Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Is this Athlon64 a good chip for gaming?

Is this Athlon64 a good chip for gaming?

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - Is this Athlon64 a good chip for gaming?

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
CyberData4   12-13-2003 at 09:00:15 AM

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProd [...] 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?

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
pitsi   12-13-2003 at 09:23:05 AM
- 0 +

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.

Reply to pitsi
Spitfire_x86   12-13-2003 at 01:54:36 PM
- 0 +

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>

Reply to Spitfire_x86
Prof133   12-13-2003 at 02:22:06 PM
- 0 +

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.

Reply to Prof133
IIB   12-13-2003 at 03:39:28 PM
- 0 +

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

Reply to IIB
Snorkius   12-13-2003 at 05:32:19 PM
- 0 +

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>

Reply to Snorkius
Spitfire_x86   12-13-2003 at 05:48:29 PM
- 0 +

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>

Reply to Spitfire_x86
addiarmadar   12-13-2003 at 05:55:58 PM
- 0 +

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)

Reply to addiarmadar
ad_rach   12-14-2003 at 03:00:23 AM
- 0 +

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. :]

Reply to ad_rach
Spitfire_x86   12-14-2003 at 03:14:34 AM
- 0 +

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>

Reply to Spitfire_x86
ad_rach   12-14-2003 at 03:41:04 AM
- 0 +

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. :]

Reply to ad_rach
silverpig   12-14-2003 at 03:45:50 AM
- 0 +

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.

Reply to silverpig
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Is this Athlon64 a good chip for gaming?
Go to:

There are 1144 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.537 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?