Run in XP mode.

You could technically clone the drive.
The problem is that when you swap over to a new mobo, Windows will say "Hey fuck you, you cant do that", and you will end up on the phone trying to convince windows tech support to validate it.

The other option to to use pirated 7. I have a legitimate copy of vista and a vista to 7 upgrade, but using the cracked version is so easy that I just use that instead.
Its called "Windows 7 loader", you install windows 7 from disk or thumb drive, say that you will activate it later. Then, you run that program and it cracks it, easy as pie.

I gotta do that on my laptop whose drive failed. there's no windows serial number on the bottom and i don't believe it came with a reinstallation cd. Unless I can somehow contact compaq and get something...

It's interesting that you mention this.

When I built my first Win7 machine, I bought into that hype and purchased the Pro version specifically for that feature. I expected that it would somehow be seamlessly integrated into the main desktop, such that I could just right click on an app and say "Run in XP mode."

Nope.

Turns out that all XP mode is is a pre-loaded copy of MS Virtual PC, with a license for XP Term Server edition. It's not at all integrated into the main OS- it runs as a totally separate virtual PC, with its own separate virtual hard disk. And, as it turns out, MS Virtual PC is a real pig. I quickly gave up on it and just loaded the free version of VMWare, loading an old copy of WP Pro into it. Ironically, VMWare is not only much faster than MS Virtual PC, but with "Unity" mode it's actually slightly better integrated into the main desktop.

Torrent a Windows 7 ISO and Windows Loader.
Burn to DVD, Install, Crack, dont help Bill Gates cure Malaria.

fixed

I can't remember the numbers on Kinston SSD's, but what I read recently is that the Samsung SSD's have the best reliability.

Like this ----> The Best SSDs and the Best Hard Drives For Your Money! | Hardware Revolution

The 120GB Samsung they recommend is $20 more than the one you listed (25% more?), but should be more reliable and have better performance.

About the only SSD brand I'd really vote to avoid is OCZ. I have owned four SSDs in total (one Intel, one OCZ Onyx, one Samsung and one Kingston) and of them, the OCZ underwent SMEF a few weeks after the 6 month warranty expired, while all the others are running strong up to 4 years later. Some googling reveals that many others have experienced similar failures

Samsung is the OEM supplier to Dell for their Latitude series business-class laptops, and I'd consider that a strong vote of confidence.

The article I linked to basically says the same thing. They reference some French website (...) that has failure rates for all of the major SSD brands and the OCZ is much, much worse than any other. The OCZ failure rate is 3 orders of magnitude worse than the Samsung, BUT the Samsung is one order of magnitude better than anyone else.


I should give some context to my post and say: I have no personal experience with SSD's. I have never owned one, and have no right to give advice on them.


Just quoting something I read on the internet......


...

I think for now what im going to do is just swap in a new MB, PSU, CPU, and RAM.

then upgrade the GPU and Monitor after christmas and then eventually do the drives.

From building a $1k bad a$$ rig to upgrading your old POS in two days?

You're quite the flip-flopper Brainbama...

:heading for cover:

not really, just going in stages.

I can do something like this:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($209.98 @ Outlet PC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.98 @ Outlet PC)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Pro3 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($85.66 @ Newegg)
Memory: Patriot Viper 3 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($89.68 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: Raidmax 730W ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($39.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $455.29
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-10-23 10:40 EDT-0400)

With my current case, drives, DVD, etc. and get the computing power I need for lightroom and photoshop and other memory hogs. Then get a new monitor (another $150 or so), then get a GPU if I decide I need it ($100-150), and then swap over to a SSD drive and deal with moving files and figuring out the OS.

But right now I need something that can handle processing RAW images more than anything.

But that will still end up being pretty much the same thing.

Id suggest spending more than $40 on a PSU, especially if you want 750 watts.

Unless your planning on running some badass GPUs or a big water colling loop, I doubt you need that much wattage.
Here is a good 520W PSU:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817151093
and if you really do need 750W:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817151132

I spent basically $700 (including stupid $100 windows OS expense, not including monitor) based on the gaming build recommendations at Hardware Revolution about 2 years ago. Since then I've upgraded the GPU (not based on need, just want...), added more RAM and that's it. The RAM and GPU upgrade have kept my computer somewhat modern and it has way more capability than I need.

