Hardware recommendation: what hardware to buy for my new FreeBSD desktop?

[Broodjegehaktmetmayo]

Hi all

I've been reading some threads on this forum in the past, and now I decided to register. I am a noob on FreeBSD, although I have played with it for some time (6.x). My old machine is getting too slow, and so I am planning to buy a new one shortly (very shortly: preferably this week). As I've had bad experiences with these 'ready to run' retail systems from the big brands I would like to configure my own one. I've been looking into AMD Phenom X4, I was enthusiastic at first but on reading more and more about it, I'm getting less and less enthusiastic (energy consumption, performance). So I am thinking of buying an Intel anyway.

I don't care too much about a little price difference, for me it's important that it's a machine that doesn't bugger me too much with typical 'hardware compatibility problems': I am a noob on FreeBSD, I want to spend my time learning the Unix way of doing things (I've bought two great books on Amazon, they are very clearly written, so I am all excited about starting to learn), not struggling with non-competing hardware.

I've seen there are quite some people here who are very knowledgeable, and so I was wondering if you could perhaps give me some advise on what to buy. I am interested in buying A-brands since they have proved to be less troublesome to me.

My typical goal will be to run a desktop, although, the further I come in studying the books I bought, the more tempting it might become to try to set up some servers as well.

It would concern advise about the - to my knowledge most important - components:
1. Mainboard (including what chipsets to look for, etcetera. I am not technical, so I am actually just typing what I have read elsewhere )
2. Videocard. I have understood the safest bet will be Nvidia, and since I've always had Nvidia to my complete satisfaction Nvidia would be fine. But then: which one? Which components on it determine what to choose?
3. Processor. Intel, then, but: Dual core, or Quad core? 32 bits or 64 bits? (Are quad cores 64 bits? I've looked and looked but the one site says it is, the other site says it isn't, and the third site (Intel) says nothing at all about it ()).
4. RAM (type, amount)
5. Harddisk (type)
6. PowerSupplyUnit

As I said before, both power consumption (#1) and performance (#2) are important to me, next to the A-brands (#1) and running FreeBSD (#1).

I know that this is my first post, and I hope you forgive me for my first post being a question right away

I will appreciate your advise very much,

Thanks in advance,.

Ciao,

B.

(My nick stands for: sandwich with meat and mayonaise, for those of you who might wonder )

[PatrickBaer]

Well, that depends on the software you want to run?

I installed a PCBSD 7 with 7.1 PRE and KDE 4 on a not so really superfast machine and a really cheap graphics card. Works just like a charme, superfast!

But if you want to run a dualboot with Photoshop, you probably want something a but more powerful

[TerryP]

RAM, Harddrive, Powersupply, shouldn't matter that much in regard t hardware compatbility, just get stuff that is good enough for the job. And worry more about the hard drive controller being supported.


Graphics wise, nVidia for 32-bit or older ATI cards for either 32/64 should be fine enough. I've used nVidia GeForce 6200, 8400GS, Matrox G220, and ATI Xpress 200M cards without problem under FreeBSD i386 releases. Many others here can comment on 64-bit graphics drivers and (barf) Intels offerings.


Unless you go for the 'cheap stuff', I don't think AMD and Intel have any non x86-64 chips left on the modern desktop market ;-), so you should be fairly free on choice of processor.

[Carpetsmoker]

I've been looking into AMD Phenom X4

Intel CPU's are (quite a bit) faster at the moment (Search for benchmarks), I would recommend going for an intel.

[vermaden]

1. Mainboard (including what chipsets to look for, etcetera. I am not technical, so I am actually just typing what I have read elsewhere )

I would get Intel Q35 for Intel CPU setup or AMD 780G/790GX for AMD CPU setup.
They both as integrated GFX:
Intel Q35 --> with Intel open source drivers will work almost everywhere.
780G/790GX --> most powerful integrated card ever (HD3200/HD3300) open source drivers currently do @d (RadeonHD) but 3D will come in some time (1 year?).

Also Intel Q35 has Intel VT-d extensions.

2. Videocard. I have understood the safest bet will be Nvidia, and since I've always had Nvidia to my complete satisfaction Nvidia would be fine. But then: which one? Which components on it determine what to choose?

Nvidia also should work, but only i386 and only binary driver.

