Nahkri wrote:

PcBytes wrote:

Updated my main "BMW":

Athon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz (OC)
Athlon XP 2500+

Is the Athlon 64 a venice core?if it is it should do 2300mhz at stock voltage,also the athlon xp 2500+ if it's a barton core should run at 2200mhz at stock voltage without any problems.

Just checked and it's Orleans core. The Athlon XP 2500+ is a Barton indeed,and the 1900+ is a Palomino.

The highest speed I had that Athlon 64 was 2.40GHz,and the XP 2500+ was stock all the time (and still is).

My main current PC is probably one of the oldest/slowest on the forum. I built it in 2008, and never bothered upgrading it much because it always does what I want it to do just fine. I'm not really a big "current gen" gamer and don't really aspire to be. Mostly I use it for internet access, e-mail, video editing/production, writing/composing/recording music for both my band (Zombie Jihad) and my solo projects, that and doing tasks to keep the vintage beasts running. Sometimes I do some VMs on it but being as most of my VM's are Clinton era or older O/S I don't really need 4+ Cores, 32GB of RAM, and Hyperthreading to keep the machine happy.

SPECS
CASE: Antec 300
PSU: Corsair 700 Watt
MoBo: ABIT AW9D LGA 775 with AWARD BIOS
CPU: Intel Pentium D 3.40 GHz Presler Core, though I have a Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 in the wings to throw in there. Occasionally I have bumped the chip up to 4GHz, seems strangely happy there when the thermal unit's nice and cleaned up and the paste has been refreshed.
THERMAL: Zalman Fatalility Cooler + the two fans that came with the case
RAM: 4GB DDR2 800
FDD: 1.44MB 3.5" (for making DDO Diskettes for the 486 and 286)
HDD: four SATA Drives, I think a 60G, an 80G, a 256GB, and a 1TB, + an 80GB PATA from my PIII
OPT: DVD-RW drive out of a Dell Dimension 9400, not sure what speed, don't care, it works
OTHER: USB Media Bay Reader
GFX: NVIDIA 8800GT 512MB, $300 well spent at the time I built this thing in 08', it STILL performs excellent for what I need/want to do
SND: Rocketfish badged SoundBlaster Audigy 7.1 card, PCI, have it because it has hardware loopback, which I need for recording music
NET: Built-In Gigabit LAN
O/S: Windows 7 x64 and Mint Linux Cinnamon, will be moving to Windows 10 when the upgrade becomes available.

PERIPHERY: Old Laser AT 101 Key Keyboard from a 286, Logitech Marble Mouse, some generic blue gamepad that looks like a deluxe PlayStation controller (mostly used with emulators or DOSBOX), and a pair of 3rd hand LCD's (An NEC and a Enlight). I also recently added a PCI-E USB 3.0 card to it as well.

Here's that thing, kind of ugly and mismatched, but again, it works great so I just keep on running it. This was taken when I took the floppy out for awhile.

creepingnet wrote:

My main current PC is probably one of the oldest/slowest on the forum. I built it in 2008, and never bothered upgrading it much […]
Show full quote

My main current PC is probably one of the oldest/slowest on the forum. I built it in 2008, and never bothered upgrading it much because it always does what I want it to do just fine. I'm not really a big "current gen" gamer and don't really aspire to be. Mostly I use it for internet access, e-mail, video editing/production, writing/composing/recording music for both my band (Zombie Jihad) and my solo projects, that and doing tasks to keep the vintage beasts running. Sometimes I do some VMs on it but being as most of my VM's are Clinton era or older O/S I don't really need 4+ Cores, 32GB of RAM, and Hyperthreading to keep the machine happy.

SPECS
CASE: Antec 300
PSU: Corsair 700 Watt
MoBo: ABIT AW9D LGA 775 with AWARD BIOS
CPU: Intel Pentium D 3.40 GHz Presler Core, though I have a Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 in the wings to throw in there. Occasionally I have bumped the chip up to 4GHz, seems strangely happy there when the thermal unit's nice and cleaned up and the paste has been refreshed.
THERMAL: Zalman Fatalility Cooler + the two fans that came with the case
RAM: 4GB DDR2 800
FDD: 1.44MB 3.5" (for making DDO Diskettes for the 486 and 286)
HDD: four SATA Drives, I think a 60G, an 80G, a 256GB, and a 1TB, + an 80GB PATA from my PIII
OPT: DVD-RW drive out of a Dell Dimension 9400, not sure what speed, don't care, it works
OTHER: USB Media Bay Reader
GFX: NVIDIA 8800GT 512MB, $300 well spent at the time I built this thing in 08', it STILL performs excellent for what I need/want to do
SND: Rocketfish badged SoundBlaster Audigy 7.1 card, PCI, have it because it has hardware loopback, which I need for recording music
NET: Built-In Gigabit LAN
O/S: Windows 7 x64 and Mint Linux Cinnamon, will be moving to Windows 10 when the upgrade becomes available.