I would recommend doing something similar, you can build a very capable rig that is easily upgradeable for ~$600-700. In your case I would opt for more RAM and a better CPU than what is generally recommended for a gaming computer (i.e. biggest budget goes to GPU).

Mah, anyway, I really like the build recommendations on Hardware Revolution and sites like it. As mentioned before, waiting for Black Friday and Cyber Monday sales should save you even more money.

I can't believe I didn't get banned, or at least warned...

it was actually $69.99 but $30 off currently. I might be able to score a GTX 560 Ti for a good price, and it looked like a 700w was recommended, but it seems like it's actually 500w so that's probably all I need.

from what I understand a better core won't necessarily improve gaming performance; especially when you factor in the cost:performance. And I've played the same game for the past 3 years now, and it still runs okay, what I really need is something that can handle running photoshop, processing of large RAW camera files, and then gaming second.

For photo processing, you're right- a GPU is mostly irrelevant, you want lots of RAM and a fast, efficient CPU.


I'm presently debating whether to upgrade my new work laptop* from 8 gig to 16 gig. Running AutoCAD 2012 inside a Win6-64 VM while also running WireCAD in the main OS (also Win7-64) while 20 tabs are open in Chrome is proving to be a bit much...


* = It would be a joke to call this thing a laptop if it weren't so sad. The Dell Precision M4600 weighs about as much as mature white rhino, depletes its battery in 60 seconds, generates more heat than the melted-down reactors at Fukushima, and generally fits into the concept of "portability" in much the same way as the Queen Elizabeth II.

Probably not relevant to you getting a new work laptop, but I got a 15" touchscreen ultrabook for tuning. I have to say, the touch screen is worth it's weight in gold when in the car. After I set my base timing at a friends house, I jumped on the highway with my timing still fixed to 10°. I was able to set it back without getting off and coming to a stop, which would have been impossible using only the touchpad.

I know, which is why I recommend spending more on CPU and RAM and less on the GPU.

That, and I've read that SC2 (I assume this is the game you speak of) is one of the more CPU demanding games.

So...uhhh what Joe just said

So yea, if I were you, I would be spending about $700 and instead of spending $160-180 on a GPU like I did, I would spend like $80 on teh GPU and put the other $100 towards a better CPU and more RAM.

okay, yeah, kinda what I'm thinking of doing. I'm just not sure I want to throw another $100 at the CPU if I'm not necessarily going to see $100 worth of measurable performance gains.

I'm pretty sure going from a core duo 2 3.16Ghz with 4GB of DDR2, to an i5 3570K 3.4Ghz with 16GB of DDR3 is going to be a HUGE improvement already.

Would it be worth it to to go up to an i7 3770K or something alike over the i5?

I still want a new GPU, mines old and I'd love to increase FPS, but that's like phase 2.

Brain,
Price can be pretty misleading with PSUs, even brands can be misleading.
Cheap PSUs will have poor filtering and are ofter overrated. Sometimes they calculate wattage by adding together the peak current capacity on the different rails, when in reality you could not pull peak current from each rail simultaneously.

Buy a Seasonic or Corsair and you'll use it for many years in different builds, or buy a cheapy and hope it doesnt hurt anything when/if it pops.


As for the i7, totally not worth it.
Get the i5 (the cheap one without all the added onboard graphics stuff), if you want more performance you can put a bigger cooler on it and overclock it a bit.
You dont even need the K version with an unlocked multiplier, overclock front side bus and the northbridge a little bit and it will be very fast.

As for teh ramz, pay close attention to its timings. With this DDR3 stuff the timings are higher than they used to becauseof the higher clock speeds, but if you can get something with timings in the 9-10 range, its worth it.
Sometimes it may even be better to go for a lower clock with better timing than the other way around. 1333Mhz with 9-9-9 timing is better than 1600Mhz with 12-12-12 timings.