Preface:
If your not a performance user, or you are trying to keep your costs low, AMD is a better choice right now. Otherwise Intel with it's Core 2 is the way to go.
Regarding motherboards with integrated video, do NOT use motherboards with Intel integrated graphics (or at the very least, get a separate video card). Intel integrated graphics (and the drivers they use) are of such poor quality it can cause crashes with various programs, and actually slows the rest of the system down, even in normal every day tasks. Stick with either Nvidia or ATI integrated video (if you want integrated video), or use a Pci-E video card outright.
One final cost consideration: all things being equal, good quality motherboards for Intel cpu's tend to cost more ($30-$50 extra) compared to a similar board for an AMD cpu. Those trying to stay on a budget will want to keep that in mind.
Intel CPU recommendations
Totally avoid the Intel P4 (and Pentium D variant) cpu's, they are very old, run way too hot, and cost too much for the price/ performance level (a $50 AMD X2 will blow em out of the water and run much cooler to boot). The Celeron Conroe and Pentium E variants aren't horrible, but AMD cpu's at the same price point tend to perform a tad better, so for budget users you are much better off looking at AMD.
Be aware that the current LGA 775 heatsink mounts just BLOWS compared to the AMD AM2, and extreme caution should be used when working with it. Just adding or removing a heatsink off a LGA 775 socket can damage the socket or heatsink mounts unless you are extremely careful.
The good news is that Intel has released the Core 2 Duo's(and Quad core versions as well), which are a HUGE improvement over the piss poor Pentium 4/D designs. Core 2 also has HUGE overclocking capabilities, as good as if not better then the original Celeron's 8-9 years ago. The one negative issue to be aware of is that Core 2 still uses the LGA 775 socket, which as mentioned above, utterly sucks. If you get a Core 2, my suggestion is to avoid the super high end motherboards (the over $150 crowd), as these are usually loaded with piles of features that very few people actually use.
With the Intel cpu's, go for the 45nm variants, these generate far less heat compared to the older 65nm versions.
The current best bang for the buck as of 8/05/08 is the E8500, which is a 3.16 ghz native cpu with 6 meg cache. These can often be pushed well past 3.5ghz on the right board with standard cooling and no extra voltage. Current price is about $185. The higher end Core 2's (including the "Extreme" crap models) aren't worth the price, they are not much faster then E8500, and cost double or worse.
For people doing extreme number crunching (video and 3d editing, some scientific computing, high end linux servers, very intensive compiling) that is multi threaded, the quad core series starting at $200ish and up is a very interesting option. Most users including gamers will not be well served by the quad core (most applications and games are not threaded well enough to use it), but for the type of users listed above, its never been easier or cheaper to have an insane amount of power in a desktop box.
12/11/08 update:
The new Intel Core i7 cpu looks very interesting from a performance and technology point of view, but is still VERY new, and rather pricey. The motherboards that have been released for it are extremely overpriced and immature at this time. Unless money is no object, I would avoid this platform for the next 6 months or so until it becomes more mature and price effective.
Socket 775 Boards:
The best choices in motherboards use either a Nvidia or Intel chipset. Be advised that Intel in one of the most idiotic chipset / platform decisions in years (probably the worst since the early 8xx series fiascoes) decided to NOT include ANY native pata channels on their current ICH8 / ICH9 / ICH10 southbridges for the Core 2, forcing all the Intel chipset MB oem's to use 3rd party controllers (and these usually have lots of performance and compatibility issues) to provide this functionality. If you go with an Intel chipset, MAKE SURE to ONLY use sata hard drives and have at least one sata optical drive. If you have additional pata optical drives, its usually safe to stick them on the 3rd party controller.
Performance on the Nvidia solutions appears to be decent, so for people who are unwilling to give up their PATA hard drives, this may be the best option for a Core 2. The Nvidia boards do occasionally have wierd NCQ problems with some hard drives (see the hard drive section above for details), so be prepared to disable NCQ if you run into issues. A file that makes disabling NCQ easy is here.
If you're not sure if the Nvidia or Intel based boards would be better for you, I'd recommend the Intel chipsets as long as you do not need native pata support or plan to run Nvidia video cards in SLI (which requires an Nvidia board). My reason for this is that the Intel chipset drivers are a bit more polished and better supported compared to Nvidia's chipset drivers. People planning to run server versions of Windows (like Windows Server 2003, 2008, etc) should definitely stay with Intel based boards due to Nvidia's refusal to properly support these OS's (you can sometimes get the XP drivers to work on the server variants, but its a pain, and there's no reason for Nvidia to not support them, its just plain laziness on their part) Also, the Nvidia sata controller can occasionally show weird bugs on some hard drives, whereas the Intel sata controller is pretty solid.
Try to make sure your board has official 1333 bus speed support (and not just the cheezy "OC" support). Many of the newer Intel cpu's require this. Avoid older chipsets that don't support this (like any of the Intel chipsets prior to the P35 series). As a final note, avoid the DDR3 only boards at this time. There is little or no real world performance gain with these boards or ram, and DDR3 sticks are quite a bit more expensive compared to DDR2 (see the ram section above).