PERIPHERY: Old Laser AT 101 Key Keyboard from a 286, Logitech Marble Mouse, some generic blue gamepad that looks like a deluxe PlayStation controller (mostly used with emulators or DOSBOX), and a pair of 3rd hand LCD's (An NEC and a Enlight). I also recently added a PCI-E USB 3.0 card to it as well.

Here's that thing, kind of ugly and mismatched, but again, it works great so I just keep on running it. This was taken when I took the floppy out for awhile.
<snip image>

I believe your motherboard supports the Core2duo line of chips, and you can grab like a 3ghz, 45nm wolfdale c2d chip for like $24 today used on ebay. It may not seem like it but the 45nm C2D chips even at like 2.6 ghz are faster than even a 4ghz Pentium-D chip, by a pretty significant margin. The P4 line was just.. really really slow.

EDIT: 3ghz 65nm Core2Duo $9.75: http://www.ebay.com/itm/221726164977
EDIT #2: 3.333 Ghz 45nm Core2Duo: $23: http://www.ebay.com/itm/221736602607

I just went from a

Q6600
8GB DDR2-800

to a

Phenom II X4 840T
8GB DDR3-1333

It's a prebuilt machine that my mothers uncle was going to donate, as he "upgraded" to a prebuilt system with a Haswell Pentium G3220 with 4GB DDR3. More like a sidegrade IMO, but whatever. The optical drive and the hard drive weren't working, so maybe thats why he got a new system. I can't believe he was going to get rid of this thing , luckily I found it, it has a lot of upgrade potential. And will be my new project.

Going from socket 775 to this AM3 socket and chipset I now get:

PCIE 2.0
16GB DDR3
3x PCIE 1x slots
Potential for a Phenom II X6 (probably won't do that though, they cost too much ATM)
And a mini PCI slot with a wifi card! 🤣.

But man that Core 2 Quad system is a beast now for its age. I fully maxed it out. It's an Dell Dimension E520 with a Pentium 4 sticker and XP sticker on it, 🤣. Went from a P4, 512MB DDR2-533 to a Q6600, 8GB DDR2-800. I brought it from 2002 to probably 2008-2009ish. Even added an Intel Pro/1000 card to it and a discrete GPU. It's styling now.

I would've imagined that going from a Core2Quad Q6600 to a Phenom II X4 would've been a downgrade actually. Quite significantly so.

LunarG wrote:

I would've imagined that going from a Core2Quad Q6600 to a Phenom II X4 would've been a downgrade actually. Quite significantly so.

Yep.. even the 4.4 ghz bulldozer core amd quad core chips sold new today for am3/am3+ are bested by a 3.5 ghz 775 quad core chip. Sadly.. it's just how the facts are.

LunarG wrote:

I would've imagined that going from a Core2Quad Q6600 to a Phenom II X4 would've been a downgrade actually. Quite significantly so.

kithylin wrote:

Yep.. even the 4.4 ghz bulldozer core amd quad core chips sold new today for am3/am3+ are bested by a 3.5 ghz 775 quad core chip. Sadly.. it's just how the facts are.

Maybe you 2 are thinking of the original Phenom's? Online benchmarks and my own tests show the 840T as being ahead of the Q6600. Here's some tests I did when I received the machine.

http://i59.tinypic.com/20qi2dw.png

Some benchmarks online:

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Co … 40T/1980vsm8545
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core2-Quad-Q660 … enom-II-X4-840T

It's a relatively close race, but with the ability to go to a Phenom II X6, DDR3, and PCIE 2.0 for free I jumped on it. Both machines are at stock clocks by the way, since both are inside OEM towers using OEM bioses. I'm sure the Q6600 hates being at stock clocks, but atleast he doesn't have to worry about heating issues very much.

