Requirements for an office computer. Choosing a computer for the office (nettop vs desktop). The optimal all-in-one for the office

Basically, an office computer is needed to solve simple tasks, for example, preparing documents in Microsoft Word or Excel, printing them, working with mail and communicating “with the outside world” via the Internet, so first we’ll start by building a budget system unit and selecting a monitor. Let me make a reservation right away that the indicated approximate prices for the selected components are indicated at the end of 2017.

First we need a central processor. The most current of them at the moment is the Intel Pentium G4560. It has two physical cores and four threads, but is one and a half times cheaper than the previous generation Intel Core i3. Power consumption is so low that a boxed cooler will suffice.

A video card is also not needed, since the one built into the processor has all the necessary characteristics for standard applications. This “pleasure” costs about 5 thousand rubles. Thus, we immediately save on two elements of the system.

Central processor Intel Pentium G4560

The “heart” of the PC must be installed in the appropriate connector on the motherboard. In this case - in LGA1151. Motherboards of the 100th and 200th series meet this requirement. In order not to update the BIOS, it is better to go with the second option. For example, on the MSI B250M PRO-VD LGA 1151 type mATX, which has two connectors for image output - DVI and VGA. This is very important, since offices may still use monitors with an analog video signal. It will cost 4000 rubles.

MSI B250M PRO-VD LGA 1151 motherboard

This board has two slots for RAM with a frequency of up to 2400 MHz. Let's take one 4 GB stick with the ability to expand to 8 GB in the future. The Patriot memory module costs 3 thousand rubles.

The optimal solution for storing data in the office can be considered a regular 2 TB HDD. Indeed, recently some projects may take up a sufficient amount of free space. About 4 thousand must be paid for a TOSHIBA E300 with a SATA III interface.

This configuration does not have a discrete video card, the central processor generates little heat, so we will choose a 350-watt power supply, for example, GIGABYTE GZ-EBN35N-C3, priced at 1000 rubles. It can be connected to any uninterruptible power supply to protect important data during a power outage. After all, it does not use PFC.

350W power supply GIGABYTE GZ-EBN35N-C3

The case for office computer elements is usually small. We chose an mATX type motherboard, so the most ordinary one, without any bells and whistles, will do, for example, LINKWORLD VC-13M33, for only 900 rubles.

Peripheral devices (mouse, keyboard, optical drive, memory card reader) are selected to your taste, since they are almost identical in functionality. It will cost a couple of thousand rubles.

To work comfortably in the office, you need a high-quality monitor. Here we pay attention to color rendition, static contrast, and the ability to tilt the screen. We will also take into account the absence of flicker and a decrease in the level of blue light, which will have a beneficial effect on vision during prolonged periods of time in front of the screen. The IIYAMA X2474HS-B1 23.6-inch monitor meets these requirements. It is convenient to connect it to the system unit using the HDMI-HDMI cable, which is already included in the kit. And the price is quite affordable - about 8,000 rubles.

Monitor IIYAMA X2474HS-B1

The final step of such an assembly is to purchase and install the Windows operating system, preferably version 10. It can be found for 7,000 rubles.

Monoblock for office

Thus, if you assemble a computer for the office yourself, it will take time and about 35 thousand rubles. But there is a shorter way - to immediately buy a monoblock that combines all the components at once (All-in-One), it will significantly reduce the occupied space and eliminate issues related to assembling the system unit.

The downside is that it is difficult to find a device that would satisfy all the requirements at an adequate price.

Let's consider the LENOVO Idea Center 510-22ISH all-in-one PC based on the Intel Pentium G4560T processor at a price of 33 thousand rubles. The processor frequency is 20% less, the hard drive capacity is 1 TB, the screen is 21 inches, there is no DVD-Rom. But there is Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, built-in speakers, keyboard and mouse, and the Windows operating system is installed.

Ready system unit

Currently, there is no need to rack your brains over the selection of components and their compatibility; manufacturers offer to buy a ready-made system unit right away, offering various assemblies at different prices. For some, this may be the best option, because in this case, unlike an all-in-one, there remains a maneuver for choosing a suitable and safe monitor, one of which we reviewed earlier.

As a budget system unit, you can offer, for example, a DELL Vostro 3668 computer with an Intel Pentium G4560 processor, 4GB DDR4 memory, a 500GB hard drive, an optical drive and Windows 10, which will cost 21,000 rubles. The only drawback of this solution is the small amount of disk space for storing information, but for most this will be enough, and this can also be solved by purchasing an additional 1 TB external hard drive, which will cost 4 thousand rubles.

System unit assembly DELL Vostro 3668

We can conclude that for the most budget PC for the office you need to shell out about 35 thousand rubles, and which assembly option to use is decided by the employees themselves.

Optimal office PC

Assembling the system unit using components

Now let's look at how to choose a PC whose operation the user would be confident that it can handle any demanding application, be it Photoshop, AutoCAD or something else that requires large resources to work.

CPUs with two physical cores are gradually becoming obsolete, so four cores are more promising, especially since office computers are purchased for a fairly long period.

Here you can offer an inexpensive 4-core AMD Ryzen 3 1200 processor, which costs about 7 thousand rubles. Cooler included. The peculiarity of this CPU is that it is unlocked for overclocking, so its frequency can be close to 4 GHz, which is not bad for this price.

The processor will be compatible with a cheap mATX motherboard ASROCK AB350M-HDV on socket AM4 for 4,500 rubles. It has all the necessary video connectors and six USB 3.1 ports.

If you are running multiple applications on your computer, and one of them is Photoshop, you may need more than 4 GB of RAM. It’s better to take two 4 GB RAM sticks for the future, for example, AMD Radeon R7 Performance Series R748G2133U1K for 5 thousand rubles. Moreover, the memory will operate in 2-channel mode, which will have a positive effect on the performance of the system as a whole.

We will leave the case, power supply, hard drive, peripheral devices and monitor the same as in the budget build. The main difference is that the AMD processor does not have a built-in graphics core, so you need to choose an external video card. For office tasks, one of the cheapest modern models is suitable - the MSI GeForce GT 1030 Aero. It will fit into any housing due to its small size. The manufacturer promises 10 years of service at maximum load. The cost of this video accelerator is about 5 thousand rubles.

A combination of an AMD processor and a discrete video card will be preferable to an Intel Core i5 with a built-in video core when working in graphics applications. Although the prices are comparable.

As a result, we get a system with average performance for 45 thousand rubles. It is quite enough for those who are not avid gamers in the office.

The optimal all-in-one for the office

A similar configuration within a monoblock will cost 57 thousand rubles. For example, the ACER Aspire Z24-880 monoblock has a 4-core Intel Core i5 7400T processor, 8 GB of RAM and a discrete NVIDIA GeForce 940MX graphics card.

Ready system unit

If we consider a finished system unit without a monitor, then an ACER Aspire TC-780 with the same parameters can be found for 41 thousand rubles. Taking into account peripheral devices and a monitor, it will be 5,000 rubles more expensive than self-assembly. But in this case, we get a smaller hard drive capacity of 1 TB and no possibility of overclocking the processor. Moreover, when choosing components, you can choose a suitable video card and RAM.

System unit ACER Aspire TC-780

Powerful office PC

Assembling the system unit using components

The difference between a high-performance computer and an optimal one for an office is the presence of a more powerful processor. In 2017, its assembly costs dropped sharply due to the emergence of new AMD models.