3. Processor. Intel, then, but: Dual core, or Quad core? 32 bits or 64 bits? (Are quad cores 64 bits? I've looked and looked but the one site says it is, the other site says it isn't, and the third site (Intel) says nothing at all about it ()).

AMD also has several very interesting small power consumption CPUs:
Athlon X2 3400e (22W) 2x1.5GHz
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ EE (35W) 2x2.0GHz
Athlon X2 BE-2400 (45W) 2x2.3GHz
Athlon X2 4450B (45W) 2x2.3GHz
Athlon X2 5050e (45W) 2x2.6GHz

As for Phnemons, there is 'e' series that is very power efficent:
Phenom X4 9350e (65W) 2x2000 MHz
Phenom X3 8450e (65W) 2x2100 MHz

AMD does CPU 'better by desing' but Intel currently wins because of 45nm process High-K Metal Gate design. AMD still uses 65nm SOI which is slower, but AMD CPUs has better features, like Nested Page Tables, Integrated Memory Controller, Tagged TLB. You will find none of these in Intel CPUs, at least till intel Nehalem will engage.

For example Intel Quad Core is nothing more then two Dual Cores stick together, and Each core does not communicate with other cores in CPU , but by North Bridge of the motherboard, its like using an email to talk to a friend that is sitting just above you.

Imho Intel e6320/e6420 (65nm) are good for everything, has virtualization and is cheap, anything newer/faster then that is ok. If you want 45nm CPU (cooler / faster / less power consumption) then go for e8xxx series.

About benchmarks, it depends what you measure, Intel is definitely better for games, but for servers AMD does really good:
http://it.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=443
http://it.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=467
http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3335&p=6
http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3335&p=7
http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3335&p=10

You may also wait for AMD's 45nm CPUs Daneb and Shanghai which will be avialable at the end of current year.

4. RAM (type, amount)

You can go for standart 800MHz DDR2 5-5-5-15 or get some faster ones like 800MHz with 4-4-4-12 or 1066 with 5-5-5-15, but the difference is very, very small. 2 x 1GB is more then enought.

5. Harddisk (type)

In short some modern 7.200RPM SATA2 drive, if you got too much money you can get SATA2 VelociRaptor 10.000RPM drive.

6. PowerSupplyUnit

Get some good brand, like Chieftec/Thermaltake/Zalman/Antec/Be-quiet/Tagan.

[ddekok]

As for power supplies, you will probably want one that is labelled as 80 Plus http://www.80plus.org/.

They generally cost a bit more. I think I paid an extra $20CDN over a generic power supply for an Antec EarthWatt 380W. It was on sale though.

The 80 Plus power supplies don't use as much power and won't heat your house. They are a minimum of 80 percent efficient compared to the 70 percent efficiency* of standard power supplies.

* This is an estimate. I'm not sure the accepted number is, but I'm sure it is around 70%.

[Carpetsmoker]

I always recommend SeaSonic power supplies ... There are also some other brands which consistently produce high quality power supplies, but the list is rather short and I don't remember any of them out of the top of my head ...

[Business_woman]

Originally Posted by Carpetsmoker

I always recommend SeaSonic power supplies ... There are also some other brands which consistently produce high quality power supplies, but the list is rather short and I don't remember any of them out of the top of my head ...

Enermax...

[Broodjegehaktmetmayo]

Thank you all for your responses sofar

I will go and process that, in the morning. When I am fresh again

[chill]

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

Hi all
I've been looking into AMD Phenom X4, I was enthusiastic at first but on reading more and more about it, I'm getting less and less enthusiastic (energy consumption, performance). So I am thinking of buying an Intel anyway.

The Athlon 6500 sound really promising
http://en.expreview.com/2008/09/23/a...ma-review.html

They are supposed to hit the market mid October??? And retail at about $110. What a deal

[vermaden]

Originally Posted by chill

The Athlon 6500 sound really promising
http://en.expreview.com/2008/09/23/a...ma-review.html

They are supposed to hit the market mid October??? And retail at about $110. What a deal

Well ... not exacly.

These DUAL core Phenom X2 (yes its branded as Athlon but it uses K10 core) uses 95W while QUAD core Phenom X4 uses 65W, not a very good TDP for a dual core CPU running at 2.3GHz.

Its assumed that AMD highered the default VCore to make it O/C easier, but I do not accept that anyway, it runs fine at 3.3GHz, but at 2.3GHz it should use 45W at most.

