Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New Intel 64 bit processors

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 12:39:34 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel processors.

Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until they
drop in price?

More about : intel bit processors

February 23, 2005 1:43:05 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Hi,

Too expensive and only a few softwares using 64 bit process.

Peter

"Rodger Day" wrote:

> Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel processors.
>
> Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until they
> drop in price?
>
>
>
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 2:48:23 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

The 64 bit newsgroups may be a better place to ask this question:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/x64/tr...
The server newsgroup is correct.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Rodger Day" <rodman@xaol.com> wrote in message
news:%23SzAKoWGFHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel processors.
>
> Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until they
> drop in price?
Related resources
February 23, 2005 6:19:05 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

In news:%23SzAKoWGFHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl,
Rodger Day <rodman@xaol.com> had this to say:


> Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel
> processors.
>
> Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until
> they drop in price?

As Jupiter said this probably isn't the best place to ask but I use an AMD64
here and the legacy support is good though not great. I've had to monkey
with drivers a few times and can't get Windows ME to work very well but it
does run quickly. Your question isn't one I can answer nor can anyone else
regardless of where you post it. The questions I ask you to ask yourself is
do you want it? Can you afford it? Will it benefit you? If the answer is yes
to anyone of those questions or any that you make up on your own then it's
up to you to get one. I own three 64 bit CPUs here and like them all but I
actually find the AMD 3200 to be speedy enough and this, my main computer,
is that.

Galen
--

"My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 6:19:06 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Galen,

What are "speedy" differences do you notice from your 3200 compare to a
Pentium 4 processor?

"Galen" <galennews@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:utDeZBYGFHA.464@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> In news:%23SzAKoWGFHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl,
> Rodger Day <rodman@xaol.com> had this to say:
>
>
>> Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel
>> processors.
>>
>> Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until
>> they drop in price?
>
> As Jupiter said this probably isn't the best place to ask but I use an
> AMD64
> here and the legacy support is good though not great. I've had to monkey
> with drivers a few times and can't get Windows ME to work very well but it
> does run quickly. Your question isn't one I can answer nor can anyone else
> regardless of where you post it. The questions I ask you to ask yourself
> is
> do you want it? Can you afford it? Will it benefit you? If the answer is
> yes
> to anyone of those questions or any that you make up on your own then it's
> up to you to get one. I own three 64 bit CPUs here and like them all but I
> actually find the AMD 3200 to be speedy enough and this, my main computer,
> is that.
>
> Galen
> --
>
> "My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
> the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
> in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
> stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
> mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
>
>
February 23, 2005 11:34:04 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Rodger Day wrote:
> Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel processors.
>
> Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until they
> drop in price?
>
>

They are Intel, that is enough to leave them well alone.

The AMD 64bit is backwards compatible, not sure if ITel is.
Get a AMD, more power for your money.


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0508-1, 22/02/2005
Tested on: 23/02/2005 08:34:05
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 1:17:25 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

sorry O/T, but I must compliment you on your signature

--
"Display tolerance & kindness to those with less
knowledge than you because there is ALWAYS
someone with more"


"Galen" <galennews@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:utDeZBYGFHA.464@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> In news:%23SzAKoWGFHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl,
> Rodger Day <rodman@xaol.com> had this to say:
>
>
> > Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel
> > processors.
> >
> > Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until
> > they drop in price?
>
> As Jupiter said this probably isn't the best place to ask but I use an
AMD64
> here and the legacy support is good though not great. I've had to monkey
> with drivers a few times and can't get Windows ME to work very well but it
> does run quickly. Your question isn't one I can answer nor can anyone else
> regardless of where you post it. The questions I ask you to ask yourself
is
> do you want it? Can you afford it? Will it benefit you? If the answer is
yes
> to anyone of those questions or any that you make up on your own then it's
> up to you to get one. I own three 64 bit CPUs here and like them all but I
> actually find the AMD 3200 to be speedy enough and this, my main computer,
> is that.
>
> Galen
> --
>
> "My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
> the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
> in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
> stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
> mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
>
>
February 23, 2005 3:22:40 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

In news:eKMF7DYGFHA.3316@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
Rodger Day <rodman@xaol.com> had this to say:


> Galen,
>
> What are "speedy" differences do you notice from your 3200 compare to
> a Pentium 4 processor?

Well, for example, this computer has been up and running since last Patch
Tuesday (in fact that's about the only time it re-boot) it's stable and
fast. I've played with a few P4's but I completely gave up on them after
running a benchmark on a P4 2.7 GHz and seeing the results compared to the
AMD that I'd bought as a lark. I had stopped buying AMD way back after the
K6 II for a while as the Intel chips were much speedier for a while. I'm not
brand specific, I'm performance specific. The P4 is great if you're a gamer
as the graphics render faster or so they tell me. I generally am looking for
a combination of speed and price. In the AMD I find that compiling goes a
heck of a lot faster and there's generally fewer errors generated during the
operation which is why I stick with it.