For example, a six-core and twelve-thread CPU AMD Ryzen 5 1600 BOX with a turbo frequency of 3.6 GHz costs 15 thousand rubles. This is comparable to the latest 6-core Intel Core i5-8400 Coffee Lake, which does not have Hyper-Threading technology. Moreover, motherboards for Intel processors are still sold within 10 thousand rubles and are mainly designed for the home segment of the market.

Thus, in order to assemble a good PC for the office yourself, you need to spend 53 thousand rubles. The only difference from a gaming system will be a powerful discrete video card and power supply.

CPU AMD Ryzen 5 1600 BOX

Monoblock for office

Ready system unit

A finished case with components based on AMD Ryzen 5 1600 - DEXP Mars E167 - with the Windows 10 operating system installed can be purchased for 45 thousand rubles. If you include the monitor and input devices, the prices become almost the same. Therefore, a choice is made between a larger hard drive capacity when selecting components or a slightly more powerful video card in the finished assembly.

System unit DEXP Mars E167

Conclusion

It is difficult to say which specific assembly will suit a particular office, since this is completely individual, but considering the configurations listed above, we can say that they will suit most offices. Let’s summarize all of the above in a summary table.

Table 1 - Assemblies of a computer system unit for the office from components

	Budget	Optima	Power
CPU			AMD Ryzen 5 1600
Motherboard	MSI B250M PRO-VD LGA 1151	ASROCK AB350M-HDV
RAM	Patriot DDR4 4Gb 2400MHz	AMD Radeon R7 Performance DDR4 4Gb x 2 2133MHz
HDD	Toshiba E300 – 2 TB
Video card	Intel HD Graphics 610
power unit	Gigabyte GZ-EBN35N-C3 – 350 W
Frame	Linkworld VC-13M33, mATX
Monitor	IIYAMA X2474HS-B1
operating system	Windows 10
Peripherals	Mouse, keyboard, optical drive, memory card reader
TOTAL (approximately in rubles):	35000	45000	53000

Table 2 - Options for a ready-made system unit for the office

	Budget	Optima	Power
System unit	DELL Vostro 3668 (Intel Pentium G4560)	ACER Aspire TC-780 (Intel Core i5 7400)	DEXP Mars E167 (AMD Ryzen 5 1600)
TOTAL (approximately in rubles):	34000	50000	54000

Table 3 - Options for monoblocks for the office

	A budget option	The best option
Monoblock	LENOVO Idea Center 510-22ISH (Intel Pentium G4560T)	ACER Aspire Z24-880 (Intel Core i5 7400T)
TOTAL (approximately in rubles):	33000	57000

There is an opinion that for an office PC, which mainly uses applications from the package of the same name from Microsoft, it does not matter what processor, how much memory and what other components will be installed. In reality, this is, of course, not the case. You can only neglect performance, even for a computer that really uses nothing but Word and an email client, to a certain extent. Otherwise, a seemingly simple spell checking operation will “unexpectedly” turn out to be quite noticeably slow, and while the mail database is being compressed, you will have to take a smoke break. And this, by the way, is by no means typical only for the so-called “nettops” (computers in which, due to some misunderstanding, or rather a fashion that arose at some point, they installed a processor that is poorly suitable even for laptops, not to mention about desktop computers). But also for full-size PCs on single-core processors 4-5 years old. Of course, you can get used to it and use all this (even nettops on Atom processors) somehow in your work. But if we are talking about a new computer, then, of course, it is worth paying attention to at least the younger representatives of modern processors for desktop PCs, which are now very inexpensive. And if the software you regularly use includes graphics, multimedia and other applications, then it probably makes sense to raise the productivity bar a little higher.

After all, even in not the most developed countries, the working time of employees (at least those who must use computers) is paid clearly higher than what can be gained from virtually saved electricity. In reality, there may be no difference: modern desktop computers in an office configuration, when working in a text editor or other similar load, consume several tens of watts, without taking into account the consumption of the monitor.

However, the specificity of choosing an office configuration, in contrast, for example, to a gaming PC assembled by an enthusiast himself, is the need to focus on universal and, as a rule, ready-made benchmarks. Creating a special set of tests that accurately simulates the work environment for each user is too labor-intensive, and the choice of choice usually needs to be made quickly. As practice shows, the most adequate office-oriented tests common today are SYSMark 2007 and PCMark Vantage. We decided to collect the results in these tests, demonstrated by configurations with different processors, video cards and memory amounts. And according to tradition, we have provided the article with an interactive “calculator”.

Configuration and software

Processors:

• AMD Sempron LE-1300 (1 core, 2.3 GHz, 512 KB L2 cache, HT1600, N/A());
• AMD Sempron X2 2100 (2 cores, 1.8 GHz, 2 x 256 KB L2 cache, HT1600, N/A(0));
• AMD Athlon X2 4850e (2 cores, 2.5 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2 cache, HT2000, N/A(0));
• AMD Athlon X2 5200B (2 cores, 2.7 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2 cache, HT2000, N/A());
• AMD Athlon X2 7750 (2 cores, 2.7 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2 cache, 2 MB L3 cache, HT3600, N/A(0));
• AMD Athlon X2 7850 (2 cores, 2.8 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2 cache, 2 MB L3 cache, HT3600, N/A(0));
• AMD Athlon II X2 250 (2 cores, 3.0 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2 cache, HT4000, N/A(0));
• AMD Phenom II X2 550 (2 cores, 3.1 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2 cache, 6 MB L3 cache, HT4000, N/A(0));
• AMD Phenom II X3 710 (3 cores, 2.6 GHz, 3 x 512 KB L2 cache, 6 MB L3 cache, HT4000, N/A(0));
• AMD Phenom II X4 805 (4 cores, 2.5 GHz, 4 x 512 KB L2 cache, 4 MB L3 cache, HT4000, N/A(0));
• AMD Phenom II X4 810 (4 cores, 2.6 GHz, 4 x 512 KB L2 cache, 4 MB L3 cache, HT4000, N/A(0));
• Intel Celeron E1400 (2 cores, 2.0 GHz, 512 KB L2 cache, FSB800, N/A());
• Intel Pentium E5300 (2 cores, 2.6 GHz, 2 MB L2 cache, FSB800, N/A());
• Intel Pentium E6300 (2 cores, 2.8 GHz, 2 MB L2 cache, FSB800, $11() );
• Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 (2 cores, 2.8 GHz, 3 MB L2 cache, FSB1066, $110() );
• Intel Core 2 Duo E7600 (2 cores, 3.06 GHz, 3 MB L2 cache, FSB1066, N/A(0));
• Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 (4 cores, 2.66 GHz, 2 x 2 MB L2 cache, FSB1066, N/A()).

System boards:

• ASRock A780LM (AMD 760G);
• FOXCONN A7VA rev 1.0 (AMD 780V);
• Gigabyte MA770-UD3 (AMD 770);
• Gigabyte GA-MA790X-DS4 (AMD 790X);
• Intel DG43NB (Intel G43);
• ASUS P5Q-VM (Intel G45);
• MSI P45 NEO1 (Intel P45).

Video cards:

• ATI Radeon HD3450;
• ATI Radeon HD4350;
• ATI Radeon HD4650.

Other components:

• RAM: 2 x 1 GB DDR2-1066 AENEON, 2 x 512 MB DDR2-800 Kingston;
• hard drive: 250 GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 SATA, 7200 rpm.

