Is it worthwhile to upgrade AthlonXP 2400 to Athlon64 3400?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

For a setup like AthlonXP 2400, 1 gig PC400 RAM, and Geforce 6800
128MB, is it worthwhile to upgrade the cpu to Athlon64 3400? This
setup would just be for playing games, FPS, strategy games, and rpgs.
My preferred resolution is 1024X768 4XAA 8xAF. Will I see dramatic
change in frame per second in shooters?
6 answers Last reply
More about worthwhile upgrade athlonxp 2400 athlon64 3400
  1. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Riddick wrote:
    > For a setup like AthlonXP 2400, 1 gig PC400 RAM, and Geforce 6800
    > 128MB, is it worthwhile to upgrade the cpu to Athlon64 3400? This
    > setup would just be for playing games, FPS, strategy games, and rpgs.
    > My preferred resolution is 1024X768 4XAA 8xAF. Will I see dramatic
    > change in frame per second in shooters?
    >

    I went from that same CPU to a 64 3500+ and saw the benefit for it, I
    imagine your GPU is slightly bottlenecked by your current processor too.
  2. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    "Riddick" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:1118403996.358159.63710@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > For a setup like AthlonXP 2400, 1 gig PC400 RAM, and Geforce 6800
    > 128MB, is it worthwhile to upgrade the cpu to Athlon64 3400? This
    > setup would just be for playing games, FPS, strategy games, and rpgs.
    > My preferred resolution is 1024X768 4XAA 8xAF. Will I see dramatic
    > change in frame per second in shooters?
    >

    Yeah.You'll notice the difference.You'l be able to play in higher
    resolutions.
    Buit a new motherbard and 3500+ will be in the $400 dollar range. Anew mobo
    w/3400+ is under $300 or thereabouts.
  3. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Yes I went from a 2000XP to a 64 3000 and there was a noticable difference.
    Plus you get the benefit of dual channel memory and being able to run 64bit
    oses and the 64 3000 is cheap so might as well leave the ailing 2400 behind

    "Riddick" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:1118403996.358159.63710@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > For a setup like AthlonXP 2400, 1 gig PC400 RAM, and Geforce 6800
    > 128MB, is it worthwhile to upgrade the cpu to Athlon64 3400? This
    > setup would just be for playing games, FPS, strategy games, and rpgs.
    > My preferred resolution is 1024X768 4XAA 8xAF. Will I see dramatic
    > change in frame per second in shooters?
    >
  4. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Contrary to the others, I say overclock the cpu, and enable the extra pipes
    on the 6800 with Rivatuner. And go for higher resolutions vs using FSAA.
    Wait til dualcore and g70/r520 are out before upgrading.

    rms
  5. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    "Riddick" <chromallly@yahoo.com> once tried to test me with:

    > For a setup like AthlonXP 2400, 1 gig PC400 RAM, and Geforce 6800
    > 128MB, is it worthwhile to upgrade the cpu to Athlon64 3400? This
    > setup would just be for playing games, FPS, strategy games, and rpgs.
    > My preferred resolution is 1024X768 4XAA 8xAF. Will I see dramatic
    > change in frame per second in shooters?

    Personally I'd say your rig is just fine for now, I'd wait until the "next
    big thing" rather than doing an upgrade now. But that's just me, if you are
    the type that can't live without 70fps in all the latest games, go for it,
    you'll see a difference.

    --

    Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

    Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
  6. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Hi,

    Riddick <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote:
    #For a setup like AthlonXP 2400, 1 gig PC400 RAM, and Geforce 6800
    #128MB, is it worthwhile to upgrade the cpu to Athlon64 3400? This
    #setup would just be for playing games, FPS, strategy games, and rpgs.
    #My preferred resolution is 1024X768 4XAA 8xAF. Will I see dramatic
    #change in frame per second in shooters?

    A while ago I went from an AMD 2200+/266 VIA KT266a 512MB DDR266 to a
    939 3000+ nForce 3U 2x512MB DDR400, all else being the same. The most
    dramatic difference is load times for CoD levels dropped by more than
    half. This is a factor if you wish to choose the team you're on in
    multiplayer, or wish to have it chosen for you. :)

    Frame rates on the 6600GT went up 10-30% on different boards, and the
    games suddenly started recommending a very high level of detail,
    textures, and features (ejecting brass, etc.)

    The AMD XP's seem to be able to run most anything at a competent fps,
    assuming enough ram, a good video card (like yours), and moderate eye
    candy settings. However if you like 4xAA and 8xAF at 1K resolution,
    combined with high detail textures, you'll see much quicker texture load
    times and higher frame rates with the Socket 939 chip.

    Ken.
    --
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mail: kmarsh at charm dot net | Just say "no" to liars SCO and Soyo
    WWW: http://www.charm.net/~kmarsh | Return services to local CIS offices!
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ask a new question

Read More

PC gaming Games Video Games