I think that if I were a gamer I'd go with one of the HT models.

Galen
--

"My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
February 23, 2005 3:25:40 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

In news:eenhUpbGFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl,
Budget Print Center <budget(nospam)print@1usa.net> had this to say:


> sorry O/T, but I must compliment you on your signature
>
> --
> "Display tolerance & kindness to those with less
> knowledge than you because there is ALWAYS
> someone with more"

A Conan Doyle quote is almost always in my signature even if I have to make
my signature even larger to fit more informatioin in. I must often wonder
what the man was really like to have been knighted, to be able to write
about such vast subjects and still seem educated, and to have the
imagination that he had. Remarkable really. You can read his bio here:

http://www.sherlockholmesonline.org/Biography/index.htm

Galen
--

"My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 7:02:02 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Ad wrote:
> Rodger Day wrote:
>
>> Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel processors.
>>
>> Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until
>> they drop in price?
>>
>
> They are Intel, that is enough to leave them well alone.
>
> The AMD 64bit is backwards compatible, not sure if ITel is.
> Get a AMD, more power for your money.
>
>
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 0508-1, 22/02/2005
> Tested on: 23/02/2005 08:34:05
> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
They are both backwards compatitible. AMD invented the AMD64
architecure, Intel just "copied" it and called it EM64T. You probably
meant Itanium, which isn't backwards compatitible and has almost nothing
to do with x86.

Either you buy Intel or AMD, you can't go wrong. There's a 64 bit
Windows XP version coming out soon and I guess developers will then
focus more on x86-64.
February 24, 2005 12:50:07 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Matej Barac wrote:
>>
> They are both backwards compatitible. AMD invented the AMD64
> architecure, Intel just "copied" it and called it EM64T. You probably
> meant Itanium, which isn't backwards compatitible and has almost nothing
> to do with x86.

>
> Either you buy Intel or AMD, you can't go wrong. There's a 64 bit
> Windows XP version coming out soon and I guess developers will then
> focus more on x86-64.
>

I am not even sure if I am staying with the P.C platform, to be honest I
am getting fed up with it and I think it is time to move to something else.
I want my Amiga back :-)

If I do stay with the P.c and upgrade, then I would upgrade to an AMD
64, I will not touch Intel with a barge pole.

But if I can get an Apple Mac at a decent price, then I may be tempted
to cross over.


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0508-2, 23/02/2005
Tested on: 23/02/2005 21:50:09
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 1:40:31 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

You actually have it backwards. AMD64's are usually better for gaming, while
P4's with HT are better at desktop apps. My P4 at work is much more
responsive to MS office tasks when I have many windows open. My AMD64 at
home seems pokey by comparison. However, it smokes the P4 in games (with
identical vid cards.)

"Galen" <galennews@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ugJeKxcGFHA.588@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> In news:eKMF7DYGFHA.3316@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
> Rodger Day <rodman@xaol.com> had this to say:
>
>
> > Galen,
> >
> > What are "speedy" differences do you notice from your 3200 compare to
> > a Pentium 4 processor?
>
> Well, for example, this computer has been up and running since last Patch
> Tuesday (in fact that's about the only time it re-boot) it's stable and
> fast. I've played with a few P4's but I completely gave up on them after
> running a benchmark on a P4 2.7 GHz and seeing the results compared to the
> AMD that I'd bought as a lark. I had stopped buying AMD way back after the
> K6 II for a while as the Intel chips were much speedier for a while. I'm
not
> brand specific, I'm performance specific. The P4 is great if you're a
gamer
> as the graphics render faster or so they tell me. I generally am looking
for
> a combination of speed and price. In the AMD I find that compiling goes a
> heck of a lot faster and there's generally fewer errors generated during
the
> operation which is why I stick with it.
>
> I think that if I were a gamer I'd go with one of the HT models.
>
> Galen
> --
>
> "My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
> the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
> in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
> stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
> mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
>
>
February 24, 2005 5:36:59 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Rodger Day wrote:
> Just checking to see what everyone thinks about the new Intel processors.
>
> Anyone think it will be worth buying right now or holding off until they
> drop in price?
>
>
I would not go with Intel 64 bit processors until they have been proven.
AMD makes the best 64 bit processors available now.

R.
February 24, 2005 5:56:08 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

In news:o GVxBBqGFHA.2156@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl,
Rube <dont@spam.me> had this to say:


> You actually have it backwards. AMD64's are usually better for
> gaming, while P4's with HT are better at desktop apps. My P4 at work
> is much more responsive to MS office tasks when I have many windows
> open. My AMD64 at home seems pokey by comparison. However, it smokes
> the P4 in games (with identical vid cards.)

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030623/p4_3200-07.htm...