MSI P7N SLI Based on the Nvidia 750 chipset. Moderate cost. Feature wise, you get average IO plate options, 2 pata ports that are fully compatible (unlike the Intel 3rd party pata controllers), firewire, and some rather impressive passive cooling heatsinks on the board. Users who have a lot of old pata devices they don't want to give up, or people wishing to use Nvidia video cards in SLI mode will want to consider this board. This board is currently untested at the moment.
Newest bios update for this board can be found here.
Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3L Based on the Intel P45 chipset. Fairly cheap by intel chipset standards. Features are fairly vanilla, 6 sata ports, lots of pci-e slots, and the IO plate offers an impressive 8 usb ports. Ethernet and audio are both realtek, so no wierd drivers to be concerned about there. The bios can be flashed right off a usb flash drive without needing to boot into dos (very handy!). Overclocking features appear to be very impressive as well. Stability is excellent, even while overclocked during heavy gaming or dvd encoding. One minor caveat, the early bios revisions were QUITE buggy, so make sure to flash your bios to the newest version when you get this board.
Newest bios updates for this board can be found here.
GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R If you need firewire, this board is virtually identical to the above board, except it includes firewire as well. The heatsink cooling is slightly improved as well. Usually runs about $10-15 more then the non firewire variant. Untested at the moment, but should be no different (other then the firewire) compared to the above model.
Newest bios updates for this board can be found here.
If your not a performance user, or you are trying to keep your costs low, AMD is a better choice right now. Otherwise Intel with it's Core 2 is the way to go.
Regarding motherboards with integrated video, do NOT use motherboards with Intel integrated graphics (or at the very least, get a separate video card). Intel integrated graphics (and the drivers they use) are of such poor quality it can cause crashes with various programs, and actually slows the rest of the system down, even in normal every day tasks. Stick with either Nvidia or ATI integrated video (if you want integrated video), or use a Pci-E video card outright.
One final cost consideration: all things being equal, good quality motherboards for Intel cpu's tend to cost more ($30-$50 extra) compared to a similar board for an AMD cpu. Those trying to stay on a budget will want to keep that in mind.
Intel CPU recommendations
Totally avoid the Intel P4 (and Pentium D variant) cpu's, they are very old, run way too hot, and cost too much for the price/ performance level (a $50 AMD X2 will blow em out of the water and run much cooler to boot). The Celeron Conroe and Pentium E variants aren't horrible, but AMD cpu's at the same price point tend to perform a tad better, so for budget users you are much better off looking at AMD.
Be aware that the current LGA 775 heatsink mounts just BLOWS compared to the AMD AM2, and extreme caution should be used when working with it. Just adding or removing a heatsink off a LGA 775 socket can damage the socket or heatsink mounts unless you are extremely careful.
The good news is that Intel has released the Core 2 Duo's(and Quad core versions as well), which are a HUGE improvement over the piss poor Pentium 4/D designs. Core 2 also has HUGE overclocking capabilities, as good as if not better then the original Celeron's 8-9 years ago. The one negative issue to be aware of is that Core 2 still uses the LGA 775 socket, which as mentioned above, utterly sucks. If you get a Core 2, my suggestion is to avoid the super high end motherboards (the over $150 crowd), as these are usually loaded with piles of features that very few people actually use.
With the Intel cpu's, go for the 45nm variants, these generate far less heat compared to the older 65nm versions.
The current best bang for the buck as of 8/05/08 is the E8500, which is a 3.16 ghz native cpu with 6 meg cache. These can often be pushed well past 3.5ghz on the right board with standard cooling and no extra voltage. Current price is about $185. The higher end Core 2's (including the "Extreme" crap models) aren't worth the price, they are not much faster then E8500, and cost double or worse.
For people doing extreme number crunching (video and 3d editing, some scientific computing, high end linux servers, very intensive compiling) that is multi threaded, the quad core series starting at $200ish and up is a very interesting option. Most users including gamers will not be well served by the quad core (most applications and games are not threaded well enough to use it), but for the type of users listed above, its never been easier or cheaper to have an insane amount of power in a desktop box.
12/11/08 update:
The new Intel Core i7 cpu looks very interesting from a performance and technology point of view, but is still VERY new, and rather pricey. The motherboards that have been released for it are extremely overpriced and immature at this time. Unless money is no object, I would avoid this platform for the next 6 months or so until it becomes more mature and price effective.
Socket 775 Boards:
The best choices in motherboards use either a Nvidia or Intel chipset. Be advised that Intel in one of the most idiotic chipset / platform decisions in years (probably the worst since the early 8xx series fiascoes) decided to NOT include ANY native pata channels on their current ICH8 / ICH9 / ICH10 southbridges for the Core 2, forcing all the Intel chipset MB oem's to use 3rd party controllers (and these usually have lots of performance and compatibility issues) to provide this functionality. If you go with an Intel chipset, MAKE SURE to ONLY use sata hard drives and have at least one sata optical drive. If you have additional pata optical drives, its usually safe to stick them on the 3rd party controller.
