Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New Pc

Tags:
  • CPUs
Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 10, 2004 12:01:40 PM

Hi,

I need advice, I will have 3,673.00 USD to spend on a machine in a couple of weeks, but dont know what Cpu route to go.

Whats specs should i look at for a Gaming machine that will last for a few years. I aslo want to play LINEAGE 2 on the high settings.

More about : question

January 10, 2004 12:48:30 PM

That's a lot of cash! For gaming, the Radeon 9800 Pro is recommended, the XT is better but less bang for the buck. As for CPU, at that budget you can go with AMD's FX-51 which is 64-bit compliant and the 940 pin socket. The problem with the FX-51 is that not only the processor is expensive but also the motherboard the the PC3200 Registered RAM, but it should fit your budget.

Got a nice overclocked overvolted system to keep you warm at night? That's great. Guess I'll have to settle for a woman...
January 10, 2004 1:03:05 PM

Thanks For the info, I think i'll go down the AMD route with a Radeon 9800 Pro Card.


Feb 10 is when I get the money
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by hajimenoippo on 01/10/04 12:54 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
January 10, 2004 1:04:14 PM

I would get a P4 EE 3.20ghz 2mb 800fsb HT cpu. This cpu supports intel's netburst architecture and hyperthreading and is designed for power users and gamers in mind. Hyper accelerate your games now, and not wait until 64-bits to arrive, which could take 2 years. I am aware that the A64 FX-51 is faster in certain games such as UT2K3, and Serious sam, but not Quake III which the P4 EE is number one. 2mb of L3 cache can be used for other tasks as well such as Data compiling. The P4 EE is $1000, which is a great bargain since an equivalent Xeon MP 2mb(redesigned for socket 478) costs $4000! the difference is the P4 EE doesn't have MP support and has 800fsb. the P4 EE should last 2 years for good gaming such as Half life 2 and Doom3 which is rumored to support hyperthreading technology. When finally 64bit arrives, Intel will have a better chip than AMD. it's called Tejas and it will be multi-cored and have 1200mhz fsb.

<b><font color=red>Aquamark3 score: 26,467</b></font color=red> :smile:
<b><font color=blue>Intel P4 2ghz ATI Radeon 9500 pro</b></font color=blue>
January 10, 2004 1:29:33 PM

Either of those systems are nice...but if you are willing to OC, get a 2.8C, Corsair PC4400 and a Prometeia CPU cooler (4.06GHz at 290MHz FSB...or at 3.0C at 4.125GHz and 275FSB--the 3.0's OC is easier to hit but will be slower). Oh yeah, an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe will probably be the best choice of motherboard for you.

If you don't want to OC, I'd go for an FX for a gaming machine and an EE for a multimedia machine.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
January 10, 2004 3:17:33 PM

You should at least give the 3400+ 64 a look as it has practically the same performance as the fx-51.
January 10, 2004 3:22:15 PM

How soon before you buy?
January 10, 2004 3:56:46 PM

A64 3400+
1 GB DDR
R9800 Pro
74 GB WD raptor
2x 200 GB WD SATA drives
Plextor 8x DVD RW
19" LCD from dell (that fp2001 or whatever it's called with the 16 ms response time)

Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.
January 10, 2004 4:43:00 PM

I would get two hot call girl peelers and have a threesome.

<font color=red><i>Doctor Hooter</i></font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.page3.com/" target="_new"><b>(·Y·)</b></A>
January 10, 2004 4:52:25 PM

The presott is suppose to be out in feb and using the new ddr2 and pci express(the replacement for the agp slot)-I would wait for that;otherwise go with the fx 51 or amd athlon 64 3400+. I would use the asus 9800xp,which is the best built gpu right now and has great bundled software to lure peope into using an asus radeon.With your budget you should also get a pair of the larger western digital raptors and raid them 0 and add a ide HD as a boot and storage disk.I think the only real reason to go for the fx 51 is to take advantage of the ability to use more than two raptors.
January 10, 2004 5:09:45 PM

Quote:
Feb 10 is when I get the money

So if I get this right, you won't be buying anything before Feb 10. What's your current system specs?

My advice is that if possible, you should wait until Prescott and San Diego are released. Then you can choose among those two since your budget is not a problem. I strongly advice you to consider this, because if you buy something in February, it will become outdated in 1-2 months. AGP will be gone, SATA will be gone, current sockets will be gone, DDR will be gone (Intel), ATX will be gone (Intel). I think you get the point.