Galen
--

"My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
February 25, 2005 2:36:42 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Galen wrote:

>
>>You actually have it backwards. AMD64's are usually better for
>>gaming, while P4's with HT are better at desktop apps. My P4 at work
>>is much more responsive to MS office tasks when I have many windows
>>open. My AMD64 at home seems pokey by comparison. However, it smokes
>>the P4 in games (with identical vid cards.)
>
>
> http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030623/p4_3200-07.htm...
>
Ignore anything from there, he is so Pro-Intel, that you would think he
got shares in the compnay.
February 25, 2005 2:36:43 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

In news:111sp83nn8t69e9@corp.supernews.com,
AD <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> had this to say:

> Ignore anything from there, he is so Pro-Intel, that you would think
> he got shares in the compnay.

LOL He's always seemed pro Intel but I don't think he'd go ahead and fudge
the benchmarks. I looked for another site that had similar reports in a
side-by-side but couldn't find the one which I had used prior to making my
choice though initial choices were made back in the AMD XP vs the Intel 2.2
GHz models. I've stuck with AMD since, should HT prove to be interesting and
stable I'll look into one of them eventually as well as the 64 bit systems
from Intel later on in life but I have to stop buying so much hardware, I'm
running out of time to test it all...

Galen

--

"My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
February 25, 2005 11:28:52 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Galen wrote:
>
>
>
> LOL He's always seemed pro Intel but I don't think he'd go ahead and fudge

I would not put it past anyone these days.


> the benchmarks. I looked for another site that had similar reports in a
> side-by-side but couldn't find the one which I had used prior to making my
> choice though initial choices were made back in the AMD XP vs the Intel 2.2
> GHz models. I've stuck with AMD since, should HT prove to be interesting and
> stable I'll look into one of them eventually as well as the 64 bit systems
> from Intel later on in life but I have to stop buying so much hardware, I'm
> running out of time to test it all..

I am staying with AMD, I have used AMd for years and unless I changed
platforms, I can not see myself buying an Intel. I have given it a rest
now for a while buying hardware. You can go on forever and there is also
the money problem.
I may upgrade sometime this year or I may just stay with the AMD 2500xp
chip I got now, after all, it does the job.
February 25, 2005 1:22:28 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

In news:111todt92gb2rc0@corp.supernews.com,
AD <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> had this to say:

> I am staying with AMD, I have used AMd for years and unless I changed
> platforms, I can not see myself buying an Intel. I have given it a
> rest now for a while buying hardware. You can go on forever and there
> is also the money problem.
> I may upgrade sometime this year or I may just stay with the AMD
> 2500xp chip I got now, after all, it does the job.

I suppose someone might fudge the benchmarks but either way I've been
impressed with this the AMD Athlon XP 3200+...

It's fast enough, stable enough, and though it seems to run a bit hotter
than I'd like but that doesn't seem to bother it. The only thing I have
cooling that chip is a Thermaltake Volcano 8 sink and a fan. Maybe I should
look into a different cooling supply at some point? I'm not too worried
about it though. I'll stick with AMD until I'm given evidence to support
changing to a different manufacturer. As for the 64 bit, I'd only use the
AMD64 at this point. I do want to check out an HT though as I've not had the
chance to do so yet.

Galen
--

"My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
February 25, 2005 5:42:25 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Those charts are for Athlon XP 32 bit CPU,s Not the 64 bit chips.
Check out these links.

http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050221/prescott-08....

http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050221/prescott-10....

I havent seen any Benchmarks for the Intel 64 Bit Cpu's yet.

"AD" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:111todt92gb2rc0@corp.supernews.com...
> Galen wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> LOL He's always seemed pro Intel but I don't think he'd go ahead and
>> fudge
>
> I would not put it past anyone these days.
>
>
>> the benchmarks. I looked for another site that had similar reports in a
>> side-by-side but couldn't find the one which I had used prior to making
>> my
>> choice though initial choices were made back in the AMD XP vs the Intel
>> 2.2
>> GHz models. I've stuck with AMD since, should HT prove to be interesting
>> and
>> stable I'll look into one of them eventually as well as the 64 bit
>> systems
>> from Intel later on in life but I have to stop buying so much hardware,
>> I'm
>> running out of time to test it all..
>
> I am staying with AMD, I have used AMd for years and unless I changed
> platforms, I can not see myself buying an Intel. I have given it a rest
> now for a while buying hardware. You can go on forever and there is also
> the money problem.
> I may upgrade sometime this year or I may just stay with the AMD 2500xp
> chip I got now, after all, it does the job.
>
February 25, 2005 11:17:50 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

DarkElldar wrote:
> Those charts are for Athlon XP 32 bit CPU,s Not the 64 bit chips.
> Check out these links.
>
> http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050221/prescott-08....
>
> http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050221/prescott-10....
>
> I havent seen any Benchmarks for the Intel 64 Bit Cpu's yet.
>


I see, that explains it then, but I still prefer AMd to Intel anyday.
Intels are over priced.

