddr2 1200 (It can't, I have the same one and also I checked AMD, it maxes at 1066 for both ddr2 and ddr3) doesn't mean your board will.

Thanks for clearing that for me LoonyLion I didn't know
all that but since you do can you answer I question for meThe manual of my motherboards says :DDR2 1200 is only suported when using a AM3 CPU
on this motherboards socket AM2+
since the socket of my is AMD Athlon X2 255 is AM3It does not support any higher as 1066 MHZ if it is DDR2?I'm a bit confused now can you explain a bit morethanks

Dual core AM3 CPUs max out at 1066, its a limitation of the onboard memory controller. It does not matter if you are using DDR2 or DDR3, the maximum is the same. If you want to use higher than 1066 you must use a triple, quad or six core. Quoted from AMD's website:

AMDX2 - Support for unregistered DIMMs up to PC2-8500 (DDR2-1066MHz) -AND- PC3-8500 (DDR3-1066MHz)X3 and X4 - Support for unregistered DIMMs up to PC2-8500 (DDR2-1066MHz) -AND- PC3 10600 (DDR3-1333MHz)

If someone has a budget of £200/$300 it aint gonna get you much quality hardware or speed.But you can get one without an OS and get slightly better spec....

Loonylion · #15Dual core AM3 CPUs max out at 1066, its a limitation of the onboard memory controller. It does not matter if you are using DDR2 or DDR3, the maximum is the same. If you want to use higher than 1066 you must use a triple, quad or six core. Quoted from AMD's website:

Thank you loonylion for the infoI understand now.

theunderling · #16If someone has a budget of £200/$300 it aint gonna get you much quality hardware or speed.But you can get one without an OS and get slightly better spec....

So would either of these be better?
http://www.compusa.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6076512&Sku=SYX-5005
http://www.compusa.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=5651067&Sku=SYX-5003

The 2nd one looks OK,considering your budget.But you need to know how to install an operating system and hope it finds all the drivers.Then just use your old monitor and get W7 disc downloaded off of "devils-shadow".

Installing operating systems is a bit of a hobby of mine, I have every windows OS from 98 to 7 on discs, except for vista... I hate vista...But I might go with the top one, because it's cheaper (which means I'll have money to order a bada$$ video card), And I think it overall looks more visually appealing