I'm lookingat getting a new computer, seen this one. Is it a good deal?

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1679882409.126315941 3@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccffadejfhlkjflcflgceggdhhmdgml.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=237598&category_oid=

Would just be using it for internet, storing photos & videos with some editing of these, word and excel, and also music. Not into gaming so not using it for this.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

That seems a decent price for that spec machine, are you looking to buy something around that price/spec? because if not, you could get a setup for a few hundred less that would still handle everything you mentioned, that machine is something you would buy if you was wanting to play games etc as it is very high spec...but, if you have the money to spare and go for it, it will do what you want it to do 10x over and you probably wouldn't have to upgrade again for a very long time.

No doubt someone wil soon tell you to build your own or avoi integrated graphics like the plague - but that is a fair price for the spec.

However I agree with the above that it seems a bit overkill for your needs - not neccesarily a bad thing as it will do what you want well, and be a tad more future proof.

I've never been keen on PC Worlds own brand but this seems a bargain considering it has a 20" monitor as well - you normally pay that price for just a base station with keyboard and mouse. In view of the fact that you want to use it for Video Editing I would advise that if it doesn't have Fire Wire port to buy a pci ieee 1394 card as colleagues at work who use video equipment have found that USB connections not to be as good - most camcorders give both USB and FireWire connections - FireWire is better as it is a continuous stream and whilst it is the same rate (400 Mb/s) as FireWire, USB 2.0 tends to transfer data in spurts instead of a continuous stream.

Best regards,
swarfendor43

I would avoid it... for video editing processor Cache is the main factor you should consider, and the Core 2 Quad Q8300 featured in the machine you linked only has 4MB cache shared and is 2.5Ghz (that's 1mb per core if all are in use, and will be actual usage approx 4Ghz) to be honest, a Q8400 3.0Ghz (6mb Cache, which = 3MB per core, and would be approx 5Ghz) would be about the same, if not higher performance.. as a result of the chache...

It's all about cache :D

any recommendations ona laptop around £350 please