Is this Athlon64 a good chip for gaming?

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-103-425&catalog=343&depa=1

It's the Athlon64 3000. Since it's around 200 I was going to pick it up. Is this a bad chip? Or shoudl I pay double and get the athlon 64 3200? If so, what are the diffwerences between the A64 3000, and the A64 3200?
11 answers Last reply
More about athlon64 good chip gaming
  1. Although there are not any reviews available yet since this chip has just been released, I believe it's an excellent choice for a new system. It should perform about 5-6% slower than the A64 3200+ but at $215 it's an excellent value. I suppose it is a little bit slower than the 3.0c but don't forget it is also $60 cheaper!

    My opinion is go for it, especially since you want to use it for gaming. This way you can easily upgrade your CPU to a 3700+ when you need one, sometime ine 2004 or 2005, without the need to replace your motherboard or memory again.
  2. I think it's clock speed is 1.8 GHz, not 2.0 GHz (it's 3200+ speed). At 1.8 GHz, A64 is faster than P4 3.0C for gaming and P4 3.0C is better for multimedia.

    For gaming, I would get A64 3000+ over A64 3200+/P4C 3.0-3.2 GHz

    ----------------
    <b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

    <b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
  3. The Athlon64 3000+ at newEgg has 512 Kbyte L2 Cache Size, if the picture they provide shows the cpu they have in stock. I hear rumors of another Athlon64 3000+ that runs at 1.8Ghz with 1Mbyte L2 Cache Size.
  4. It would be overall a bit slower then the P4C 3Ghz and abit faster then the P4C 2.8Ghz.


    This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
  5. Plus, I think it would OC to 3200+ levels without prob. Should anyway, no reason for it not to.

    <font color=blue>If the <font color=yellow>laurel</font color=yellow> is to big for your head, it becomes a hoola-hoop, and you have to keep your butt really busy.</font color=blue>
  6. Quote:
    It would be overall a bit slower then the P4C 3Ghz and abit faster then the P4C 2.8Ghz.

    I think it'll be equal overall. P4 will be faster in multimedia and A64 in gaming

    ----------------
    <b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

    <b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
  7. Sounds like a good deal

    Barton 2500+ @ 2200mhz (10x220 vcore @ 1.775)
    Asus A7N8X Dlx 440 FSB
    1gb Geil GD pc3500 Dual Channel (2-3-3-6)
    Segata 80gb SATA 8.5ms seek
    ATI Radeon 9800 Pro(420/700)
  8. Judging by <A HREF="http://www.ocworkbench.com/index.stm" target="_new">today's reports on OCWorkbench</A>, it seems that the A64 3000+ is a 2GHz part with a reduced 512Kb cache.I can only assume that the 1.8Ghz ones with 1Mb cache (such as Hexus') must have been early samples.

    no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]
  9. Then it should have no problem beating P4 3.0C GHz

    ----------------
    <b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

    <b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
  10. You're probably right there.I doubt that the smaller cache makes quite the equivalent of a theoretical 200MHz frequency deficit (which AMD essentially suggests)in most cases.

    no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]
  11. AWWW CRAP. Right when I upgraded too. I was really waiting for a 64 bit chip. Ah well, I can just pawn this off in a few months to someone and get a new cpu + mobo. Should be decent in a little while.

    Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Gaming Chip