<b>blah:</b> <font color=red>Don't show your stupidity, whole world knows that Intel is a much better CPU for stable work.</font color=red>
January 10, 2004 6:20:40 PM

pitsi

I'll take your advice and wait, the games i want, wont be out untill the summer at least, thanks to everyone who has posted, I have alot to think about in the up coming months.
January 11, 2004 1:24:31 AM

Quake 3 is lame. Play a real frag fest like UT2k3.
Or play a real mans FPS like Halo.
Hyperthreading is over rated.

p4 2.8 533fsb
intel mobo
1gb rdram pc 800
radeon9800 pro
120gb seagate s-ata
January 11, 2004 1:39:08 AM

With that much money, as far as HD's go, 2 74 gb raptors in RAID 0, and maybe a pair of 250 gb 8 mb cache WD's in RAID 1. That would be about 1000 USD. With the other ~2500, get either prescott, tejas, or whatever AMD 64-bit processor is best and you are willing to wait for. I would like that setup... :) 

Anxiously awaiting prescott....is it here yet?
January 11, 2004 4:14:25 AM

Do not buy the prescott ! This is an intel bias site, and many users of this forum advise you to go intel while AMD has the best offerings at the moment, and the Prescott is not gooing to change that ! (prescott runs very hot and is not gooing to be faster then the curent P4).
P4 3.2 GHz EE is a joke, AMD Athlon 3400+ eats it for lunch !
If i was you, i would be buying a Athlon 3400+(wich is the fastest in gaming together with the FX51 but that FX cost much much more !) ore wait until the socket 939 from AMD comes out 30 april, then you have dual channel 3700+ and you can easely upgrade !

But read some reviews man, but please dont read them @ this site ! they are Intel bias, read them somewhere else.
Realy i think i should warn you !
January 11, 2004 4:25:49 AM

Re: Do not buy the prescott !

Don't ya think you are slaging the prescott a little premature? Could be this thing will rock.

You don't know how prescotts going to perform so hold off on the fanboy stuff.

Oh and thg might have an intel bias but these forums have just as many amd fanboys as intel fanboys.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
January 11, 2004 11:27:59 AM

LOL you guys make me laugh. Its not as simple as buy the AMD or buy the INTEL. Look around the net for reviews and its pretty clear. For gaming, the FX-51,3400 and the 3.2EE are top, but the EE is overpriced and doesn't quite match the FX in performance. For encoding and internet apps, the 3.2C and EE are excellent. Its all about what you will be using the pc for more than who is best in general.

Gaming = FX-51 or 3400 (or 3.2EE but its very expensive for performance).

Most other apps the 3.2C or EE are the choice here, with the 3.2 taking my vote because its so cheap now.

I myself am going the 3400 route because all I do is play games on my pc, and it will be equiv to about a 3.8ghz P4 or 3.4EE.



My system spec: Fast PC<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
"It's not the spoon that bends, it's only yourself."
January 11, 2004 11:56:46 AM

If I was ya I would also keep one thing in mind the FX oced to 2.8Ghz. Now this thing is flying and I know you can fit it in your bugget unless you go all out on extras. But if I had the cash right now I woul be getting my self the OCed FX. You can always upgrade later and use the same Cooler for you new CPU and OC the hell out of it.

Frozen
Fallout
OUT

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
January 11, 2004 2:16:01 PM

Quote:

Don't ya think you are slaging the prescott a little premature? Could be this thing will rock.

You don't know how prescotts going to perform so hold off on the fanboy stuff.

I was just informing the person !
Prescott will very likely not perform well, sorry to dissapoint you...(not faster then curent P4)
This is the time of AMD64, they are simply the fastest on this moment, and still some persons advice p4 ore p4 EE.
This i can not allow, i know many people who think P4 is the fastest and buy a P4, if i explain to them THG is intel bias and P4 is not the fastest they are disapointed(by letting them read other reviews then THG) , so i think good information is importend, surtenly on a intel site/forum as THG.

Kanavit was telling Half life 2 will suport Hyper Treading.
This must be a joke, Hyper treading is very much over rated and slower`s the system in much cases !The only thing where it looks good is sysoft Sandra(intel payed a lot i gues).
64 bit is what gamedevelopers love ! 30% extra performence !! they are all chosing for 64 bit ! UT2004, Half life2, Far Cry !
http://www.amdzone.com/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=26&...

