[drewg123]

When I build a PC, the number one feature I want is ECC memory. It can be tricky to find a non-server configuration that supports it (you historically need a "good" bios that is smart enough to enable it for AMD, and you typically need a Xeon flavor CPU + workstation level board for Intel; caveat, it has been 2.5 years since my last build).

I was hoping that this tool might make finding non-server parts that support ECC easier, but alas, that does not seem to be the case.

[adl]

I'm genuinely curious, why is it your number one feature? I know that ECC provides error correction, but aside from server use, is it really that critical?

[joosters]

Memory errors are a significant cause [citation needed!] of system instability. If you want a reliable machine, even a desktop, that is going to keep working, then ECC is very useful.

If you've decided upon ECC as a must, then it would be great for a system builder tool to then show you options based upon that choice.

[walshemj]

And for some high end use case you might want to be looking at xenon's or even dual xenon's.

I could see a big data or HPC developer wanting to have a desktop that used the same processor as the cluster they are writing for - mainly in the case where your tuning for max performance and want to able to develop using the same complier flags.

[Freaky]

It's less about the stability and more about data integrity. Crashes suck, but they suck a hell of a lot less than corrupt filesystems and backups.

[dclowd9901]

I think I'm the vein of this product's philosophy, maybe a "stability" or "reliability" metric along with the performance and price metrics.

[dnm]

This is an old page, but convinced me years ago to go with ECC memory whenever I build a new machine.

http://cr.yp.to/hardware/ecc.html

He hasn't updated is build in a while, though. http://cr.yp.to/hardware/build-20090123.html