Performance on the Nvidia solutions appears to be decent, so for people who are unwilling to give up their PATA hard drives, this may be the best option for a Core 2. The Nvidia boards do occasionally have wierd NCQ problems with some hard drives (see the hard drive section above for details), so be prepared to disable NCQ if you run into issues. A file that makes disabling NCQ easy is here.
If you're not sure if the Nvidia or Intel based boards would be better for you, I'd recommend the Intel chipsets as long as you do not need native pata support or plan to run Nvidia video cards in SLI (which requires an Nvidia board). My reason for this is that the Intel chipset drivers are a bit more polished and better supported compared to Nvidia's chipset drivers. People planning to run server versions of Windows (like Windows Server 2003, 2008, etc) should definitely stay with Intel based boards due to Nvidia's refusal to properly support these OS's (you can sometimes get the XP drivers to work on the server variants, but its a pain, and there's no reason for Nvidia to not support them, its just plain laziness on their part) Also, the Nvidia sata controller can occasionally show weird bugs on some hard drives, whereas the Intel sata controller is pretty solid.
Try to make sure your board has official 1333 bus speed support (and not just the cheezy "OC" support). Many of the newer Intel cpu's require this. Avoid older chipsets that don't support this (like any of the Intel chipsets prior to the P35 series). As a final note, avoid the DDR3 only boards at this time. There is little or no real world performance gain with these boards or ram, and DDR3 sticks are quite a bit more expensive compared to DDR2 (see the ram section above).
MSI P7N SLI Based on the Nvidia 750 chipset. Moderate cost. Feature wise, you get average IO plate options, 2 pata ports that are fully compatible (unlike the Intel 3rd party pata controllers), firewire, and some rather impressive passive cooling heatsinks on the board. Users who have a lot of old pata devices they don't want to give up, or people wishing to use Nvidia video cards in SLI mode will want to consider this board. This board is currently untested at the moment.
Newest bios update for this board can be found here.
Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3L Based on the Intel P45 chipset. Fairly cheap by intel chipset standards. Features are fairly vanilla, 6 sata ports, lots of pci-e slots, and the IO plate offers an impressive 8 usb ports. Ethernet and audio are both realtek, so no wierd drivers to be concerned about there. The bios can be flashed right off a usb flash drive without needing to boot into dos (very handy!). Overclocking features appear to be very impressive as well. Stability is excellent, even while overclocked during heavy gaming or dvd encoding. One minor caveat, the early bios revisions were QUITE buggy, so make sure to flash your bios to the newest version when you get this board.
Newest bios updates for this board can be found here.
GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R If you need firewire, this board is virtually identical to the above board, except it includes firewire as well. The heatsink cooling is slightly improved as well. Usually runs about $10-15 more then the non firewire variant. Untested at the moment, but should be no different (other then the firewire) compared to the above model.
Newest bios updates for this board can be found here.
Amd CPU recommendations:
For building a new AMD rig, your best bet is the AM2+ socket. There's no reason to touch Socket A, 754, or 939 anymore. When possible, get the lower wattage model cpu's if they don't cost a lot more compared to the higher watt ones. Rather then give direct links here, I am going to give a few suggestions, as pricing changes way too quick here to recommend certain model cpu's. With AMD cpu's, its generally not worth spending over $100, the Intel Core 2 is a better choice in the $100 and up range. Avoid the 125 (and above) watt cpu's at all cost, there are LOTS of reports of various motherboards dying when these are used, plus these models generate a LOT a heat. As always, do your homework and shopping, this isn't written in stone. Avoid the pre B3 stepping Phenom's, they have a REALLY nasty bug in them that cripples performance. Most of programs currently out do NOT take advantage of a quad core cpu, so don't buy one expecting it to magically double your performance. Unless an oem cpu is WAY cheaper compared to its retail brother, go with the retail cpu. 3 year warranty, and the retail heatsink/fans are pretty good quality.
For building a new AMD rig, your best bet is the AM2+ socket. There's no reason to touch Socket A, 754, or 939 anymore. When possible, get the lower wattage model cpu's if they don't cost a lot more compared to the higher watt ones. Rather then give direct links here, I am going to give a few suggestions, as pricing changes way too quick here to recommend certain model cpu's. With AMD cpu's, its generally not worth spending over $100, the Intel Core 2 is a better choice in the $100 and up range. Avoid the 125 (and above) watt cpu's at all cost, there are LOTS of reports of various motherboards dying when these are used, plus these models generate a LOT a heat. As always, do your homework and shopping, this isn't written in stone. Avoid the pre B3 stepping Phenom's, they have a REALLY nasty bug in them that cripples performance. Most of programs currently out do NOT take advantage of a quad core cpu, so don't buy one expecting it to magically double your performance. Unless an oem cpu is WAY cheaper compared to its retail brother, go with the retail cpu. 3 year warranty, and the retail heatsink/fans are pretty good quality.