Also, one minor cool thing is I can actually use HyperV now, because the Phenom II has the ability to do EPT (or the equivalent), and HyperV requires that. Sadly, I was just behind a generation with my Q6600 as Intel didn't introduce EPT in their chips until Nehalem i7's, so I couldn't use HyperV at all. VMware worked fine though. Also, not sure why I thought he had a Haswell i3, it was actually a Pentium G3220 !

fyy wrote:

Maybe you 2 are thinking of the original Phenom's?

That is possible.
I am aware that in single core performance, at least in certain benchmarks, performs better than the newer modular AMD architecture. I really hope AMD abandons their current line and redesigns a CPU from scratch, cause I don't think their idea of modules with two ALUs + single double-precision/dual single-precision FPU, was really such a good idea. And I know that it's becoming illegal to not "take sides" these days ("either you're with us, or against us" kind of bullshit), but clearly AMD is not able to compete on CPU performance these days. And it is such a shame, because when they released the Athlon, it was an absolute laugh to see it pound Goliath to the ground. They had a long period of wonderfully competitive CPUs up until Intel launched the Core i-series. And since then, they've been beaten. They don't need more complex multi-module 16 core cpus with built in three-way crossfire and coffee maker. They need to focus on designing a good single-core and then move from there. They seem to have focused on designing a clever multi-core architecture without actually bothering with the cores that are connected together.

Oh well, sorry, rant over. I would just hate to see AMD giving up on CPUs and becoming a gfx-only company.

LunarG wrote:

That is possible. I am aware that in single core performance, at least in certain benchmarks, performs better than the newer mod […]
Show full quote

fyy wrote:

Maybe you 2 are thinking of the original Phenom's?

That is possible.
I am aware that in single core performance, at least in certain benchmarks, performs better than the newer modular AMD architecture. I really hope AMD abandons their current line and redesigns a CPU from scratch, cause I don't think their idea of modules with two ALUs + single double-precision/dual single-precision FPU, was really such a good idea. And I know that it's becoming illegal to not "take sides" these days ("either you're with us, or against us" kind of bullshit), but clearly AMD is not able to compete on CPU performance these days. And it is such a shame, because when they released the Athlon, it was an absolute laugh to see it pound Goliath to the ground. They had a long period of wonderfully competitive CPUs up until Intel launched the Core i-series. And since then, they've been beaten. They don't need more complex multi-module 16 core cpus with built in three-way crossfire and coffee maker. They need to focus on designing a good single-core and then move from there. They seem to have focused on designing a clever multi-core architecture without actually bothering with the cores that are connected together.

Oh well, sorry, rant over. I would just hate to see AMD giving up on CPUs and becoming a gfx-only company.

I agree. But I also don't think it's as bad as people think in real world scenarios, especially when you also factor in prices. AMD's chips are much slower than Intel clock for clock yes, but they still support all the latest CPU instructions, so any application that uses those instructions is still going to get a huge boost compared to older processors that don't support the instructions for example, even if those older processors are faster clock for clock.

We're on the same page though, AMD is quite behind sadly and has been for a while now.

fyy wrote:

I agree. But I also don't think it's as bad as people think in real world scenarios, especially when you also factor in prices. AMD's chips are much slower than Intel clock for clock yes, but they still support all the latest CPU instructions, so any application that uses those instructions is still going to get a huge boost compared to older processors that don't support the instructions for example, even if those older processors are faster clock for clock.

We're on the same page though, AMD is quite behind sadly and has been for a while now.

I agree that for everyday tasks, AMD is a great choice, especially when looking at the more cost effective models. Whenever somebody asks me for advice on building a cheap all-round computer that doesn't need to be gaming oriented, then I tend to recommend AMD, in a large part thanks to their better on-chip graphics.

LunarG wrote:

That is possible. I am aware that in single core performance, at least in certain benchmarks, performs better than the newer mod […]
Show full quote

fyy wrote:

Maybe you 2 are thinking of the original Phenom's?

