Upgrade Mobile 2500+ -> 939 a sensible move?

[ChrisR]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

I'm looking for a little advice on whether it would be a sensible
upgrade, (i.e. significant improvement) in jumping ship and upgrading my
Soltek SL-75FRN2-L + Mobile 2500+ @ 2.5Ghz to a 939 platform.

Specifically I'm looking at the MSI K8N NEO2-F, Socket 939, nForce3
Ultra, AGP 8X, Dual DDR 400 in conjuction with a suitable processor.
What is the upgrade path going to be like for AGP video cards in the future?

Would I be correct in assuming that a Athlon 64 3200+ (90 nm) processor
would offer best potential value when overclocking?


Current system

Soltek SL-75FRN2-L + Mobile 2500+ @ 2.5Ghz
Geforce 6800GT AGP
1Gb DDR 400
Enermax 485W PSU
x2 HD, DVD, Audigy


Thanks.

 

[anonymoose]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

IMHO, I would. I basically had the same setup. an XP 2500+ @ 2.5GHz and I
went to a 939 based AMD64 3200+ and I noticed a substantial increase in
performance not overclocked. I haven't tried overclocking this system yet so
I dunno how that would work but for what I do I don't see any need to
overclock this system yet.

"ChrisR" <chrisr@es.co.nz> wrote in message
news:d6ltrm$7fv$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> I'm looking for a little advice on whether it would be a sensible upgrade,
> (i.e. significant improvement) in jumping ship and upgrading my Soltek
> SL-75FRN2-L + Mobile 2500+ @ 2.5Ghz to a 939 platform.
>
> Specifically I'm looking at the MSI K8N NEO2-F, Socket 939, nForce3 Ultra,
> AGP 8X, Dual DDR 400 in conjuction with a suitable processor. What is the
> upgrade path going to be like for AGP video cards in the future?
>
> Would I be correct in assuming that a Athlon 64 3200+ (90 nm) processor
> would offer best potential value when overclocking?
>
>
> Current system
>
> Soltek SL-75FRN2-L + Mobile 2500+ @ 2.5Ghz
> Geforce 6800GT AGP
> 1Gb DDR 400
> Enermax 485W PSU
> x2 HD, DVD, Audigy
>
>
> Thanks.

 

[rms]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

I say don't do it.

I assume this is a gaming system. Your videocard is the real bottleneck
here, but it's about the best one on the market.

Also consider that really noticeable improvements will occur when you have
dualcore or intel's HT, but oops that's not what your getting.

Unless you're getting money for the old system, I'd wait til next year when
new games and new videocards to run them are out. And go dual-core.

rms

 

[ChrisR]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Yup, its a general purpose gaming/net/video machine. I think I probably
will wait. It would be nice to see direct comparisons of AMD 64 and 32
bit CPUs in 32 bit apps/games. I know there have been some done...I'll
have another look about.


Thats probab

rms wrote:
> I say don't do it.
>
> I assume this is a gaming system. Your videocard is the real bottleneck
> here, but it's about the best one on the market.
>
> Also consider that really noticeable improvements will occur when you have
> dualcore or intel's HT, but oops that's not what your getting.
>
> Unless you're getting money for the old system, I'd wait til next year when
> new games and new videocards to run them are out. And go dual-core.
>
> rms
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Here's a one-game (Doom 3) comparison from last year:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7

This doesn't include any of the Winchester or Venice A64 CPUs, of course.

If you're getting 2.5 GHz out of your Athlon XP-M, maybe the improvement
you'd get with an A64 would not impress you. However, if you can get 2.6 GHz
or better out of a A64 3200+, that might be worthwhile.

As regards dual-core,

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1813852,00.asp

Apparently multiple threading is something that current games don't do.
However, most Socket 939 mainboards are supposed to be capable of supporting
the dual-core A64 CPUs (probably a BIOS update would be required), so you
could get a Winchester or Venice CPU now, and upgrade to X2 when it is no
longer on the bleeding edge.

It's interesting to hear a 6800GT referred to as a "bottleneck", but I guess
there are some people who would regard anything less than a phase-change
cooled SLI pair of highly overclocked 512 MB 6800 Ultras as low tech. (I
should have issued a sarcasm alert before writing that, I suppose.)

As regards the mainboard you've considered, the only thing I know against it
is that it won't comfortably take a Thermalright XP-120 heatsink. (The Asus
A8V Deluxe board I own works with an XP-120, although things are a bit cozy
with it in my Antec Super Lanboy case.)


Address scrambled. Replace nkbob with bobkn.

"ChrisR" <chrisr@es.co.nz> wrote in message
news:d6of0k$isp$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> Yup, its a general purpose gaming/net/video machine. I think I probably
> will wait. It would be nice to see direct comparisons of AMD 64 and 32
> bit CPUs in 32 bit apps/games. I know there have been some done...I'll
> have another look about.
>
>
> Thats probab
>
> rms wrote:
>> I say don't do it.
>>
>> I assume this is a gaming system. Your videocard is the real bottleneck
>> here, but it's about the best one on the market.
>>
>> Also consider that really noticeable improvements will occur when you
>> have dualcore or intel's HT, but oops that's not what your getting.
>>
>> Unless you're getting money for the old system, I'd wait til next year
>> when new games and new videocards to run them are out. And go dual-core.
>>
>> rms

 

[ChrisR]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Thats some good info. Thanks for that.