I do not like Toms hardware website, he is too pro Intel.
February 25, 2005 11:28:40 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Galen wrote:
>
>
> I suppose someone might fudge the benchmarks but either way I've been
> impressed with this the AMD Athlon XP 3200+...
>
> It's fast enough, stable enough, and though it seems to run a bit hotter
> than I'd like but that doesn't seem to bother it. The only thing I have
> cooling that chip is a Thermaltake Volcano 8 sink and a fan. Maybe I should
> look into a different cooling supply at some point? I'm not too worried
> about it though. I'll stick with AMD until I'm given evidence to support
> changing to a different manufacturer. As for the 64 bit, I'd only use the
> AMD64 at this point. I do want to check out an HT though as I've not had the
> chance to do so yet.


I have got a AMD 2500XP running on a Abit NF7-s V1 motherboard and it
will do me for a while. the main problem I have is with software or one
bit of software, it got the name Windows in it.

I built a computer for my neighbour last year using the AMD Opteron and
boy do it move. I am not sure what the difference is between that CPu
and the newer 64bit ones. But it was flaming expensive.

My heatsink and fan cost me 9GBP and it keeps my cpu at about 40 C when
the CPU is going at full pelt. So it is not bad for the price.
I did try and overclock it once, but the board did not like it, I think
it had something to do with duel channel memory.
Anyway, it is fast enough, it is just the stabilty is the problem. I
have changed over to using Windows ME for a little bit to see what it is
like on this machine. Everything is so much faster now, than when I was
using XP. The only problem is the serial hard drive, the drivers for the
SATA is a little dicey on ME.

We will see what happens in the next few days, you never know, i may end
up going back to XP, but it is sure nice to see Windows media player 7
again., better than 8,9 or 10.
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 11:38:07 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Hi, at least AMD can make 90nm CPU's without steam coming from them
:-)......
ChrisC
"AD" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:111v2jh3u1o91d5@corp.supernews.com...
> Galen wrote:
>>
>>
>> I suppose someone might fudge the benchmarks but either way I've been
>> impressed with this the AMD Athlon XP 3200+...
>>
>> It's fast enough, stable enough, and though it seems to run a bit hotter
>> than I'd like but that doesn't seem to bother it. The only thing I have
>> cooling that chip is a Thermaltake Volcano 8 sink and a fan. Maybe I
>> should
>> look into a different cooling supply at some point? I'm not too worried
>> about it though. I'll stick with AMD until I'm given evidence to support
>> changing to a different manufacturer. As for the 64 bit, I'd only use the
>> AMD64 at this point. I do want to check out an HT though as I've not had
>> the
>> chance to do so yet.
>
>
> I have got a AMD 2500XP running on a Abit NF7-s V1 motherboard and it
> will do me for a while. the main problem I have is with software or one
> bit of software, it got the name Windows in it.
>
> I built a computer for my neighbour last year using the AMD Opteron and
> boy do it move. I am not sure what the difference is between that CPu and
> the newer 64bit ones. But it was flaming expensive.
>
> My heatsink and fan cost me 9GBP and it keeps my cpu at about 40 C when
> the CPU is going at full pelt. So it is not bad for the price.
> I did try and overclock it once, but the board did not like it, I think it
> had something to do with duel channel memory.
> Anyway, it is fast enough, it is just the stabilty is the problem. I have
> changed over to using Windows ME for a little bit to see what it is like
> on this machine. Everything is so much faster now, than when I was using
> XP. The only problem is the serial hard drive, the drivers for the SATA is
> a little dicey on ME.
>
> We will see what happens in the next few days, you never know, i may end
> up going back to XP, but it is sure nice to see Windows media player 7
> again., better than 8,9 or 10.
February 26, 2005 12:13:18 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

In news:111v2jh3u1o91d5@corp.supernews.com,
AD <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> had this to say:


> We will see what happens in the next few days, you never know, i may
> end up going back to XP, but it is sure nice to see Windows media
> player 7 again., better than 8,9 or 10.

I put Windows ME on an AMD64 and it went like a screaming demon. It was
blazing fast for the short time that it was on there. I couldn't get a
single modem to work with it (even though the AMD has good legacy support, I
blame me for it and not taking the time to research it fully or having the
desire to look into it further, it was mostly for entertainment anyhow.) and
didn't take the time to do the updates to slow the booting down or the like.
I only booted it a couple of times to play with it. I did NOT use the SATA
drives with it, I used ATA 133's (I know, I know, but to make it worse I'm a
Maxtor fan... Give them some space in your case and they'll outlast a
Seagate in my experiences. LOL Please, no flames... I should know better but
I've honestly had no issues. Then again I also like Windows ME, it's my
second favorite OS after XP Pro.) That board too was a GigaByte. I've pretty
much fallen in love with the GigaByte boards and AMD chip combinations. I
don't overclock too often these days, there's no point in it for me.
(Instead I go for case mods and pretty lights and things like Enermax system
monitors which are much cooler than overclocking in my opinion.)