That is possible.
I am aware that in single core performance, at least in certain benchmarks, performs better than the newer modular AMD architecture. I really hope AMD abandons their current line and redesigns a CPU from scratch, cause I don't think their idea of modules with two ALUs + single double-precision/dual single-precision FPU, was really such a good idea. And I know that it's becoming illegal to not "take sides" these days ("either you're with us, or against us" kind of bullshit), but clearly AMD is not able to compete on CPU performance these days. And it is such a shame, because when they released the Athlon, it was an absolute laugh to see it pound Goliath to the ground. They had a long period of wonderfully competitive CPUs up until Intel launched the Core i-series. And since then, they've been beaten. They don't need more complex multi-module 16 core cpus with built in three-way crossfire and coffee maker. They need to focus on designing a good single-core and then move from there. They seem to have focused on designing a clever multi-core architecture without actually bothering with the cores that are connected together.

Oh well, sorry, rant over. I would just hate to see AMD giving up on CPUs and becoming a gfx-only company.

The 4 core Phenom II is on avarage equal to "Kentsfield" (65 nm Intel C2D Quad) clock for clock and they are both more or less equal to "8 core" Piledriver (used in AMD FX 83x0 and 9xx0) clock for clock. In general you can say that Intels C2D Quads beats the Phenom II by a small margin in games clock for clock while the "8-core" AMD FX beats it by a larger margin where it gets to fully use all its "cores" and isnt restricted by something else.

I do not think the Phenom II was that bad just late to the market. The Phenom II was pretty much all that the original Phenom should have been. The AMD FX is bad, but in real life the FX beats both the C2D Quad and the Phenom II through higher clock speed and to a lesser extent higher memory bandwidth (with the same DDR3 memory). A high clocked Phenom II X6 could perhaps touch the AMD FX in some benchmarks.

So this is what I'm talking about. There is no direct comparison, so the only way to compare the two is to come look at the CPU Scores. From everything I can tell these appear to be the stock speeds for either chip, so neither are overclocked.

One of the modern-day bulldozer quad core non-APU desktop cpu's on AM3+, the FX-4170 which runs at 4.2 ghz (turbo to 4.3) out of the box.

10,526 cpu score: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5118310

And much older 2008 LGa-775 quad core, the Core 2 extreme QX9770, which even runs at a default clock speed of 3.2 ghz, and I found a result with a 3.2 ghz cpu.

12,647 cpu score: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5050571

Again, ignore the overall score and focus on the CPU scores. So yes, you can see here that despite the massively higher clock of the newer AMD chips, and the newer architecture, they're still bested by even a much older Intel chip (4 years older) that runs at even -1100 Mhz less speed on top of that. Any 4-core intel chip newer than that (the i5's) is going to be even faster. And this is an "apples to apples" comparison as best I can find, they're both running the exact same test software at the same settings.

kithylin wrote:

So this is what I'm talking about. There is no direct comparison, so the only way to compare the two is to come look at the CPU […]
Show full quote

So this is what I'm talking about. There is no direct comparison, so the only way to compare the two is to come look at the CPU Scores. From everything I can tell these appear to be the stock speeds for either chip, so neither are overclocked.

One of the modern-day bulldozer quad core non-APU desktop cpu's on AM3+, the FX-4170 which runs at 4.2 ghz (turbo to 4.3) out of the box.

10,526 cpu score: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5118310

And much older 2008 LGa-775 quad core, the Core 2 extreme QX9770, which even runs at a default clock speed of 3.2 ghz, and I found a result with a 3.2 ghz cpu.

12,647 cpu score: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5050571

Again, ignore the overall score and focus on the CPU scores. So yes, you can see here that despite the massively higher clock of the newer AMD chips, and the newer architecture, they're still bested by even a much older Intel chip (4 years older) that runs at even -1100 Mhz less speed on top of that. Any 4-core intel chip newer than that (the i5's) is going to be even faster. And this is an "apples to apples" comparison as best I can find, they're both running the exact same test software at the same settings.

Thats one of the worst AMD FX CPUs against a top of the line Intel socket 775 quad. In a better world the much newer CPU will always win but I do not even think AMD thought in their wildest dreams that their half FX two module "4-core" ever could compete against a "full" top of the line quad in situations where the CPU gets fully loaded. The sad part is when AMDs "8-core" part also gets beaten by older tech. The second generation "8-core" FX (Piledriver) gets smoked by all but the slowest models of socket 1366 4-core i7, "Bloomfield" is also from 2008.