Bob Knowlden wrote:
> Here's a one-game (Doom 3) comparison from last year:
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7
>
> This doesn't include any of the Winchester or Venice A64 CPUs, of course.
>
> If you're getting 2.5 GHz out of your Athlon XP-M, maybe the improvement
> you'd get with an A64 would not impress you. However, if you can get 2.6 GHz
> or better out of a A64 3200+, that might be worthwhile.
>
> As regards dual-core,
>
> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1813852,00.asp
>
> Apparently multiple threading is something that current games don't do.
> However, most Socket 939 mainboards are supposed to be capable of supporting
> the dual-core A64 CPUs (probably a BIOS update would be required), so you
> could get a Winchester or Venice CPU now, and upgrade to X2 when it is no
> longer on the bleeding edge.
>
> It's interesting to hear a 6800GT referred to as a "bottleneck", but I guess
> there are some people who would regard anything less than a phase-change
> cooled SLI pair of highly overclocked 512 MB 6800 Ultras as low tech. (I
> should have issued a sarcasm alert before writing that, I suppose.)
>
> As regards the mainboard you've considered, the only thing I know against it
> is that it won't comfortably take a Thermalright XP-120 heatsink. (The Asus
> A8V Deluxe board I own works with an XP-120, although things are a bit cozy
> with it in my Antec Super Lanboy case.)
>
>
> Address scrambled. Replace nkbob with bobkn.
>
> "ChrisR" <chrisr@es.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:d6of0k$isp$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
>>Yup, its a general purpose gaming/net/video machine. I think I probably
>>will wait. It would be nice to see direct comparisons of AMD 64 and 32
>>bit CPUs in 32 bit apps/games. I know there have been some done...I'll
>>have another look about.
>>
>>
>>Thats probab
>>
>>rms wrote:
>>
>>>I say don't do it.
>>>
>>>I assume this is a gaming system. Your videocard is the real bottleneck
>>>here, but it's about the best one on the market.
>>>
>>>Also consider that really noticeable improvements will occur when you
>>>have dualcore or intel's HT, but oops that's not what your getting.
>>>
>>>Unless you're getting money for the old system, I'd wait til next year
>>>when new games and new videocards to run them are out. And go dual-core.
>>>
>>>rms
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Iam sticking with my Mobile 2500 at 2.4ghz. Not upgrading till Dual
Core AMD chips come out. I think ill get a 4400, or 4200



On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:11:08 +1200, ChrisR <chrisr@es.co.nz> wrote:

>Thats some good info. Thanks for that.
>
>Bob Knowlden wrote:
>> Here's a one-game (Doom 3) comparison from last year:
>>
>> http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7
>>
>> This doesn't include any of the Winchester or Venice A64 CPUs, of course.
>>
>> If you're getting 2.5 GHz out of your Athlon XP-M, maybe the improvement
>> you'd get with an A64 would not impress you. However, if you can get 2.6 GHz
>> or better out of a A64 3200+, that might be worthwhile.
>>
>> As regards dual-core,
>>
>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1813852,00.asp
>>
>> Apparently multiple threading is something that current games don't do.
>> However, most Socket 939 mainboards are supposed to be capable of supporting
>> the dual-core A64 CPUs (probably a BIOS update would be required), so you
>> could get a Winchester or Venice CPU now, and upgrade to X2 when it is no
>> longer on the bleeding edge.
>>
>> It's interesting to hear a 6800GT referred to as a "bottleneck", but I guess
>> there are some people who would regard anything less than a phase-change
>> cooled SLI pair of highly overclocked 512 MB 6800 Ultras as low tech. (I
>> should have issued a sarcasm alert before writing that, I suppose.)
>>
>> As regards the mainboard you've considered, the only thing I know against it
>> is that it won't comfortably take a Thermalright XP-120 heatsink. (The Asus
>> A8V Deluxe board I own works with an XP-120, although things are a bit cozy
>> with it in my Antec Super Lanboy case.)
>>
>>
>> Address scrambled. Replace nkbob with bobkn.
>>
>> "ChrisR" <chrisr@es.co.nz> wrote in message
>> news:d6of0k$isp$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>>
>>>Yup, its a general purpose gaming/net/video machine. I think I probably
>>>will wait. It would be nice to see direct comparisons of AMD 64 and 32
>>>bit CPUs in 32 bit apps/games. I know there have been some done...I'll
>>>have another look about.
>>>
>>>
>>>Thats probab
>>>
>>>rms wrote:
>>>
>>>>I say don't do it.
>>>>
>>>>I assume this is a gaming system. Your videocard is the real bottleneck
>>>>here, but it's about the best one on the market.
>>>>
>>>>Also consider that really noticeable improvements will occur when you
>>>>have dualcore or intel's HT, but oops that's not what your getting.
>>>>
>>>>Unless you're getting money for the old system, I'd wait til next year
>>>>when new games and new videocards to run them are out. And go dual-core.
>>>>
>>>>rms
>>
>>
>>