Quake runs best on Intel says Kanavit, that`s maybe true, but all the other games run faster on AMD :o )
so i would say, let the baby have his cooky :) 
January 11, 2004 2:41:18 PM

Ok Coop, you got me. i'm an Intel fan, and i am a believer in <i>mhz</i>. when i spend money, i expect value. when my computer boots , i love seeing 3.2ghz on the post screen, and not 2ghz (3200+). :smile: :tongue: i'm sorry but the brand new AMD A64 couldn't beat an 3 year old P4 architecture in the battle review. Plus, all Intel did was rebadge the xeon and it more than held its own against the A64.

LOL, half-life2 64-bit? i'm sorry but wasn't half-life 2 was suppose to be out last year? And it required DX9 also. I hate to see how long it takes before HL2 64-bits hit store shelves, i'm guess sometime 2010 maybe.

<b><font color=red>Aquamark3 score: 26,467</b></font color=red> :smile:
<b><font color=blue>Intel P4 2ghz ATI Radeon 9500 pro</b></font color=blue>
January 11, 2004 3:23:55 PM

Well Kanavit your are truly am product of Intels agressive "Mhz Matters" campaign, i laughed when i read your post at futuremark where you claimed that "Netburst" would improve your surfspeed and the other time when you told that you choose Intel because they have better maketing methods...

Other than that i don't really think prescott will be faster than the P4 clock for clock, especially not in games where raw memory latency tends to be the deciding factor. But sure the P4E will scale to higher speeds, because of the improved clock distribution.

But atleast you never offend anyone you just can't listen to other people with diffrent opinions :) . Having a conversation with you about CPUs is like talkaing the fridge in the kitchen
January 11, 2004 3:24:38 PM

Re: Look around the net for reviews and its pretty clear. For gaming, the FX-51,3400 and the 3.2EE are top, but the EE is overpriced and doesn't quite match the FX in performance.

I agree but we don't know what intel has up its sleve with the prescott. maybe it will be a dud maybe it will rock, we won't know forsure untill we see it tested so lets not slag the prescott untill we know how it performs.

Personaly I can't see intel releasing a new chip that performs worse than the previous chip. Not that it can't happen just look at the p4 @ 1.3 but i'd be suprised if the prescott does not offer more performance.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
January 11, 2004 3:36:56 PM

Re: I was just informing the person !
Prescott will very likely not perform well, sorry to dissapoint you...(not faster then curent P4)

I'm not dissapointed. While I do think it's high time amd got the performance crown for a while I also think they gotta earn it fair and square maybe amd has it right now but prescott might change all that. Like I said one can guess how prescott will perform but untill then that's all it is a guess.

Lets wait for the test results before you knock it.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
January 11, 2004 3:43:31 PM

Quote:
i'm an Intel fan, and i am a believer in mhz. when i spend money, i expect value. when my computer boots , i love seeing 3.2ghz on the post screen, and not 2ghz (3200+). i'm sorry but the brand new AMD A64 couldn't beat an 3 year old P4 architecture in the battle review. Plus, all Intel did was rebadge the xeon and it more than held its own against the A64.

Whatever!

<b>blah:</b> <font color=red>Don't show your stupidity, whole world knows that Intel is a much better CPU for stable work.</font color=red>
January 11, 2004 3:46:54 PM

Quote:
I was just informing the person !

How can you inform someone without any information? Please show me all the info you used, in order to draw any conclusions about Prescott's performance. I am really interested in this! Btw, not any "The Inquirer" style articles, real reviews is what I am looking for!

<b>blah:</b> <font color=red>Don't show your stupidity, whole world knows that Intel is a much better CPU for stable work.</font color=red>
January 11, 2004 11:21:17 PM

I agree with just waiting for the test results. It is only 1 month away, so just wait! Plus, I would say not to buy a new computer right now, because new techs will be coming out soon (PCI express, DDR2, and I just forgot the queing HD's name)

Anxiously awaiting prescott....is it here yet?
January 12, 2004 12:01:29 AM

But if you wait until then, people will say wait till the technology matures, then wait until the next gen comes out... He'll be waiting with a 5 year old system.

If you have the money and want to upgrade, do it.

Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.
January 12, 2004 12:46:43 AM

Quote:
This must be a joke, Hyper treading is very much over rated and slower`s the system in much cases !The only thing where it looks good is sysoft Sandra(intel payed a lot i gues).