I really worry about heat. My AMD Athlon XP 3200+ (the one in question and
the one I've been on about) is currently kicking at about 114 degrees
Fahrenheit or a bit above 45.5 Celcius. It's a bit higher than I'd like but
it seems like it's stable enough. I've never had a BSOD with it due to
something hardware related. I've had only one BSOD that I recall and that
was after I'd updated it, installing the latest nVidia drivers made it never
go away. I've never had it stop due to heat so I guess it's okay. I've
looked at some of the cooling blocks available and had thought about going
with a radiator type setup but it's seemingly stable as it is. Besides,
there's really not that much more room in the case...

I live in a very cold area of the world. I guess that doesn't have much to
do with it. My home is heated to the comfort zone and that's about it. I
don't even have the "aggressive" option enabled in my CMOS. I use slim
cables instead of ribbons, I keep them out of the way, there are three fans
in this particular case, and there's enough air space. The lights are
cathode so surely not putting out that much heat. I think, perhaps, that a
lot of the heat is coming off of the power supply (Enermax 550 Watt supply)
and radiating through the case, to be honest though I don't really have any
idea. I've heard (but don't own any new Intel chips so I can't compare
personally) that AMD runs much hotter than Intel anyhow. So long as it works
I don't mind really.

I must wonder about any proof of such things. Basically I'm now an AMD man
because right now AMD has my fancy. Should Intel (or another company) take
the lead and provide solid performance numbers at a decent price I'm willing
to convert. I'm not brand specific, as I mentioned, I'm simply performance
oriented. Feel free to flame about liking Maxtor too ;)  I don't mind and I
probably deserve it. LOL Everyone I know who is into computers hates Maxtor
and Windows ME. They're two of my favorite things. If it wasn't for XP I'd
still be using ME as my basic OS and Maxtor drives hold up well for me while
I've had more than one Seagate kick the bucket without warning. So much for
S.M.A.R.T. doing any good :/ 

Galen

--

"My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
February 26, 2005 1:47:27 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Chris Catt wrote:
> Hi, at least AMD can make 90nm CPU's without steam coming from them
> :-)......

I really do not know why peoples computer get so hot anyway, in a warm
country maybe, but my mate got a AMD 3000xp and his system is running at
the 50 mark when it is idle. I never have had a problem with heat.
February 26, 2005 2:11:08 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

I just made the switch from Intel to AMD I was a die hard Intel fan until I
got my wife a notebook with an Athlon 2800+ Mobile, works great without a
problem.
I went with a Athlon 64 3500+ socket 939 on a Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe and I am
very impressed with it so far.

"AD" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:111v1v72vf9bvc1@corp.supernews.com...
> DarkElldar wrote:
>> Those charts are for Athlon XP 32 bit CPU,s Not the 64 bit chips.
>> Check out these links.
>>
>> http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050221/prescott-08....
>>
>> http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050221/prescott-10....
>>
>> I havent seen any Benchmarks for the Intel 64 Bit Cpu's yet.
>>
>
>
> I see, that explains it then, but I still prefer AMd to Intel anyday.
> Intels are over priced.
>
> I do not like Toms hardware website, he is too pro Intel.
February 26, 2005 12:08:32 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

DarkElldar wrote:
> I just made the switch from Intel to AMD I was a die hard Intel fan until I
> got my wife a notebook with an Athlon 2800+ Mobile, works great without a
> problem.
> I went with a Athlon 64 3500+ socket 939 on a Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe and I am
> very impressed with it so far.
>

Great another convert.
I keep trying to get a mate of mine to convert, but he got this idea
that AMD is no good for producing music. Ok, so AMd had some problems a
few years back with floating point, but that have been solved now.
February 26, 2005 12:46:29 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Galen wrote:

>
> I put Windows ME on an AMD64 and it went like a screaming demon. It was
> blazing fast for the short time that it was on there. I couldn't get a

I bet it was, if ME was a 64 bit Os, it would be even faster.


> single modem to work with it (even though the AMD has good legacy support, I
> blame me for it and not taking the time to research it fully or having the

That is strange, I know I have not got a 64bit chip, but my modem works
ok, not that I use it very often, it is only for a back up dial up or
for fax.


> desire to look into it further, it was mostly for entertainment anyhow.) and
> didn't take the time to do the updates to slow the booting down or the like.
> I only booted it a couple of times to play with it. I did NOT use the SATA
> drives with it, I used ATA 133's (I know, I know, but to make it worse I'm a
> Maxtor fan... Give them some space in your case and they'll outlast a
> Seagate in my experiences. LOL Please, no flames... I should know better but

I got two SATA Maxtors in my computer, great drives, no problems at all,
I have built 5 computers for different people in the last 5 weeks and I
put Maxtor in them all. I like Maxtor. I did not used to as they was
noisy and slow, but they have improved.