Skyscraper wrote:

Thats one of the worst AMD FX CPUs against a top of the line Intel socket 775 quad. In a better world the much newer CPU will always win but I do not even think AMD thought in their wildest dreams that their half FX two module "4-core" ever could compete against a "full" top of the line quad in situations where the CPU gets fully loaded. The sad part is when AMDs "8-core" part also gets beaten by older tech. The second generation "8-core" FX (Piledriver) gets smoked by all but the slowest models of socket 1366 4-core i7, and "Bloomfield" is also 2008 tech.

Yep I know they use MCM's and it's not really a "quad core". -BUT- AMD is advertising and selling them as quad cores. And so therefore 4 core vs 4 core is the comparison I went for. Anyway we're sort of de-railing this thread off topic and should take this discussion elsewhere probably... I'm pretty bad about that around here it seems 😒

kithylin wrote:

I believe your motherboard supports the Core2duo line of chips, and you can grab like a 3ghz, 45nm wolfdale c2d chip for like $2 […]
Show full quote

creepingnet wrote:

My main current PC is probably one of the oldest/slowest on the forum. I built it in 2008, and never bothered upgrading it much […]
Show full quote

My main current PC is probably one of the oldest/slowest on the forum. I built it in 2008, and never bothered upgrading it much because it always does what I want it to do just fine. I'm not really a big "current gen" gamer and don't really aspire to be. Mostly I use it for internet access, e-mail, video editing/production, writing/composing/recording music for both my band (Zombie Jihad) and my solo projects, that and doing tasks to keep the vintage beasts running. Sometimes I do some VMs on it but being as most of my VM's are Clinton era or older O/S I don't really need 4+ Cores, 32GB of RAM, and Hyperthreading to keep the machine happy.

SPECS
CASE: Antec 300
PSU: Corsair 700 Watt
MoBo: ABIT AW9D LGA 775 with AWARD BIOS
CPU: Intel Pentium D 3.40 GHz Presler Core, though I have a Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 in the wings to throw in there. Occasionally I have bumped the chip up to 4GHz, seems strangely happy there when the thermal unit's nice and cleaned up and the paste has been refreshed.
THERMAL: Zalman Fatalility Cooler + the two fans that came with the case
RAM: 4GB DDR2 800
FDD: 1.44MB 3.5" (for making DDO Diskettes for the 486 and 286)
HDD: four SATA Drives, I think a 60G, an 80G, a 256GB, and a 1TB, + an 80GB PATA from my PIII
OPT: DVD-RW drive out of a Dell Dimension 9400, not sure what speed, don't care, it works
OTHER: USB Media Bay Reader
GFX: NVIDIA 8800GT 512MB, $300 well spent at the time I built this thing in 08', it STILL performs excellent for what I need/want to do
SND: Rocketfish badged SoundBlaster Audigy 7.1 card, PCI, have it because it has hardware loopback, which I need for recording music
NET: Built-In Gigabit LAN
O/S: Windows 7 x64 and Mint Linux Cinnamon, will be moving to Windows 10 when the upgrade becomes available.

PERIPHERY: Old Laser AT 101 Key Keyboard from a 286, Logitech Marble Mouse, some generic blue gamepad that looks like a deluxe PlayStation controller (mostly used with emulators or DOSBOX), and a pair of 3rd hand LCD's (An NEC and a Enlight). I also recently added a PCI-E USB 3.0 card to it as well.

Here's that thing, kind of ugly and mismatched, but again, it works great so I just keep on running it. This was taken when I took the floppy out for awhile.
<snip image>

I believe your motherboard supports the Core2duo line of chips, and you can grab like a 3ghz, 45nm wolfdale c2d chip for like $24 today used on ebay. It may not seem like it but the 45nm C2D chips even at like 2.6 ghz are faster than even a 4ghz Pentium-D chip, by a pretty significant margin. The P4 line was just.. really really slow.

EDIT: 3ghz 65nm Core2Duo $9.75: http://www.ebay.com/itm/221726164977
EDIT #2: 3.333 Ghz 45nm Core2Duo: $23: http://www.ebay.com/itm/221736602607

It does, still have the old manual jammed in the WinXP x86 box from when I built it.

I mentioned the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 above, is that chip better than the two you listed or worse. Also, when I replace the CPU, I will have to upgrade the RAM for better performance since DDR2 800MHz is what I have in there now (might be good to bump this thing up to 8-16GB at that point too). The Q6600 takes 1066MHz DDR2 hence why I've not put that in there yet (well, that and having to reinstall Windows).