Software:

• OS Windows Vista Ultimate (32 bit), ATI Catalyst 9.5 drivers;
• PCMark Vantage (standard test with 3 repetitions);
• SYSMark 2007 Preview (3 runs with a calibration run, the result of which is not taken into account).

Screen resolution: 1280x1024, 32 bit, 60 Hz.

Testing

SYSMark 2007

The SYSMark 2007 test package includes applications quite common in office practice: Microsoft Office components, Adobe graphics tools, video processing and 3D modeling programs. The complete list is as follows:

• Adobe After Effects 7
• Adobe Illustrator CS2
• Adobe Photoshop CS2
• AutoDesk 3ds Max 8
• Macromedia Flash 8
• Microsoft Excel 2003
• Microsoft Outlook 2003
• Microsoft PowerPoint 2003
• Microsoft Word 2003
• Microsoft Project 2003
• Microsoft Windows Media Encoder 9
• Sony Vegas 7
• SketchUp 5
• WinZip® 10.0

Looking at this list, we can assume minimal dependence on the installed video card; what will be important, first of all, is the processor’s own performance. The result will also be affected by the amount and performance of memory (in our tests we used 2 x 1 GB DDR2-1066 AENEON for all processors, with the exception of Sempron and Celeron, which were provided with a set of 2 x 512 MB DDR2-800 Kingston to better suit the especially budget segment ). Finally, another component to pay attention to is the hard drive, the performance of which also contributes to the final score (and, accordingly, to correctly compare different configurations, it is necessary to use the same drives).

Noteworthy is the fact that the test package does not contain the latest software versions to date, so a certain conservatism is likely in relation to multi-core processors. Most likely, the presence of additional cores will slightly increase the final score, while a processor with fewer cores running at a higher frequency may be in an advantageous situation.

This table clearly demonstrates the absence of any influence of the installed video card on the test results. Both the final score and the results in individual subtests are practically the same when using both the AMD 780V core integrated into the chipset and two video cards based on Radeon HD3450 and HD4350 GPUs.

The balance of power in the row of processors illustrates the theory well: indeed, if the only single-core processor (Sempron LE-1300) in this selection is clearly lagging behind, then numerous dual-core processors are inferior to processors with O a larger number of cores only in tests related to video processing. However, given that newer versions of applications make greater use of additional cores, an interesting option is the triple-core Phenom II X3 710, which is relatively inexpensive and has a balanced result, on average, in subtests, as well as headroom for the future.

The greatest competition is observed in the range of 135-145 points - this is precisely the level of performance that the dual-core Athlon X2 7000 series and Pentium E have. The new Athlon II X2 250 also looks confident in this class. Apparently, this segment accounts for the maximum performance in office software for your own money.

Finally, powerful dual-core processors (Phenom II X2 550 and Core 2 Duo E7600) score maximum points, performing on equal terms and even surpassing the results of quad-core processors from the Phenom II X4 800-series family and Core 2 Quad Q8400 in a number of subtests. However, if the X4 810 was not so much inferior to the E7600, then the result of the Q8400 looks like a failure. After all, this processor is in a higher category in terms of positioning and price (in particular, from the Phenom II family, the 920/940 models are more likely to correspond to it). But it is difficult to say how adequately the performance of processors of this level can be assessed using a set of applications from SYSMark 2007. Rather, it should be recognized that quad-core processors are not a justified choice for the average office PC, which (like the SYSMark 2007 package) usually uses not the most new versions of applications.

PCMark Vantage

Unlike the previous test, PCMark is Futuremark's own development, and although it is stated that the tests are based on program code fragments typical of real applications, this test still does not pretend to be transparent in the final assessment. However, it is also very popular and can be a good help when comparing different configurations when time is short. In addition, the test is completely focused on Windows Vista and uses multithreading much more actively, as a result of which it takes advantage of the additional cores of multi-core processors. The test also puts a higher load on the graphics subsystem, so it is very indicative to compare the results of configurations with different video cards. The test also includes some good tools for comparing the performance of hard drives.

Of course, there is no linear dependence of the final score on the number of cores in processors, because other factors also influence the result, and not all tests are multi-threaded. But in front are, indeed, quad-core processors, followed by the only three-core processor in our testing, which, however, only slightly overtook the undisputed leader among dual-core processors: the Phenom II X2 550. In turn, the result of the Core 2 Duo E7600, which could, if not catch up with a competitor, then at least fill the gap; in this test it consistently turned out to be lower than that of the E7400. This, of course, is difficult to justify with any rational arguments, because, according to formal criteria, this processor is more powerful. But since it was released quite recently, most likely the problem is in the BIOS (but the problem is quite global - we tried several boards).

The dependence on the video card in this test is observed, because it even contains test fragments from 3DMark - a well-known package for testing based on 3D gaming graphics, however, in general, the test is more focused on assessing the performance of the processor, memory and hard drive. As a result, the configuration with a more powerful processor almost always scored higher, even when using a video card of a lower class.

To make it easier to compare configurations, we suggest using our interactive “calculator”:

conclusions

General recommendations for choosing a configuration for an office PC can be given only with reservations for specific circumstances: in some cases you have to proceed from the budget and the required number of workstations, and in others the basic level of performance is important. If we proceed from the minimum requirements for sufficient response speed of the operating system and a minimum set of office software (text editor with spell check, email program, Internet browser and the necessary security tools (antivirus/antispyware, firewall), then as a processor with a task quite even the representatives of the top of the list can cope: dual-core Sempron and Celeron. And processors that score more than 100 points in SYSMark will be subjectively perceived as fast. In fact, a further increase in system response speed, if the user understands by this the time of loading programs, moving through folders with files and disk search is more related to the performance of the hard drive than the processor. If the user works with graphic data, documents of the order of several dozen Word pages, archived data, configurations that score 135-145 points look optimal. Finally, for those who have When dealing with three-dimensional modeling (even simple ones, such as the manager of a furniture showroom) or video editing, you need to take care of a processor that receives 145 points or more, and a 3-4 core model would be a more adequate choice.

As for the remaining components, even an entry-level computer requires 1 GB of RAM. But when working under Windows Vista, 2 GB should be taken as a minimum, which is also the “optimum” for almost any office PC. With the exception of workstations engaged in professional 3D rendering or CAD modeling (which are not usually included in this category, although, in general, they are also classified as “office” by their location). An obvious way to save money is a video card, which there is simply no particular need to install; just choose a motherboard with integrated video. Moreover, in the case of chipsets such as AMD 780V/780G, the user also receives good basic functionality in tasks that require hardware calculation of 3D graphics.

Finally, if you still purchase a discrete video card, and the board, accordingly, is selected without its own video, then there is no reason to choose a board on an expensive chipset with several graphics ports, such as, for example, boards based on the AMD 790FX. The older chipset, the motherboards on which it makes sense to consider when equipping any office computer, even if a powerful three- or four-core model is installed as a processor, is AMD 770 for the AMD platform, and P45 for Intel. This may seem obvious, but for some reason you can often come across configurations that are planned to be tested in SYSMark/PCMark and aimed at office use, but which use motherboards on older chipsets. It is clear that with a fixed budget for a computer, in this case there will be less money left for the processor, and such a computer will show low results in tests and will indeed turn out to be weaker and inferior to a computer in which the emphasis is on the most powerful processor, and the board is inexpensive. The actual scope of application of chipsets such as the 790FX or Intel X48 is limited to gaming computers and specific professional applications that can use multiple video cards or other high-speed peripherals installed in PCI Express x16 slots.

