Dell Dimension 2400 CPU

It's still slow.

A newer not brand new PC is cheaper than building your own.  At $100 OR LESS a refurb machine with windows 7 is absolutely cheaper than building new.

http://www.walmart.com/search/?query=46697045&grid=true&

You get what you pay for, which is something borderline obsolete. Forget about USB 3.0, SATA 3, and DDR3 memory.  

You get what you pay for, which is something borderline obsolete. Forget about USB 3.0, SATA 3, and DDR3 memory.

A used T3500 would be cheaper than a new motherboard cpu with usb3 and DDR3 or DDR4 Ram.  I purchased several of these with windows 7 coa and reinstalled them.  The cost of the used units was under $300.   Windows 7 Pro alone is $149 to $199 if you can find it.

And could be easily upgraded to USB3 and SATA 3 with SSD later on.The 2400 is beyond obsolete.

$150 will upgrade the mainboard, CPU and memory. Meanwhile, the T3500 is an old design (I used one back in 2012), and hardware, even workstations, doesn't age well.  

As for an OS, a Windows 8 upgrade can be had for $80, and it is eligible for a free upgrade to 10.

$150 will upgrade the mainboard, CPU and memory. Meanwhile, the T3500 is an old design (I used one back in 2012), and hardware, even workstations, doesn't age well.   As for an OS, a Windows 8 upgrade can be had for $80, and it is eligible for a free upgrade to 10.

Show me the money.

Since you cant use the 20 pin ATX power supply either.

I did find the 8.0 windows still around.

http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-Pro-Upgrade-Version/dp/B008H3SW4I

and that does not include the minimum $109 dollar cost of windows 7 8.1 or 10. I have to also disagree about the T3500 which is based on Nelahem architecture aka you can put a 6 core xeon into it.  The hardware is similar to 2009 to 2012 Mac Pro systems.  24 Gigs DDR3 and a newer video card GTX960 and this system ages just fine and Rocks Games as well as Video Editing Apps Etc.

http://www.amazon.com/Dell-Precision-Workstation-Quad-Core-Professional/dp/B008EWIN2S

 http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0161MZ1J0/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all

There's only so much you can do with a nearly 10 year old PC - for improved web surfing you can try a lightweight browser (paper moon is good in this respect) - or a light weight OS (http://lubuntu.net/)

I did find the 8.0 windows still around.

I have to also disagree about the T3500 which is based on Nelahem architecture aka you can put a 6 core xeon into it.

Here's the old quad-core compared to the dual-core that's in my dad's Web-surfing box.

Those tests are a red herring.  They were not putting a T3500 with GTX960 up against the I3.  They are using the Old non gaming Quadro or Fire Pro video cards.  They will score lower on gaming.

If you compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges by using the EXACT SAME Card and EXACT SAME RAM amount the T3500 is fine.  WEI index close to 9 on the graphics where 9.9 is max.

The GPU makes all the difference.  Their methodology is suspect at best which is why they don't list all of the components in the system.

Also when you pair up the cpu the difference is 14% per their spec.

http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/rc1009777/shared-content~data-sheets~en/documents~dell-precision-t3500-spec-sheet.pdf

A T3500 with a Quadro NVS 420 is going to be slower with games.

But is it faster than it was?

The T3500 with GTX960 is significantly faster.  Its basically the same hardware as a single Processor Mac pro Nehahem from the 2009 to 2012 era with the same DDR3.

 https://www.amazon.com/Precision-Workstation-2-66GHz-Professional-Installed/dp/B00ZWFX56O/

All Mac Pro GPUs above were in a in a 'Mid 2010' Mac Pro 3.33GHz Hex-Core. The GeForce GTX 680MX is the only exception -- embedded in the 'Late 2012' (27") iMac 3.4GHz Core i7. Both Macs were running OS X 10.8.3.

In this case the I7 3.4Ghz is NOT faster than Nelahem Xeon 3.33 Ghz

http://barefeats.com/gpu680v.html

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-960-vs-GeForce-GTX-680

The GPU makes all the difference.  Their methodology is suspect at best which is why they don't list all of the components in the system.

In raw CPU power, the quad-core of 2009 is on a par with the i3 dual-core of today. My point is that the old quad-cores are nothing special anymore.