Well my daily gamer is

FX6300 @ 4.8ghz
MSI 970 Gamer
8gb DDR3 1866
GTX 660 SuperClocked
Antec Eleven Hundred
TemralTake TR2 600W

creepingnet wrote:

I mentioned the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 above, is that chip better than the two you listed or worse. Also, when I replace the CPU, I will have to upgrade the RAM for better performance since DDR2 800MHz is what I have in there now (might be good to bump this thing up to 8-16GB at that point too). The Q6600 takes 1066MHz DDR2 hence why I've not put that in there yet (well, that and having to reinstall Windows).

Ahhh I missed that part, oopsie. The Q6600 is lots better than either of those two, yep. About the ram though.. you should be aware that for ddr2 platforms, anything faster than 800 mhz (like 1066 ram) is typically "overclocking ram" and you can't just "Install it and it works". You will probably be having to manually set ram timings and voltage and referring to who makes the ram to figure it out.. A big hassle in general. And 1066 mhz ram is a lot more expensive (these days) than normal ddr2-800. Because it's specialty ram that wasn't sold in mass quantities.

Most DDR2 motherboards only have 4 ram slots.. and 4GB single ram sticks are rather expensive for ddr2 systems as well (4x4 GB for 16 GB you mentioned), you're probably best off just looking for some 2GB ddr2-800 sticks and getting those and be happy, it is a really old platform now. I wouldn't really advise spending a ton of money on it today.

Also you shouldn't have to re-install windows to upgrade the CPU. Windows XP and newer should just adapt to it rather easily. I put "Should" in there because.. don't blame me if it doesn't work and blows up in your face, but 90% of the time as long as your system supports it you just pop it in and reboot a couple times and you're on your way.

Here's another shot of my main computer, I just got around to getting a case badge for it so I guess it's done now. 😜

As I said before it's currently:

Motherboard: IPIBL-LB (Benicia)
CPU: Core2Duo E8400 3ghz
RAM: 8GB
HDD: 200GB Seagate, 500GB Western Digital Caviar
GFX Card: AMD Sapphire 7790HD 1GB
Drives: DVDRW Optical Drive (Disguised as 8x CD-ROM), 3.5" Floppy Diskette drive
Case: InWin V500 (mATX case)

Operating system(s): Fedora Linux 21 and Windows 7 Ultimate

King_Corduroy wrote:

Here's another shot of my main computer, I just got around to getting a case badge for it so I guess it's done now. :P […]
Show full quote

Here's another shot of my main computer, I just got around to getting a case badge for it so I guess it's done now. 😜

As I said before it's currently:

Motherboard: IPIBL-LB (Benicia)
CPU: Core2Duo E8400 3ghz
RAM: 8GB
HDD: 200GB Seagate, 500GB Western Digital Caviar
GFX Card: AMD Sapphire 7790HD 1GB
Drives: DVDRW Optical Drive (Disguised as 8x CD-ROM), 3.5" Floppy Diskette drive
Case: InWin V500 (mATX case)

Operating system(s): Fedora Linux 21 and Windows 7 Ultimate

Should get that beauty an SSD to make it even more of a sleeper. 😎

King_Corduroy wrote:

Here's another shot of my main computer, I just got around to getting a case badge for it so I guess it's done now. :P […]
Show full quote

Here's another shot of my main computer, I just got around to getting a case badge for it so I guess it's done now. 😜

As I said before it's currently:

Motherboard: IPIBL-LB (Benicia)
CPU: Core2Duo E8400 3ghz
RAM: 8GB
HDD: 200GB Seagate, 500GB Western Digital Caviar
GFX Card: AMD Sapphire 7790HD 1GB
Drives: DVDRW Optical Drive (Disguised as 8x CD-ROM), 3.5" Floppy Diskette drive
Case: InWin V500 (mATX case)

Operating system(s): Fedora Linux 21 and Windows 7 Ultimate

[/img]http://orig05.deviantart.net/af03/f/2015/067/ … roy-d8l0dk8.jpg[/img]

[/img]http://th02.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/f/2014/36 … roy-d8bxbqb.jpg[/img]

Should get that beauty an SSD to make it even more of a sleeper. 😎