> I've honestly had no issues. Then again I also like Windows ME, it's my
> second favorite OS after XP Pro.) That board too was a GigaByte. I've pretty

TBH, I prefer win98 to ME, but Me was at hand and it makes using USB
hardware easier.


> much fallen in love with the GigaByte boards and AMD chip combinations. I

I never had a Gigabyte board. TBH, I have not really stuck with one
manufacture.
PC-Chips was my first board with a Cyrix 166 chip, then I had a lucky
star, which had a 233 AMD, then a 266 AMD. after that I updated to a
Soyo and a AMD k6-3 400Mhhz, then a Epox with a AMD Athlon 1000Mhz,
leading up to this machine which has a Abit board in with a 2500 AMD XP
chip.
I hated the Epox board, the worse mother board of the lot, it is now
hanging on my computer room wall.
If I update to another P.C, then I think I will go with Abit again, this
board have been great, very stable. considering it is the version one
and I was told it had lots of problems.

> don't overclock too often these days, there's no point in it for me.
> (Instead I go for case mods and pretty lights and things like Enermax system
> monitors which are much cooler than overclocking in my opinion.)

I stopped over clocking now, the system is stable as it is. I got some
lights inside the box and a nice LED fan, but i want to get a decent
case, instead of the cheap 14UKpound thing I got.
Not worried about lights or windows, I just want something that will
last longer.



> I really worry about heat. My AMD Athlon XP 3200+ (the one in question and
> the one I've been on about) is currently kicking at about 114 degrees
> Fahrenheit or a bit above 45.5 Celcius. It's a bit higher than I'd like but
> it seems like it's stable enough. I've never had a BSOD with it due to
> something hardware related. I've had only one BSOD that I recall and that
> was after I'd updated it, installing the latest nVidia drivers made it never
> go away. I've never had it stop due to heat so I guess it's okay. I've
> looked at some of the cooling blocks available and had thought about going
> with a radiator type setup but it's seemingly stable as it is. Besides,
> there's really not that much more room in the case...

I was thinking of water cooling once, but it is so expensive and I I do
not really think they are as good as people says. The other thing is
water and electric is not good, if a pip burst, you have had it. Someone
down the road from me got water cooling and it is still noisy due to the
pump and fan.


>
> I live in a very cold area of the world. I guess that doesn't have much to
> do with it. My home is heated to the comfort zone and that's about it. I

Yes, that is another problem.


> don't even have the "aggressive" option enabled in my CMOS. I use slim
> cables instead of ribbons, I keep them out of the way, there are three fans

Same here, I use round cables, but they still seem to get in the way.


> in this particular case, and there's enough air space. The lights are
> cathode so surely not putting out that much heat. I think, perhaps, that a
> lot of the heat is coming off of the power supply (Enermax 550 Watt supply)
> and radiating through the case, to be honest though I don't really have any
> idea. I've heard (but don't own any new Intel chips so I can't compare
> personally) that AMD runs much hotter than Intel anyhow. So long as it works
> I don't mind really.

I think AMD do run hotter or they did, not sure about now mind you. Have
you got any case fans? I got two at the back of the case, pulling air
out of the case. My way of thinking is that if you pull the hot air out
of the back of the case, then cool; air must come in from the front. I
could be wrong, but it seems to make sense to me.
When I get my new case, I am going to buy the quietest fans I can get
and may change my heat sink and fan, but then that is not where the
noise comes from.


> I must wonder about any proof of such things. Basically I'm now an AMD man
> because right now AMD has my fancy. Should Intel (or another company) take
> the lead and provide solid performance numbers at a decent price I'm willing
> to convert. I'm not brand specific, as I mentioned, I'm simply performance

I will never buy an Intel, I do not like the company and they way they
work. So if they come out with the vest CPU ever, I would still stay
with AMD. Mind you I have got one computer here with an Intel chip in,
an Acer with a 233 in. I did not buy it, I was given it.
I also got 2 old 233 AMD based machines, I think it is time to get rid
of these, give them away to a charity or something.




> oriented. Feel free to flame about liking Maxtor too ;)  I don't mind and I
> probably deserve it. LOL Everyone I know who is into computers hates Maxtor
> and Windows ME. They're two of my favorite things. If it wasn't for XP I'd

Nothing wrong with Maxtors, I think they work very well.
I had a 20GB seagate and it was returned to seagate 8 times in 3 years,
the strange thing was that the drives they sent me was never the same
one and they just failed. It is now in a friends computer and it been
working in her machine now for 2 years, so maybe it was my Epox board
that was mucking it up. I still got 3 seagates, a 80gig in this machine
which is used for storage, a 120Gig in a USB caddy and a 6 Gig in my
400MHz machine. But I think the 6gig is failing, so I may buy another
120Gig drive for this computer and stick the 80 gig in the 400Mhz.