Being an AMD fanboi doesn't make you any better than the so-called Intel fanbois. HT does improve performance on applications that support it. If the application doesn't support it, obviously it's not going to perform any better, and it some cases may perform worse. Chances are, the results would be the same in a dual-CPU platform.

Quote:
Quake runs best on Intel says Kanavit, that`s maybe true, but all the other games run faster on AMD :o )
so i would say, let the baby have his cooky :) 


Unless the difference is >10%, it's insignificant and not worth the money it costs to upgrade. The GPU in your system is beginning to make more and more difference while the CPU is beginning to matter less and less. Whether you go P4C, Scotty, or A64... I think you'll be happy; provided you have a good motherboard, RAM, power supply and GPU supporting it.


<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
January 12, 2004 2:11:19 AM

still, wouldnt it be better to at least get an early version of PCI express? Would it be like before AGP was out, but it was soon to be out, would you just buy a MB with only PCI? Or wait and get AGP 1, when people say to wait for AGP 2?

Anxiously awaiting prescott....is it here yet?
January 12, 2004 5:07:26 AM

Quote:
Well Kanavit your are truly am product of Intels agressive "Mhz Matters" campaign, i laughed when i read your post at futuremark where you claimed that "Netburst" would improve your surfspeed and the other time when you told that you choose Intel because they have better maketing methods...

Other than that i don't really think prescott will be faster than the P4 clock for clock, especially not in games where raw memory latency tends to be the deciding factor. But sure the P4E will scale to higher speeds, because of the improved clock distribution.

But atleast you never offend anyone you just can't listen to other people with diffrent opinions :) . Having a conversation with you about CPUs is like talkaing the fridge in the kitchen

heh, Intel marketing is second to none. alot of warfare is fought through polotics. Intel just seems to know how to successfully campaign their products. Like the hyperthreading feature and mhz. the release of the P4 EE did steal some thunder from otherwise un-opposed A64 FX-51 hammer 64-bit cpus. Business is all about cost and expense.

the prescott should be faster clock for clock than the northwood, slower than P4/EE. Plus improved clock distribution.

<A HREF="http://www.chip-architect.net/news/2003_03_06_Looking_a..." target="_new">http://www.chip-architect.net/news/2003_03_06_Looking_a...;/A>

<b><i>Prescott improvements over NOrthwood</i></b>
- Improved Hyper threading technology.

- Improved pre-fetcher

- Improved branch predictor.

- Improved Integer Multiply latency.

- Improved Power management.

- Additional Write Combining buffers


<b><font color=red>Aquamark3 score: 26,467</b></font color=red> :smile:
<b><font color=blue>Intel P4 2ghz ATI Radeon 9500 pro</b></font color=blue>
January 12, 2004 10:39:06 AM

Quote:
Quake 3 is lame. Play a real frag fest like UT2k3.
Or play a real mans FPS like Halo.
Hyperthreading is over rated.

UT2k3 was quite possibly the worst hyped game ever.
the P4 EE owns the A64 3400+, and A64 FX-51 in Halo.
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1941&p=5" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1941&p=5&lt;/A> click link to see! :smile:

hyperthreading is the single most innovative processor feature out this year, it allows a single physical cpu to act like two logical cpu. increasing thoroughput, effeciency, and decreasing cpu idle time simultaneously. i think x86-64 is overrated imo, why? because it ain't even out yet. lol

<b><font color=red>Aquamark3 score: 26,467</b></font color=red> :smile:
<b><font color=blue>Intel P4 2ghz ATI Radeon 9500 pro</b></font color=blue>
January 12, 2004 11:36:46 AM

Latest information on Prescott @ <A HREF="http://www.aceshardware.com/#75000461" target="_new">Ace's Hardware</A>.

Just a few things I noticed:
- This means that some software will not run - clock for clock - faster on the Prescott than on the Northwood P4. So besides SSE-3 optimized software, and software that benefits from hyperthreading, a 3.4 GHz Prescott will -IMHO- perform like a Northwood 3.4 GHz.
- Basically, I expect that most games will run on it like on a 3.4 Ghz Northwood, In fact, many games are already using the CPU more and more for AI (Battlefield 1942 uses up to 25% of the CPU's clockcycles).
- The software where Intel is already doing well such as Lightwave, Cinema4d and 3DSMax, will show the Prescott being faster clock for clock than Northwood.
- Intel's main objective with Prescott is getting higher clockspeeds out of Netburst without lowering the IPC.