We present to your attention second part research on the topic “Office PC configuration”.

When it comes to choosing a computer for office purposes, everything is not as simple as it seems at first glance. Very often you can come across the opinion that “for office plankton, a laptop on some Celeron or Pentium is enough and that’s it.”

Well, in principle, if the tasks of a particular “plankton” include only answering calls, smiling sweetly at visitors and periodically communicating with them - no question, a 15-inch laptop with a Celeron and a minimum of RAM (usually 2 GB) will be for eyes for spending time on Facebook/VK and periodically simply entering text into simple documents and printing them out. Any laptop with an Intel Celeron N3060 or Intel Celeron 2957U supplemented with 2 GB of RAM for $250 will do just fine.

But everything becomes much more interesting if you need a computer for people who work in the financial/economic/legal/accounting departments of an enterprise.

For some reason, a specialist in the information technology department had the erroneous opinion that this category, as a rule, needs the most simple laptop or desktop computer, which will last for a long time. Nope. Will not be enough.

Let me give you an example: right now the author is typing this text on an ASUS X551MA laptop - this is a fairly budget machine, with an Intel Celeron N2830 (the same one that is renamed Atom with Bay Trail architecture) and 4 GB of RAM on board. The OS used is Windows 10 (Windows 8 came out of the box, but was updated for free to ten with subsequent complete reset to factory settings), with additional software: Microsoft Office 2016, CCleaner, Opera, League of Law (boxed Standalone version) and sound improver from ASUS, which itself arrives with system updates.

There are 8 tabs open in the browser, one medium-complexity document is open in Excel and an RDP connection is running - in this mode, the system resource monitor shows the CPU load (during the period of inactivity and typing) at 20-30%, and RAM at 60-70 %. Those. the work is quite comfortable until you have to launch the League of Law package - when working with it, you feel like throwing the laptop out the window, because the brakes and stutters apply to the entire system.

And at the same time, it also saves that all the main work happens on the server (via RDP) - there is mail, and 1C, and work with documents (including shoveling heavy scans into .pdf into a hundred or two pages). The RDP window is displayed on a connected old Dell E197FPb monitor. If there had not been this remote connection, the work would have turned into hell with switching between windows lasting 10-20 seconds - one day the server “got down” and I had to work in this mode for three days. I don’t think it’s worth saying how productive these three days were. Therefore, more and more often people are thinking about replacing the “workhorse” with something more powerful, because in two years, an Intel Celeron N2830 with 4 GB of RAM will no longer be enough for the Internet (there are already such heavy sites that are drawn in constant jerks and on which, unfortunately, due to the main work, the author has to sit).

It is for these reasons that we will consider assembling a desktop computer, and not choosing a laptop for the office - this would be too long and ambiguous a topic. And also, for these same reasons, we will consider two possible options for assembly, based on whether the company uses RDP or not (and in the realities of the CIS countries, 99% of accounting departments work with RDP). I don’t think it’s worth explaining that to constantly work with RDP, you don’t need a super-powerful computer - in general, thin clients have long been invented for similar purposes, but we will still be assembling a stationary PC with an eye to further modernization and the ability to work in a mode untethered from the server. And that is why the configuration “Without RDP” will be compiled with an eye to the maximum possible further upgrade as the need to increase computing power, and the configuration “With RDP” will also provide for the possibility of an upgrade, but for the purpose of further transferring such a computer to the reception, secretaries or managers “on the phone”, which usually require only one or two active windows on the screen. At the same time, we will specifically discard the issue of choosing a monitor, keyboard and mouse.

We set the assembly budget at $250 for both configurations - this is the average cost of a 15-inch laptop based on budget Intel Celeron CPUs supplemented by 4 GB of RAM (the same workhorses that are actively purchased for working with text and the Internet). The calculation, as already mentioned, does not include the cost of the monitor, keyboard and mouse - this is the same overpayment that will ensure the functionality of our assembled configuration over the next 8-10 years. No matter what anyone says, but as a rule, this is how long a stationary PC lives in offices, turning by the end of its life into a Frankinstein monster, supplemented by RAM strips and hard drives from failed counterparts, or even having replaced the case and power supply, which took a long time live (and, by a lucky chance, didn’t burn anything).

So, we’ve sorted out the introductions, let’s get down to business. We analyzed the offers presented in the online catalogs hotline.ua and ek.ua - the sample turns out to be representative for Ukraine, but given the not particularly large dispersion in prices for components in neighboring CIS countries (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, etc.), we can safely say that the price list below is quite relevant for their residents.

Office PC build (March 2017)
CPU	Without RDP	Intel Pentium G4560	$65,00
	With RDP	AMD Sempron 3850	$35,00
Motherboard	Without RDP	Based on Intel H110 (examples): Biostar H110MHV3 ASRock H110M-DGS MSI H110M Pro-D	$50,00
	With RDP	For Socket AM1 (examples): ASRock AM1B-ITX MSI AM1I ASUS AM1I-A	$35,00
RAM	Without RDP	1 × 8 GB DDR4-2400	$55,00
	With RDP	1 × 4 GB DDR3-1600	$30,00
Storage device	HDD	1 TB, 7200 rpm, SATA 3.0	$50,00
Frame	Any inexpensive one without power supply		$20,00
power unit	DeepCool DE380 250W		$20,00
Total (without RDP):			$260,00
Total (with RDP):			$190,00

Processor "No RDP":

For a “No RDP” computer, you need maximum performance for little money on a platform that can be later retrained for other needs. Here, Intel is doing well in the market with its new Celeron and Pentium based on the Kaby Lake architecture, and especially the best-selling Pentium G4560 - the company's first processor in many years with Hyper Threading support in the office and entry-level PC segment. But the truth is that the price of the latter is very expensive for our budget - $65 is the minimum that we could find and it won’t be cheaper, because... Intel's own recommended price tag is set at $64.

From the AMD camp, choosing a worthwhile APU with sufficient processor unit performance, and at the same time keeping within the budget, turned out to be problematic. Yes, AMD in this segment offers good solutions in terms of integrated graphics, but there are obvious problems with processor power. To be fair, let's say that the A6-7400K and Athlon 5370 fit into the budget normally - the first does not really fit into our concept due to 2 cores, i.e. one module (accordingly, we get 2 ALU blocks at the output with 1 FPU block - more details), and the second due to low frequencies, albeit with 4 cores (4 ALU blocks with 4 FPU blocks, because it is based on the microarchitecture Jaguar, which does not support the cluster multi-threading (CMT) mechanism, which means that the computational units are not shared among the cores, as in ).

Therefore, in the “Without RDP” category, it was decided to choose the Intel Pentium G4560, as the most optimal option in terms of performance level and capabilities of the LGA 1151 platform - these two indicators are directly proportional to the longevity of our computer.