[chill]

Originally Posted by vermaden

These DUAL core Phenom X2 (yes its branded as Athlon but it uses K10 core)

Yes I am aware of that but phenoms are only branded for triple and quad core processors so they are labeling it athlon. I don't know an awful lot about AMD processors either way. I still think it looks like a decent buy though.

[Broodjegehaktmetmayo]

Originally Posted by vermaden

I would get Intel Q35 for Intel CPU setup or AMD 780G/790GX for AMD CPU setup.
They both as integrated GFX:
Intel Q35 --> with Intel open source drivers will work almost everywhere.
780G/790GX --> most powerful integrated card ever (HD3200/HD3300) open source drivers currently do @d (RadeonHD) but 3D will come in some time (1 year?).

Also Intel Q35 has Intel VT-d extensions.




Nvidia also should work, but only i386 and only binary driver.



AMD also has several very interesting small power consumption CPUs:
Athlon X2 3400e (22W) 2x1.5GHz
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ EE (35W) 2x2.0GHz
Athlon X2 BE-2400 (45W) 2x2.3GHz
Athlon X2 4450B (45W) 2x2.3GHz
Athlon X2 5050e (45W) 2x2.6GHz

As for Phnemons, there is 'e' series that is very power efficent:
Phenom X4 9350e (65W) 2x2000 MHz
Phenom X3 8450e (65W) 2x2100 MHz

AMD does CPU 'better by desing' but Intel currently wins because of 45nm process High-K Metal Gate design. AMD still uses 65nm SOI which is slower, but AMD CPUs has better features, like Nested Page Tables, Integrated Memory Controller, Tagged TLB. You will find none of these in Intel CPUs, at least till intel Nehalem will engage.

For example Intel Quad Core is nothing more then two Dual Cores stick together, and Each core does not communicate with other cores in CPU , but by North Bridge of the motherboard, its like using an email to talk to a friend that is sitting just above you.

Imho Intel e6320/e6420 (65nm) are good for everything, has virtualization and is cheap, anything newer/faster then that is ok. If you want 45nm CPU (cooler / faster / less power consumption) then go for e8xxx series.

About benchmarks, it depends what you measure, Intel is definitely better for games, but for servers AMD does really good:
http://it.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=443
http://it.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=467
http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3335&p=6
http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3335&p=7
http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3335&p=10

You may also wait for AMD's 45nm CPUs Daneb and Shanghai which will be avialable at the end of current year.


You can go for standart 800MHz DDR2 5-5-5-15 or get some faster ones like 800MHz with 4-4-4-12 or 1066 with 5-5-5-15, but the difference is very, very small. 2 x 1GB is more then enought.


In short some modern 7.200RPM SATA2 drive, if you got too much money you can get SATA2 VelociRaptor 10.000RPM drive.


Get some good brand, like Chieftec/Thermaltake/Zalman/Antec/Be-quiet/Tagan.

So it took me a little bit more time to process this

Vermaden, thank you again for your advise. As to the chipsets, I am stuck regarding your advise about 'Q35'. Could I, most impolitely, ask you what to pick here:

http://www.informatique.nl/cgi-bin/i...gi?M=GRP&H=033

I'm in your dept already

Thank you in advance

[DrJ]

There is one other quirky you should be aware of if you use a discrete nVidia graphics card, the binary nVidia driver and a lot of memory on an Intel chipset and 32-bit FreeBSD. The motherboard BIOS needs support for memory remapping. If it does not, you are limited to 3GB RAM. If it does, you can use an additional 0.5GB (from the 4GB installed). These days 2x2GB are so inexpensive that it makes little sense not to use them.

Of course if you use the Q35 you would use the on-board Intel graphics so this might not apply. That GPU does not have much power, but honestly other than a few Linux games and a very few other things you have little need for 3D horsepower on FreeBSD. There just is not much software that uses it.

Also, this applies to 32-bit only. There is no nVidia driver for 64 bits.

[chill]

Since this thread was bumped I figure I should update that the Kuma processor that I mentioned earlier in this thread was cancelled AGAIN, now scheduled for Q1 2009:
http://en.expreview.com/2008/10/15/k...-75507750.html

AMD seems like it's been terribly mismanaged since the ATI merge. I am an Intel guy mostly but I want to see AMD stay strong and competitive.