Basically, I don't see any way for Intel to get the performance crown with Prescott. The first Prescotts coming out at 3.4GHz will deffinetely be slower than the 3.2GHz P4EE/FX-51 and San Diego isn't even here yet (will probablby arrive by the end of March at 2.4GHz using unregistered DDR memory)!

IMO 2004 belongs to AMD, if they play their cards correctly. Intel should better focus on Tejas instead.

<b>blah:</b> <font color=red>Don't show your stupidity, whole world knows that Intel is a much better CPU for stable work.</font color=red>
January 12, 2004 11:13:26 PM

Re: The software where Intel is already doing well such as Lightwave, Cinema4d and 3DSMax, will show the Prescott being faster clock for clock than Northwood.

I'd suppose we can expect many benchmarks in those 3 categories when THG compares it to the a64.



If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
January 13, 2004 1:18:30 AM

I understand what it does.
And so far for me i see no real life difference.
P4 is a complete 1 ghz over rating the amd cpu and you're going to tell me that it's only putting out a fraction of a Framerate.
Not to mention it's a good 300 dollars more. But ignoring price i wont really get into an intel amd fanboy fight. It's not worth it.
As you can see the specs below i use a pentium. I have no problem with either cpu's and i like them both. But.. as far as my own experience i haven't noticed a difference in performance from myspecs to the new 'C' specs.
Multi-tasking and WMA3 transfers seem to be the same.

I'm just starting to think too many people are buying into this "800" fsb HT thing a bit too much.
And as for it being the most innovative for this year.. i can agree with you. 64 bit cpu's doesn't impress me much only becuase it's the next logical step. Not to mention it will be years before we have true 64bit computing.

p4 2.8 533fsb
intel mobo
1gb rdram pc 800
radeon9800 pro
120gb seagate s-ata
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2004 2:41:42 AM

Prescott might not be as fast as Northwood, clock for clock. AMD has done a nice job with the 3400+. Unfortunately the only board on the market using the 755 chipset is the ECS 755-A. VIA can never be trusted and the NF3-150 has problems. NF3-250 isn't out yet, and you can't have a system without a motherboard. Sorry Poop.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
January 13, 2004 2:50:21 AM

I would be more worried about PCI-express, DDR support, and form factor in the next few months than about the Prescott core. I feel sorry for people buying 265M 9800XT and the like these days.
January 13, 2004 3:10:08 AM

Quote:
Prescott might not be as fast as Northwood, clock for clock

I will beg to differ..
<A HREF="http://www.ocheaven.com/article/0310/readgoodarticle.as..." target="_new">http://www.ocheaven.com/article/0310/readgoodarticle.as...;/A>
above link shows that a 2.8 prescott beats a 2.8 P4c in Super PI 1mb +2mb, Aquamark3, 3dmark2001se, 3dmark03, content creation,and cpubench 2003.

<b><font color=red>Aquamark3 score: 26,467</b></font color=red> :smile:
<b><font color=blue>Intel P4 2ghz ATI Radeon 9500 pro</b></font color=blue>
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2004 3:30:47 AM

I was being nice because I know trolls will point out tests using only the benchmarks where prescott lost.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
January 13, 2004 6:36:32 PM

What do you guys mean SATA will be gone? I am building this weekend and don't want to feel like a total buffoon. Even though I don't need Prescott, should I care about DDR2, PCI Express, etc? How do these new technologies affect AMD based systems? I was going to build now and then build in 2 years with BTX, new socket, DDR2, etc.
January 13, 2004 6:55:34 PM

I wasn't 100% correct by saying "SATA will be gone". What I should have said is that "SATA II will appear", so your new mobo won't be able to use those new HDDs based on that interface (WHEN they appear of course). You could of course built now, but the thing is that you won't have many upgrade options for your system. If you don't care about that, then there is no point in waiting for all these new technologies to arrive.

It's just that you have to keep in mind that if for example you build a rig now with A64 3200+ and Radeon 9800 Pro, you should know that the max CPU that could go into your mobo in a future upgrade will probably be a 3700+ and the max upgrade for your graphics card will probably be the Radeon 9800 XT.

As I said earlier, if you don't really care about upgrading your system until your next major upgrade, then you can build a powerful system right now without anything to worry about. Just keep in mind though that during your next upgrade in 2 years, probably 100% of your system's components will be obsolete.

<b>blah:</b> <font color=red>Don't show your stupidity, whole world knows that Intel is a much better CPU for stable work.</font color=red>
!