Processor for configuration “With RDP”:

For a computer “With RDP” you also need maximum performance for little money to increase the lifespan of the finished computer without much pursuit of radical retraining of hardware. And Intel is doing well in this segment with its new Celeron based on the Kaby Lake architecture - at the moment the choice lies between the Celeron G3950, Celeron G3930 and Celeron G3930T. The first is the “top” in this segment, offering 2 cores with 2 threads (alas, Hyper Threading is not supported) at a frequency of 3.0 GHz for $55. The next Celeron G3930 offers everything the same, but a slightly lower (100MHz) frequency - 2.9 GHz, but is already $10 cheaper - for $45. The younger Celeron G3930T is a more economical version of its namesake without the “T” prefix. Reduced frequencies, TDP at 35 W, but the price remains unchanged - $45. Of the three listed, the most interesting is the older Celeron G3950, but the price tag of $55 (only $10 less than the Pentium G4560 used in the “No RDP” configuration) and the minimum cost of motherboards for LGA 1151 makes us think about alternative options that allow us to squeeze the most out of our budget .

And there is such an alternative in the Red camp. AMD offers a good, highly integrated AM1 platform - the central processor (essentially a full-fledged SoC) includes all the necessary blocks for the operation of all equipment, so the motherboard acts only as a carrier of interface connectors, a network chip and an audio codec, as well as a carrier of the power circuit. Therefore, AM1 motherboards have the most attractive price tag. Separately, it is worth noting that all processors for AM1 support AVX instructions, which all processors from Intel Celeron and Pentium lines lack. At the same time, quad-core models for socket AM1 in conjunction with a motherboard are completely within our budget.

Only five processors are offered for AM1: Sempron 2650, Sempron 3850, Athlon 5150, Athlon 5350, Athlon 5370. The first one is not interesting to us due to its extremely low performance, and the Athlon 5350 model is becoming less common on sale, because it was replaced by the Athlon 5370. The latter is a very interesting and top-end solution for this platform, with a price difference of $4-$5 compared to the Athlon 5150, which offers 25% lower clock speeds. But we will discard this too and make a choice in favor of the Sempron 3850 for $35 - with a cost gap of 50% compared to the top Athlon 5370, the selected processor offers a more than twofold drop in frequencies, but carries all the same functionality as and his older brother. Moreover, the performance of the Sempron 3850 is sufficient for our target build “With RDP” (especially in comparison with the notebook Celerons discussed at the very beginning of the article), which means we have achieved the goal of saving as much as possible on this component while maintaining a sufficient level of performance.

Motherboard for "No RDP" configuration:

For the Intel LGA 1151 platform, the choice of motherboards is extremely large - both due to their prevalence and due to the different chipset options that dictate a certain set of functionality. But we will focus on models built on the younger set of system logic, namely Intel H110. Intel H110 motherboards support both Skylake and Kaby Lake processors. But it is necessary to take into account that support for the latter can only be implemented in the latest revisions of motherboards or with the help of a BIOS update - the one that comes out of the box is guaranteed to run the CPU on Skylake, but may not run Kaby Lake, so you should immediately check when purchasing about the possibility of updating the firmware directly in the store or at the service center without additional payment.

As examples, we chose three models:

• Biostar H110MHV3
• ASRock H110M-DGS
• MSI H110M Pro-D

These are fairly budget solutions, but they will be quite sufficient for the purposes we face. All three boards are made in the Micro ATX form factor and offer approximately the same functionality, but to be fair, we will go over the main differences between the models.

Biostar H110MHV3 It differs from the ASRock offer only in the presence of D-Sub and HDMI video outputs (ASRock only has DVI-D), which will be useful for connecting older monitors. Also on the rear panel there are only two USB 3.0 and USB 2.0 ports.

ASRock H110M-DGS offers two more USB 2.0 ports (four versus two for the solution from Biostar), an additional 4-pin connector for powering the CPU (in our case, not a critical difference at all) and VRM cooling in the form of a simple radiator.

MSI H110M Pro-D the most sophisticated in our list and offers the ability to connect an additional COM port (connector on the board), has the same set of USB 3.0 and USB 2.0 connectors as the solution from ASRock, but the USB 3.0 ports are Gen 2 (USB 3.1). The set of video outputs is similar to the ASRock solution - only DVI-D.

The three models offered are only guidelines for selection, so you should pay attention to the characteristics suitable for your specific needs and consider options from other manufacturers. It is especially worth paying attention to the set of video outputs, because... Assembling a computer and realizing that it cannot be connected to your monitor is quite unpleasant. Nevertheless, all three options involve a further upgrade of the system up to the top Core i7, but without the “K” prefix, incl. In this regard, the configuration of the platform turned out to be successful.

Motherboard for configuration “With RDP”:

On the AM1 platform, you don’t have to go to extremes when choosing a motherboard, because... Such boards are only a “trim” for the SoC, differing mainly only in the color of the PCB and the set of video outputs. The standard form factor for this platform is Mini ITX, which allows you to assemble a very compact box and compact system unit. We chose three models (in the standard Mini ITX form factor for this platform):

• ASRock AM1B-ITX
• MSI AM1I
• ASUS AM1I-A

All three candidates offer approximately the same capabilities - for example, a choice of one D-Sub, DVI-D, HDMI (1.4) connector, only solid-state capacitors are used, two connectors for RAM, three audio connectors and one LAN GbE. But let's go over the key differences.

ASRock AM1B-ITX stands out for the presence of two additional SATA 3.0 ports (additional ASMedia ASM1061 controller), three fan connectors (competitors have two), a slightly more budget Realtek ALC662 (5.1) audio codec and two additional USB 3.1 Gen 1 (USB 3.0) ports on the board (for connecting external connectors) implemented using additional controller ASMedia ASM1042A. There is also an external LPT port for connecting legacy peripherals. The PCI Express slot is designed in full size (as for video cards - 16x), but the speed is limited to four lines.

MSI AM1I offers only two SATA 3.0 connectors, only two fan connectors, a slightly higher quality Realtek ALC887 (7.1) audio codec than ASRock, and also has the ability to connect an additional COM port (connector on the board), there is a connector for a TPM module, and also There is a Mini-PCIe slot that can be used to connect a WiFi adapter. The PCI Express slot, similar to the solution from ASRock, is made in a full-sized format (as for video cards - 16x), but the speed is also limited to four lines.

ASUS AM1I-A In terms of modern connectors, it turned out to be the poorest of the entire trio, but it also stands out for its Realtek ALC887-VD (7.1) audio codec, which is slightly higher quality than ASRock’s, with two USB 3.0 ports and four USB 2.0 ports on the rear panel (competitors have two of them) , and it is also possible to connect an additional COM port (a connector on the board in addition to the external COM port on the rear panel) and an additional LPT port.

These three models are only guidelines, so you yourself have the right to choose options from other manufacturers that are more suitable for your specific needs.

RAM for “No RDP” configuration:

The decision about the amount and characteristics of RAM is simple. According to the characteristics - we look at the processor specifications, look for the maximum supported frequency and take memory with that frequency. For Intel Pentium G4560 this is DDR4-2400. Why not take the cheaper DDR4-2133? It's simple: we already don't have the most productive processor (even if we're assembling it for the office, we still need to squeeze all the juice out of the available hardware), plus the price difference between DDR4-2400 and DDR4-2133 is not that significant (on average around $2 -$4 on entry-level sticks of the volume we need), but the theoretical possibility in the future, in a few years, to look for a pair for DDR4-2133 is depressing (from personal experience, finding both used and new memory sticks of a dying standard is much more It’s easier if the bar you’re looking for has high frequencies).