Also I agree with Carpetsmoker on the power supply recommendation. The last two power supplies I bought have been Seasonics and they run like tanks and have high efficiency. I only stopped using my first one after more than two years because I needed more power.

[vermaden]

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

Thank you in advance

You are welcome mate.

About Intel chipsets power usage here is the stats:


Abou AMD ones 780G are also very eco, they use about 7W of power.

As for power supplies, the most important part while buying them is their efficency, the stat that is almost always omitted (guess why) most of them have very poor efficency. Many people does not understand efficency of power supplies, it works like that.

EXAMPLE 1:
power supply efficency: 85%
computer power draw: 100W
power needed to run this computer: 118W

x * 0.85 = 100W
x = 100W / 0.85
x ~ 118W

EXAMPLE 2:
power supply efficency: 55%
computer power draw: 100W
power needed to run this computer: 182W

x * 0.55 = 100W
x = 100W / 0.55
x ~ 182W

So if your computer uses 100W then using power supply with 85% efficency you will really draw abou 118W for this box while 182W using 55% efficent power supply.

Another part of good power supply is amount of A (ampers) that can be provided for each line, and keeping the ATX standart voltages at high load, but if you buy a power supply that has 80+ efficency, you can be sure that A and voltages will be ok.

There is a site that aggregates all 80% and more efficent power supplies, you can use it as a guide which ones are good: http://80plus.com

[mdh]

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

1. Mainboard (including what chipsets to look for, etcetera. I am not technical, so I am actually just typing what I have read elsewhere )

I like Biostar if you go for the AthlonX2 or Phenom setup. Probably Tyan if you go for the Opteron or dual-Opteron setup. Asus is usually good, as well.

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

2. Videocard. I have understood the safest bet will be Nvidia, and since I've always had Nvidia to my complete satisfaction Nvidia would be fine. But then: which one? Which components on it determine what to choose?

I'd say avoid nvidia right now. Between the "black windows bug" and the fact that you'll be locked into using FreeBSD/i386 if you actually want to use 3D acceleration on your GPU, it isn't a good bet at the moment. If you do go nvidia, you'll want to use FreeBSD/i386 even if you get an AMD64 CPU. Otherwise the nvidia binary drivers won't work, and hence you won't be really using the GPU for 3D acceleration at all, and you'd be just as well off using a cheapo video card or on-board video or whatever.

Of course, there's still the black windows bug to contend with, making nvidia still annoying - you'll have to turn off OpenGL "effects" in KDE4 or some of your windows will appear all black at times.

I'm not sure how things are on the ATI side. My next video controller will be ATI though, unless nvidia fixes the problems before then.

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

3. Processor. Intel, then, but: Dual core, or Quad core? 32 bits or 64 bits? (Are quad cores 64 bits? I've looked and looked but the one site says it is, the other site says it isn't, and the third site (Intel) says nothing at all about it ()).

If you have a *whole* lot of money, get a quad-core Opteron or even two.

If you have a lot of money, get an AMD Phenom (quad-core).

If you don't have a lot of money, get an AMD AthlonX2. You can get a 5400+ black edition cheap right ($77!) on newegg.

Note: all of these CPUs are AMD64 and will run FreeBSD AMD64, but will also run FreeBSD i386.

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

4. RAM (type, amount)

Keep in mind that if you run FreeBSD AMD64, you can use over 4gigs of ram. Running FreeBSD i386, you won't be able to without using PXE, but I'm not familiar with PXE. Generally speaking, this comes down to money. Memory speed probably won't be your bottleneck. Memory is fairly cheap nowadays, too. Go for 4-8 gigs if you can. Kingston's "ValueRam" line is actually very good and inexpensive. Get the highest speed that your motherboard will support. Keep in mind that if you buy an ECC motherboard (this is common if you go for the Opteron layout, not at all common for AthlonX2 or Phenom) you'll want to buy ECC ram as well.

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

5. Harddisk (type)

Get two identical drives and mirror them for redundancy. SATA300 is what you'll likely want, given what most motherboards support on-board. It's common, too, so it won't be tremendously overpriced.

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

6. PowerSupplyUnit

Not really a strong opinion here. I've never bought a power supply that failed prematurely (only one failed at all, and it was pushing 10 years old), and I've gone for some "bargain brand" power supplies as well as name-brand ones.