> still be using ME as my basic OS and Maxtor drives hold up well for me while
> I've had more than one Seagate kick the bucket without warning. So much for
> S.M.A.R.T. doing any good :/ 

I am not found of ME, seems to have more problems than 98, I must admit
I do like Windows XP, it is just the holes that get on my nerves. XP is
normally very stable as long as I keep SP2 off it. I even made a version
that was slipstreamed with SP2, thinking that may work better, but no.
I never have smart on, on my Nephews old computer, it seemed to slow the
machine down, so I never used it again.
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 4:56:26 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Hi, I don't think that the Athlon XP's actually run any hotter. What you
might find is that the method of reading the CPU temperature changed from
the external diode to the internal probe, thus giving the impression that it
was running hot...
ChrisC
"AD" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1120hbcakmoog4a@corp.supernews.com...
> Galen wrote:
>
>>
>> I put Windows ME on an AMD64 and it went like a screaming demon. It was
>> blazing fast for the short time that it was on there. I couldn't get a
>
> I bet it was, if ME was a 64 bit Os, it would be even faster.
>
>
>> single modem to work with it (even though the AMD has good legacy
>> support, I
>> blame me for it and not taking the time to research it fully or having
>> the
>
> That is strange, I know I have not got a 64bit chip, but my modem works
> ok, not that I use it very often, it is only for a back up dial up or for
> fax.
>
>
>> desire to look into it further, it was mostly for entertainment anyhow.)
>> and
>> didn't take the time to do the updates to slow the booting down or the
>> like.
>> I only booted it a couple of times to play with it. I did NOT use the
>> SATA
>> drives with it, I used ATA 133's (I know, I know, but to make it worse
>> I'm a
>> Maxtor fan... Give them some space in your case and they'll outlast a
>> Seagate in my experiences. LOL Please, no flames... I should know better
>> but
>
> I got two SATA Maxtors in my computer, great drives, no problems at all, I
> have built 5 computers for different people in the last 5 weeks and I put
> Maxtor in them all. I like Maxtor. I did not used to as they was noisy and
> slow, but they have improved.
>
>
>> I've honestly had no issues. Then again I also like Windows ME, it's my
>> second favorite OS after XP Pro.) That board too was a GigaByte. I've
>> pretty
>
> TBH, I prefer win98 to ME, but Me was at hand and it makes using USB
> hardware easier.
>
>
>> much fallen in love with the GigaByte boards and AMD chip combinations. I
>
> I never had a Gigabyte board. TBH, I have not really stuck with one
> manufacture.
> PC-Chips was my first board with a Cyrix 166 chip, then I had a lucky
> star, which had a 233 AMD, then a 266 AMD. after that I updated to a Soyo
> and a AMD k6-3 400Mhhz, then a Epox with a AMD Athlon 1000Mhz, leading up
> to this machine which has a Abit board in with a 2500 AMD XP chip.
> I hated the Epox board, the worse mother board of the lot, it is now
> hanging on my computer room wall.
> If I update to another P.C, then I think I will go with Abit again, this
> board have been great, very stable. considering it is the version one and
> I was told it had lots of problems.
>
>> don't overclock too often these days, there's no point in it for me.
>> (Instead I go for case mods and pretty lights and things like Enermax
>> system
>> monitors which are much cooler than overclocking in my opinion.)
>
> I stopped over clocking now, the system is stable as it is. I got some
> lights inside the box and a nice LED fan, but i want to get a decent case,
> instead of the cheap 14UKpound thing I got.
> Not worried about lights or windows, I just want something that will last
> longer.
>
>
>
>> I really worry about heat. My AMD Athlon XP 3200+ (the one in question
>> and
>> the one I've been on about) is currently kicking at about 114 degrees
>> Fahrenheit or a bit above 45.5 Celcius. It's a bit higher than I'd like
>> but
>> it seems like it's stable enough. I've never had a BSOD with it due to
>> something hardware related. I've had only one BSOD that I recall and that
>> was after I'd updated it, installing the latest nVidia drivers made it
>> never
>> go away. I've never had it stop due to heat so I guess it's okay. I've
>> looked at some of the cooling blocks available and had thought about
>> going
>> with a radiator type setup but it's seemingly stable as it is. Besides,
>> there's really not that much more room in the case...
>
> I was thinking of water cooling once, but it is so expensive and I I do
> not really think they are as good as people says. The other thing is water
> and electric is not good, if a pip burst, you have had it. Someone down
> the road from me got water cooling and it is still noisy due to the pump
> and fan.
>
>
>>
>> I live in a very cold area of the world. I guess that doesn't have much
>> to
>> do with it. My home is heated to the comfort zone and that's about it. I
>
> Yes, that is another problem.
>
>
>> don't even have the "aggressive" option enabled in my CMOS. I use slim
>> cables instead of ribbons, I keep them out of the way, there are three
>> fans
>
> Same here, I use round cables, but they still seem to get in the way.
>
>
>> in this particular case, and there's enough air space. The lights are
>> cathode so surely not putting out that much heat. I think, perhaps, that
>> a
>> lot of the heat is coming off of the power supply (Enermax 550 Watt
>> supply)
>> and radiating through the case, to be honest though I don't really have
>> any
>> idea. I've heard (but don't own any new Intel chips so I can't compare
>> personally) that AMD runs much hotter than Intel anyhow. So long as it
>> works
>> I don't mind really.
>
> I think AMD do run hotter or they did, not sure about now mind you. Have
> you got any case fans? I got two at the back of the case, pulling air out
> of the case. My way of thinking is that if you pull the hot air out of the
> back of the case, then cool; air must come in from the front. I could be
> wrong, but it seems to make sense to me.
> When I get my new case, I am going to buy the quietest fans I can get and
> may change my heat sink and fan, but then that is not where the noise
> comes from.
>
>
>> I must wonder about any proof of such things. Basically I'm now an AMD
>> man
>> because right now AMD has my fancy. Should Intel (or another company)
>> take
>> the lead and provide solid performance numbers at a decent price I'm
>> willing
>> to convert. I'm not brand specific, as I mentioned, I'm simply
>> performance
>
> I will never buy an Intel, I do not like the company and they way they
> work. So if they come out with the vest CPU ever, I would still stay with
> AMD. Mind you I have got one computer here with an Intel chip in, an Acer
> with a 233 in. I did not buy it, I was given it.
> I also got 2 old 233 AMD based machines, I think it is time to get rid of
> these, give them away to a charity or something.
>
>
>
>
>> oriented. Feel free to flame about liking Maxtor too ;)  I don't mind and
>> I
>> probably deserve it. LOL Everyone I know who is into computers hates
>> Maxtor
>> and Windows ME. They're two of my favorite things. If it wasn't for XP
>> I'd
>
> Nothing wrong with Maxtors, I think they work very well.
> I had a 20GB seagate and it was returned to seagate 8 times in 3 years,
> the strange thing was that the drives they sent me was never the same one
> and they just failed. It is now in a friends computer and it been working
> in her machine now for 2 years, so maybe it was my Epox board that was
> mucking it up. I still got 3 seagates, a 80gig in this machine which is
> used for storage, a 120Gig in a USB caddy and a 6 Gig in my 400MHz
> machine. But I think the 6gig is failing, so I may buy another 120Gig
> drive for this computer and stick the 80 gig in the 400Mhz.
>
>> still be using ME as my basic OS and Maxtor drives hold up well for me
>> while
>> I've had more than one Seagate kick the bucket without warning. So much
>> for
>> S.M.A.R.T. doing any good :/ 
>
> I am not found of ME, seems to have more problems than 98, I must admit I
> do like Windows XP, it is just the holes that get on my nerves. XP is
> normally very stable as long as I keep SP2 off it. I even made a version
> that was slipstreamed with SP2, thinking that may work better, but no.
> I never have smart on, on my Nephews old computer, it seemed to slow the
> machine down, so I never used it again.
>
February 26, 2005 6:45:56 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Chris Catt wrote:
> Hi, I don't think that the Athlon XP's actually run any hotter. What you
> might find is that the method of reading the CPU temperature changed from
> the external diode to the internal probe, thus giving the impression that it
> was running hot...