But on the issue of determining the volume, I propose to return to the beginning of this article and look at the memory load on a system with 4 GB when working exclusively with Standalone applications. I think I won’t be mistaken if we install one 8 GB stick for $55 and forget about this issue for 6-7 years. If you want to save money - ok, you can stop at 4 GB, cross out $20 from the final calculation and return to the same issue after just a couple of years - with the current increase in software's appetite for RAM and overloaded sites, in 2-4 years the browser with 10-15 tabs (office workers usually keep this amount open) and a couple of open specialized or office applications will barely fit into 4 GB.

RAM for configuration “With RDP”:

Here everything is even simpler - again we return to the beginning of the article, we see that 4 GB is still enough and, due to the transfer of work from special. Software for a remote server will be sufficient for the next 3-5 years for now. Let's stop at this volume.

In terms of characteristics, look similarly at the technical specifications of the AMD Sempron 3850. A 4 GB DDR3-1600 or DDR3L-1600 memory stick costs about $30. We’ll take anything within this monetary limit.

Storage device:

The recommendations for choosing a drive for both configurations are the same - we take any time-tested one for 1 TB. The choice on the market is large and you can rely on user reviews. There is no point in taking a smaller volume, because... for the “Without RDP” system, a volume of less than 500 GB will fill up very quickly (for the author, in two years, only the size of the mailbox has grown from zero to 183 GB - and these are just letters with text documents and scans of these same documents in signed form), and the difference is the price between 1 TB and 500 GB falls within the limit of about $10. Although I don’t reject the idea of ​​saving on this component, especially in the “With RDP” configuration option, and putting them into the same mouse and keyboard.

Case and power supply:

I have a feeling that these two points will become the most controversial in the assembled configurations, because it is proposed to abandon the case with a built-in noname power supply, and take a noname case without it, but purchase an inexpensive power supply from a mid-range manufacturer - something like DeepCool DE380 250W, which, as it were, it seems more reliable (unlike the poop and sticks in the nameless blocks of nameless buildings).

If you have doubts about such a need, then just ask the bearded administrator to count how many times in his memory a cheap unit carried away good computers into oblivion and how much time and money was lost because of this - do you need such happiness? So we think not.

Conclusions:

These are the ambiguous office computer builds of the month - March 2017.

In assembling an office PC used exclusively as a standalone, we were $10 out of budget - this can be made up by reasonable savings on the hard drive or by abandoning a separately purchased power supply. But we don’t like either the first or the second option, incl. If you have the opportunity to shell out that $10, then it’s better to do just that. Particularly successful for this platform is the fact that in the future this assembly will have room for development - the maximum memory size is limited to 32 GB, and processors are supported up to and including Core i7 of the sixth and seventh generations, incl. if something happens, there will be something to replace/increase/increase.

Assembling an office PC, which will often be used as a connection point for RDP sessions, turned out to be extremely budget-friendly - we spent $190, which can be reduced to $180 using the same methods as indicated in the previous paragraph. Yes, this is not even the level of performance that can be expected from the “No RDP” build, but it will be quite enough for us. However, what else could you expect from a platform that is reaching its end? But, nevertheless, for the difference of $60-$70, you can try (not without difficulty, of course, but it is possible) to find even a good monitor for work.

That's all. In other issues we will look at configurations for completely different purposes.

I began to delve more and more into topics related to gaming hardware and completely forgot about ordinary office computers. But recently I received an order to assemble a new office PC. There were no requirements for the car; the budget was allocated in the region of 12-13 thousand rubles. Looking ahead a little, I will say that I just met this amount. Before I begin my story, I want to note that assembling an office computer does not mean buying the cheapest components so that each of them acts as a plug, as many may think. You can assemble an office PC in different ways, and in such an ultra-budget segment there is also plenty to choose from, and I will now demonstrate it to you.

To avoid numerous questions “why” and “why”, I will immediately say which component I chose, and a little lower I will tell you why this particular piece of hardware was honored to be included in today’s assembly.

CPU

By tradition, we start with the processor. Without hesitation, I immediately remembered the old man well known to all of you - the Celeron G3900. Sturdy dual-core processor born in 2015 with a built-in video core Intel HD Graphics 510 and supporting modern DDR4 memory type. In my recent article, I described in detail why my gaze fell on this strong man. In addition, this stone is directly related to office solutions. It is important to note that the G3900 is the cheapest processor from Intel in the ultra-budget segment,

but on the AMD side there are a huge number of stones.

They say that one in the field is not a warrior? Well, let's check it out. All stones from red have outdated types of sockets: AM1, FM2. Celeron has a relatively modern 1151. Why relatively? Not long ago, Intel announced the next line of Coffee Lake processors, which will be released on August 21 this year. It’s not hard to guess that they will be released on a new socket, but since 1151 is now the most popular, it will remain afloat for a very long time. In general, the possibility of an upgrade is a plus for the stone I chose. The next plus is support for the modern type of DDR4 memory; all the red stones are only friendly with DDR3, since most appeared back in 2012. Our old man delighted us with his appearance in 2015. You all know very well how different DDR3 and DDR4 are in terms of performance. In general, another coin for Celeron’s treasury. Next is heat dissipation. 51 W for the one I selected, versus 65 W for AMD. The only exception is Semprons with 25 W, but the choice of motherboards on the AM1 socket is very depressing.

Yes, the difference in heat release is not that big, but as they say: a trifle, but nice. The more powerful integrated graphics core also played a role in the final choice. The Reds lost here too. Well, the biggest plus, which looks like the last stake in the lid of the red coffin, is support for video playback in 4K format. Work is work, but watching movies and videos in high definition is very pleasant. In general, all of the above advantages, in my opinion, are worth the overpayment of 500-1000 rubles, which in our time is not that much money. Of course, you may not agree with me, but I think I managed to convince you. The most attentive may have noticed that the top of the photo shows the G3930 processor, and not the G3900 we were talking about. Yes it is. The thing is that the stone we needed was not available and we had to take its modification, which cost 50 rubles more. The left one is the Kaby Lake family, the right one is the SkyLake family. They differ from each other only in the base frequency and GPU model. In general, the difference is minimal, take the one that will be available.

CPU cooler

Completes the chapter on the processor. Absolutely any turntable can cope with such low heat dissipation, so it makes sense to buy a boxed version of the processor rather than an OEM one. This way you can save a little, but the result will not change. Unfortunately, the store didn’t have boxed versions either, and we had to buy a cooler separately. We bought one of the cheapest coolers for obvious reasons. Deepcool Theta 9.

There’s not much to say about the cooler, I’ll just say that I chose a very quiet model (22.5 dB), time-tested, which I’ve installed more than once, and there were no complaints. I don’t think it’s right to spend more than 500 rubles on a cooler within such a budget, but don’t buy the cheapest model either.

45W of heat dissipation you understand is not comme il faut. But the boxed version of the processor, which comes with a cooler, is the best choice, as I already said. The difference in price is ridiculous - 150 rubles.

Motherboard

Next in line is . I have already said that I am not a supporter of saving on motherboards, but this only applies to those cases when you are assembling a gaming machine for yourself, and your car will be under a heavy load for the entire system for the Nth amount of time and will work with heavy applications , get very hot, etc. and so on. In office tasks, the motherboard, as a command center, only requires an accurate distribution of responsibilities and complete data transfer from one component to another. And absolutely any mother, even the cheapest one, can cope with such tasks. Another thing is quality and preferences when choosing a manufacturer. I, as the owner of a board from Asrock, know that they almost always install high-quality power circuits and massive heatsinks on their products, which is why I turned my head in their direction. Asrock H110M-DGS. This motherboard is built on the modern H110 chipset.