[Broodjegehaktmetmayo]

Hi all

Wow, this takes a lot of time to research

So, I've finally selected some hardware, and I would like to run it by you for final 'approval' (). I've attached a picture of my selection so far. There are duplicates in there which I still need to choose between. I will try to explain my thoughts.

CPU
I understand the preference for AMD that has been mentioned many times here. I appreciate that preference. On the other hand, I see AMD rates below Intel on many tests, both concerning speed but most certainly also, and I feel that is important, on power consumption. Every test seems to read to me 'hmm, it performs worse *and* it has much higher energy use'. So I am more or less tempted to stick with Intel.

The Q8200 is a little cheaper than the Q9400, but I've also noticed the Q8200 doesn't have 'Intel VT'. I have no clue is that is important to me: could anybody advise me please?

Moreover, Vermaden writes:

Intel Qxxxx series quad core cannot be used in SMP setup, you will have to use a Xeon

Do I understand correctly that this means the quad cores are actually useless since it will operate as 1 core? If so, it wouldn't be very usefull to buy Intel quad core, no? I would need to buy Xeon then? But which one? There are about a zillion Xeons? And then I probably also need another mainboard?

Video
Actually, I have no clue which one to take. I've taken good notice of the comments about the black window by mdh, but on the other hand, Nvidia has FBSD-drivers and ATI has not. So I'm tempted to stay with Nvidia, and I've selected three not all the expensive cards. After that, I am lost (): I have no clue how to pick one of the three. They are all GDDR3, but that's as far as my guesses go.

Mainboard
I've looked up some tests, it seems the P5Q and P5QE are both tested rather well. But which one to choose

PSU
Thanks for the advise on 80plus. I've selected the Corsair (I thought I've read it has good comments, and it isn't very expensive), and I've added the Seasonic based on the advises posted here. Again: and so, now I am stuck: which one to choose?

HDD
Actually the 750GB would be fine, but I've noticed the 1,5TB has a slightly lower price per GB. Whichever it will be, I would install two I think.

Originally Posted by vermaden

I would get Intel Q35 for Intel CPU setup or AMD 780G/790GX for AMD CPU setup.
They both as integrated GFX:
Intel Q35 --> with Intel open source drivers will work almost everywhere.
780G/790GX --> most powerful integrated card ever (HD3200/HD3300) open source drivers currently do @d (RadeonHD) but 3D will come in some time (1 year?).

Also Intel Q35 has Intel VT-d extensions.

I am still a little lost about the Q35 chipset Vermaden: I am not that technical so going through all the technical details isn't telling me too much. From what I've read the Q35 has integrated audio, and that's about it? (I'm probably writing something very stupid right now - forgive me in advance ). The Asus mainboards selected here have P45, is that bad?

Once again, thank you all for your kindness in helping me out: it is much appreciated (!)

EDIT: I just noticed the attached picture has been scaled down into something not very readable. Upload on an external host:

[ephemera]

> The Q8200 is a little cheaper than the Q9400, but I've also noticed the Q8200 doesn't have 'Intel VT'. I have no clue is that is important to me: could anybody advise me please?

Most desktop users will not benefit from a quad core. They cost more and have higher tdp.
Very, very few applications will benefit from 4 cores and most people don't run those sort of applications. Also, the "I am a heavy multitasker" argument is BS.

I would recommend a Core2 E8400 or higher.
Or, if you can afford it then buy all means go for 3GHZ or higher core2 quad or even core i7.

> Do I understand correctly that this means the quad cores are actually useless since it will operate as 1 core?

No, Vermaden is talking about dual-socket m/c (2 physical processors) where you need a xeon.
quad core is a CMP which in practical/layman terms is just like having 4 physical processors.

> Actually the 750GB would be fine, but I've noticed the 1,5TB has a slightly lower price per GB. Whichever it will be, I would install two I think.

I would go for 2x750 instead of 1x1500

> Thanks for the advise on 80plus. I've selected the Corsair (I thought I've read it has good comments, and it isn't very expensive), and I've added the Seasonic based on the advises posted here. Again: and so, now I am stuck: which one to choose?

Both are good. If you can't make up your mind then go for Seasonic. (BTW, the particular corsair 450W model I have heard is very good.)

> video

I would 'not' recommend the Asus "Silent" models (passive cooling).