No idea, I have never had an Intel machine to compare it with. All i
know is that my computer is running at a decent temp.
February 27, 2005 3:32:18 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

AMD has come a long way. I did have an AMD 386/40 at one time it did work
well. It took some time for them to get their FPU up to snuff but now Intel
has had to call on them for 64 bit x86.

"AD" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1120f475mqksq67@corp.supernews.com...
> DarkElldar wrote:
>> I just made the switch from Intel to AMD I was a die hard Intel fan until
>> I got my wife a notebook with an Athlon 2800+ Mobile, works great without
>> a problem.
>> I went with a Athlon 64 3500+ socket 939 on a Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe and I
>> am very impressed with it so far.
>>
>
> Great another convert.
> I keep trying to get a mate of mine to convert, but he got this idea that
> AMD is no good for producing music. Ok, so AMd had some problems a few
> years back with floating point, but that have been solved now.
February 28, 2005 3:11:17 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

DarkElldar wrote:
> AMD has come a long way. I did have an AMD 386/40 at one time it did work
> well. It took some time for them to get their FPU up to snuff but now Intel
> has had to call on them for 64 bit x86.
>

The FPU was a problem with AMD, it did not bother me, as it never
affected anything I was doing. But it is now much better.
I still will not buy Intel, I went to get a modem once from our local
store, I got it home, found it had an Intel chip and took it back. They
moaned a bit, when I told them the reason, but they eventully changed it
for a Motorola based modem.
!