There was no question of any additional USB connectors, a large number of slots for RAM, or several PCI-E slots.

This is the budget segment, baby, and they save on everything here. The form factor is, of course, Micro-ATX because they are cheaper than their larger counterparts. When assembling an office PC, an aesthetic, like a higher education diploma, may appear, but no one cares about it.

Important Note! MotherboardAsrock H110M-DGS has a connector for connecting a monitorDVI-D Dual Link.

If you have an old monitor, then it probably does not have this connector and you will need to look for an adapter

DVI-D Dual Link --> VGA (D-Sub) (unfortunately not sold everywhere). You can pay attention to other motherboards on the H110 chipset, for example - MSI H110M PRO-VD (3000 rubles) or ASUS H110M-K for 3200 rubles, they have a VGA connector.

RAM

Since we have only two slots for , and 4 gigabytes nowadays is the bare minimum for comfortable work, even for an office, it’s easy to guess that I took one 4GB stick. Almost all RAM on the market has a 10-year warranty. This is due to the fact that very rarely something happens to it, and it fails. Therefore, we take the cheapest one and don’t worry.

HDD

We supplied the Toshiba P300, which has been on the market for a very long time, has a lot of positive reviews and is worth it to many of my clients.

It has a spindle speed of 7200 rpm, a 64 MB cache memory, a data transfer rate of 190 MB/s and during operation creates a noise level of 26 dB. Excellent performance, in my opinion. By the way, the cooler is quieter than the hard drive. Heh. Regarding the volume, take it naturally according to your requirements. 500GB was enough for our client, although, in my opinion, it was possible to overpay 250 rubles per terabyte, but, as they say, the master is the master.

power unit

I had to choose a non-certified one, because the customer did not want to go beyond the 12-13 thousand line. I again had to rely on experience, which told me that the VX series from the AeroCool company turned out to be very successful and is wildly popular with many of my friends. We settled on AeroCool VX 400.

And although our system does not consume more than 200W, I am a supporter of a small power reserve in power supplies. In addition, 350W was not in the store. You can safely save another 450 rubles.

In general, regardless of the purpose of your PC, I recommend AeroCool KCAS 400W as the minimum purchase. Since it is certified 80+ Bronze, and I myself own the 600W version, and am a very satisfied owner. The blocks are quiet, the materials are of high quality and they deliver the stated power. Therefore, if you have the opportunity to pay an additional thousand rubles, then it is better to do so, since, I am sure, this power supply will migrate to more than one of your builds in the future.

Having a good desktop computer is simply undeniable these days. It is necessary in almost all areas of activity and helps not only in work, but also in relaxation. You can do almost anything you want with it. However, each type of activity will require certain advantages provided by the components of the device itself. That is why, before purchasing a computer, it is important to think about what purposes it is needed, what the minimum technical indicators should be that allow it to carry out primary tasks, what the cost of all this can turn into, and many other aspects. We wrote about all this in this article, which is designed to make it easier for some users to choose the best option.

Price policy

Before moving on to a direct analysis of the important parameters when buying a computer, it is worth understanding the issue of cost and what affects it. As in most cases with a different range of devices on the technology market, computers can also be figuratively divided into three categories: budget, mid-range and top class. Of course, such a distribution cannot be clear, as, for example, with smartphones, and all because PC components can not only be easily interchanged, but also initially have varying degrees of cost and quality, despite the overall price of the device.

Also, on many online shopping sites you can find the following classification:

There is also another, no less important category of computers, which many call by their own name, and it is mainly intended for advanced and complex graphic work. Basically, such computers are used by people whose professions involve graphic design, be it 3D modeling or working with animation, video editing and other processes that load both the video card and the processor. It is for such purposes that much more powerful components are installed there, most often for faster processing of operations, since, for example, in the gameplay there will be an increase from such hardware, it may not be so colossal. And such workstations can cost the same as gaming ones, or even an order of magnitude more expensive.

Among other, less significant categories of computers, there are also monoblocks And nettops, which may well belong to other types described above, combining all the necessary parameters. However, they offer a slightly different device form factor. And the first are “all-in-one” designs, offering a monitor in a larger case, naturally hiding all the other parts of a full-fledged desktop computer. While the second type is a desktop analogue of a netbook, presented in a relatively small and compact case. Such computers do not have hardware powerful enough to perform resource-intensive tasks, but they are quite suitable for use as an Internet connection (for example, in an Internet cafe) or for simple office needs.

In principle, such a division is quite logical and can already significantly facilitate the user’s choice, prompting him to think about the future area of ​​\u200b\u200buse of the computer. So, having understood this classification, we can safely move on.

Personal computer configurations

This question involves considering several options and possibilities for purchasing or creating a ready-to-use computer, based on various assemblies provided by manufacturers or specialized sites. To put it simply, the user always has three purchasing options, which we will look at in a little more detail.

Factory or factory assembly

This method is one of the simplest, since a lot of manufacturers offer their ready-to-use desktop computers at the best price. Various online stores also do this, providing a wide selection of configurations and categories, which we have already familiarized ourselves with. You can always check the components of a particular model indicated on the website or in the product card, and you will be confident that you will purchase exactly what you selected.

This method is very useful for those who are not very versed in the selection of hardware and the basics of its interaction with each other. First of all, because all this has already been done in the most optimal way, taking into account certain needs. Also, from a cost perspective, the most you may have to pay over and above the purchase price is delivery.

Custom assembly (to order)

This approach is also welcomed among most users, and even those who, as in the first case, are not good at selecting components. There are a large number of trusted companies involved in assembling personal computers to order, offering not only ready-made assemblies with the possibility of modification and improvement, but also, in many cases, certain “designers” that allow you to personally select all the necessary components.

A distinctive feature of this method may be the possibility of ordering an original system unit, if not made specifically for the user, then precisely embellished. This is how many companies attract customers, allowing them to create their own unique design for the computer. All this, of course, is incredibly pleasant and no worse than the first option, however, in most cases, in addition to the cost of the computer itself, the user also pays for the work done on it. This is quite logical, but, unfortunately, it is not aimed at everyone.

Self-assembly

The last possible option for purchasing a computer is, of course, to assemble all the necessary components yourself. The positive side of such a solution may be the fact that if the user is well versed in this, he will be able to select and find all the necessary components at a more favorable price. On the contrary, this method is highly not recommended for those users who understand little about assembling a personal computer. In addition to the fact that you need to find these same components, they will also need to be assembled correctly, and ignorance of the process, as well as a minor error during assembly, can easily lead to not the best consequences. So, even if you want to save money by choosing this method, think about possible waste, and also find among your friends or acquaintances someone who will probably understand this.

Accessories

Having dealt with the possible options for purchasing a computer and their types, it is worth moving on to an equally important part - the hardware, or components. If you are wondering about assembling a computer yourself, then you need to know this point one hundred percent. What needs to be put, where and in what sequence, all these are, in principle, basic concepts. It is more important to understand and be able to navigate a wide range of these same components, as well as understand what works best with what.

CPU

The computing center or, as people say, the “brain” of any computer, tablet or smartphone is the central processor. Of course, they are different for each device, have different architecture, power, etc., but we are interested in computer ones. And it just so happens that the leaders in the production of processors in the computer market are two well-known corporations - Intel And AMD. These are yet another representatives among the many giants of the technology market, among whose products there is an eternal “struggle”, mainly among users, of course.