[vermaden]

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

CPU
I understand the preference for AMD that has been mentioned many times here. I appreciate that preference. On the other hand, I see AMD rates below Intel on many tests, both concerning speed but most certainly also, and I feel that is important, on power consumption. Every test seems to read to me 'hmm, it performs worse *and* it has much higher energy use'. So I am more or less tempted to stick with Intel.

Intel CPU are not bad, they are very good, tehy are just designed less "smart way" (for example native quad core in AMD vs just two dual cores put into one plate). AMD also have Integrated Memory Controller which Intel CPU lack, along with Nested Page Tables for virtualization, but you will not use them at FreeBSD.

About CPU, I had Q6600 (4 x 3.0GHz) and it idled for most of the time, I switched to used e6320 (2 x 1.86GHz) and I do not see the point to get more, vesides e6320 has only 12W idle power draw so when my box is idle it draws only 62W (checked with wattmeter) and I have only 70% efficent PSU (old Chieftec) so with more efficent PSU it will be even better, at full load it draws less then 90W so its real nice, it also has Intel Q35 chipset.

Q6600 and e6320 are "old" 65nm parts so newer 45nm CPUs like e8xxx and q9000 will draw even less power (with EIST of course --> Intel Speedstep enabled in BIOS + powerd).

If you need 4 cores power then go on buy and check, you can always sell it on ebay and get dual core later.

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

The Q8200 is a little cheaper than the Q9400, but I've also noticed the Q8200 doesn't have 'Intel VT'. I have no clue is that is important to me: could anybody advise me please?

Q8200 has ripped of Intel VT-x extension (virtualization) while Q9xxx still have it.

You can check everything here:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/Default.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

Moreover, Vermaden writes:

Do I understand correctly that this means the quad cores are actually useless since it will operate as 1 core? If so, it wouldn't be very usefull to buy Intel quad core, no? I would need to buy Xeon then? But which one? There are about a zillion Xeons? And then I probably also need another mainboard?

SMP = Symmetric Multi Processing --> use multiple CPUs (not cores)

It means that you will not be able to connect two Q9300 for example on one mother board to have 8 cores (2 cpus), only xeon can do that.

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

Video
Actually, I have no clue which one to take. I've taken good notice of the comments about the black window by mdh, but on the other hand, Nvidia has FBSD-drivers and ATI has not. So I'm tempted to stay with Nvidia, and I've selected three not all the expensive cards. After that, I am lost (): I have no clue how to pick one of the three. They are all GDDR3, but that's as far as my guesses go.

If you want to play games: nVidia 9600GSO / nVidia 8800GS (they are cheap and do the job)
If you do not play: get Intel integrated GMA

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

PSU
Thanks for the advise on 80plus. I've selected the Corsair (I thought I've read it has good comments, and it isn't very expensive), and I've added the Seasonic based on the advises posted here. Again: and so, now I am stuck: which one to choose?

For that box, 400-500W would be good, with inegrated gfx even 350W will do, as for company, the most important thing is efficency, you have the tables and you can see which ones are good, the cheapest would propably be Antec GreenPower 380W (80plus also).

check this also:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ndup,2062.html

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

HDD
Actually the 750GB would be fine, but I've noticed the 1,5TB has a slightly lower price per GB. Whichever it will be, I would install two I think.

You need all that space? I would get 320GB / 400GB / 500GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 or Seagate 7200.11

If you have too much cash, then change quad core cash into SATA2 VelociRaptor 10.000RPM drive, you wil lgain more speed with that one intead of additional 2 cores.

You can also get SSD drive, but stay away from OCZ Core ones.

check tests here:
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/3...hmarks,24.html

Originally Posted by Broodjegehaktmetmayo

I am still a little lost about the Q35 chipset Vermaden: I am not that technical so going through all the technical details isn't telling me too much. From what I've read the Q35 has integrated audio, and that's about it? (I'm probably writing something very stupid right now - forgive me in advance ). The Asus mainboards selected here have P45, is that bad?

Q35 has integrated Intel GMA 3100 + Intel VT-d (usless on FreeBSD) comparing to P35/P45.
Audio, Nic and other things on motherboard are mostly not from Intel, but Q35 motherboards often has Intel 10/100/1000 nic (which is good), P35/P45 mostly have Realtek 10/100/1000 which is less god but still works.