Previously, it was believed that processors from AMD were more budget-friendly and, at the same time, less productive, while Intel maintained a high quality bar with an equally low price tag. However, now, with the rapid development of technology gaining momentum, competition is also increasing. And this, in turn, led us to the fact that now both companies can present their products in all niches, from budget to top-end. Naturally, processor parameters are selected primarily for the tasks predetermined by the device, so everyone chooses the most suitable ones for themselves.

If we talk about budget options for assemblies that require good system performance, then processors from the Intel Celeron or AMD Athlon lines are quite suitable for them. If you need more efficient work, you can throw in some money and look towards the AMD FX or Intel Core i3/i5 models. And here disputes may already arise, since representatives of the FX series are noticeably cheaper, but among many users there is a fairly large heating of these processors, and the fact that the Core i3 or i5, which are similar in technical parameters, work “quieter”, for some does not justify their high cost .

If you are aiming not only for high performance in work, but also excellent performance in games, then you should pay attention to the latest models like AMD Ryzen 5 or Ryzen 7, as well as Intel Core i7 or i9 (preferably the latest 7th generation Kaby Lake). All options are excellent for modern hardware and demonstrate good performance under various loads. Of course, AMD may be a little inferior in terms of overall gaming performance, but it's not just the CPU that's involved. This means that until all the components are selected completely, you should not focus on models that are only slightly superior to other options.

Motherboard

Another important part when assembling a computer is the motherboard, which can also indirectly affect the user’s choice of all other components, and the processor in particular. The thing is that the motherboard is a very complex mechanism, and the wide range of this market is due to the fact that they work with different components and have different sets of ports, connectors, radiators and other things. They, in principle, are divided in the same way as all other hardware, namely into budget ones for simple assemblies, medium ones with fairly high quality and optimal parameters, and “sophisticated” gaming ones that can support everything that is needed and not so much.

The choice of motherboard is often based on the principle of comparing the parameters of other components and searching for the “golden mean”, however, despite the sockets for a specific processor, or the dimensions suitable for the system unit, it is also worth paying attention to the following features:

• a sufficient number of USB ports (especially good if it is USB 3.0);
• a sufficient number of connectors for installing RAM modules;
• the presence of all necessary components among the list supported by the motherboard;
• The presence of a port of the new USB Type-C format will not be amiss;
• availability of HDMI;
• the presence of high-quality heatsinks on the chipset and in the processor power system;

When choosing a motherboard, the user will definitely be faced with a large selection, however, having decided on the parameters, their number will be significantly reduced. Basically, the market is occupied by products exclusively from well-known, time-tested companies and brands, so you hardly have to worry about quality. And if you don’t clean the inside of the computer and systematically overload it, then it can end up in a service center regardless of whether it was expensive or budget.

Video card

Moving further, we come across another component, which in some cases adds a significant amount to the total cost of the computer, namely a video card. And if a computer is purchased not only for work purposes, but also for play, then a discrete video card can sometimes surpass even the processor in price. Of course, for simpler tasks, the same office computers will have enough of any simple video card that can provide comfortable work outside of games. Among other options, video cards are mainly divided as follows:

Discrete: These video cards are intended, as we have already understood, for more resource-intensive and graphically intensive processes, such as games. They deal with computing processes and direct graphics processing, providing high-quality gaming experience. Speaking of calculations, they are specifically handled by the graphics processor (GPU), which is much more important than the amount of graphics memory. Naturally, the higher the generation (for example, the same GeForce 10XX), the better the work. The main chipsets on the video card market are AMD And GeForce, and memory amounts may differ depending on the device class. Budget models today most often have 1-2 GB of memory, mid-range 4 and the most current gaming solutions have 6-8 GB.

Built-in: This type of video card is the most common in simple budget and mid-range computers, as they are part of the installed hybrid processor. They do not have great performance and speed, as they draw resources from RAM. However, most modern chipsets can allow you to run a more or less modern game on minimal graphics settings. Due to such indicators, the need to buy a cheap video card for inexpensive assemblies is completely eliminated, which in turn allows you to save a little.

RAM

A component such as RAM or RAM is also a fairly important parameter that affects the speed of the operating system, good multitasking and performance. Naturally, the more RAM installed, the better. For an average computer build, 8 GB may be sufficient. This will allow you to work efficiently and also play some modern games at decent settings. This indicator can be considered universal. On the other hand, if you are assembling a gaming computer, then it is better to install 16 GB there. It is extremely rare to install 32 GB of RAM, and this mainly happens if the user wants to build a very powerful device with a sufficient budget.

Also, when installing RAM, it is better to use a pair of identical modules with a smaller capacity than one, but larger. This will allow the system to enable dual-link mode, which is faster. Speaking of memory types, DDR3 is still relevant for most motherboards and is not particularly inferior in performance DDR4. Of course, newer and more current models of mat. boards only work with DDR4, so you shouldn’t think too much about it. And the types themselves do not differ much in price.

Hard disks

A hard drive is another type of computer memory that allows you to store any information recorded on it, as well as provide space for the operating system to run. They are quite reliable and universal means of storing information and can have different architectures, as well as volumes. The last indicator is important for those users who are going to collect a lot of information on their computer, such as disco or filmographies of their favorite performers and actors, large archives of family and personal photographs, and indeed everything that you can think of. If previously the hard drive capacity did not allow this, offering very little space, now one terabyte, which has practically become the standard for any configuration, can be enough for a large amount of information.

Another important parameter of a hard drive, both for more comfortable work and in general, is the speed, which for many manufacturers is divided into three types:

• 5400-5900 rpm– standard disks for data storage, the overall performance of which is hardly inferior to higher-speed options. They are one of the most affordable and quietest.
• 7200 rpm- options intended for mass use, which often sound loud during operation, vibrating into the system unit.
• 7200 rpm (Performance)– higher quality and faster models, which at the same time remain too expensive.

Classic HDD HDDs are still widely popular, but they are inferior in speed to the solid state drives that replaced them. SSD drives that are excellent for installing operating systems, also having a positive effect on operating speed. However, for long-term storage of information they are less effective, and their cost is several times higher than the price tag of HDDs.

Availability of drive

In the context of the same rapid development of technology, the need for an optical drive for reading discs in computers and laptops has practically disappeared. Mostly because they were replaced by computer flash drives, portable and regular hard drives. With mass access to the Internet, storing files on disks has also lost its relevance, since they are constantly updated online and are available for downloading at any convenient time. Be it movies, books, drivers or all kinds of utilities.

And yet, if the need to install an optical drive arises, then you should pay attention to various popular models from Samsung or LG. They are known to have high quality, and at the same time the speed of reading/playing information from the disk.

Cooling system

This point is also important if you want to avoid overheating of individual components and the system as a whole. The most common cooling option is a cooler. Today, there are many modifications of system units that allow you to install coolers in a variety of zones for more efficient cooling and ventilation of the case.

An equally popular cooling system can also be noted as liquid (or water). It is a closed system with tubes filled with liquid. This cooling system is rightfully considered more efficient. First of all, it is much more compact than the previous one, and its main advantage is considered to be noiselessness. Of course, in some cases, it is almost impossible to achieve complete noiselessness, however, if you choose high-quality and quiet cooling, then this system will be much better.