I know Prescott is the newest but I've also heard some negative things about it; but keep in mind I will not overcloak. Which chip, seeing as how price difference is neglible, do you think I should go with?
And then of course the AMD-64: $199 - Athlon 64 3000.
Intel seems it would be the more reliable of the two and better suited to video applications and compression etc., and still performs similar to the AMD64 in games. I have been leaning this way. Without bringing biased arguments, are there any objective reasons why I may want to reconsider the AMD-64 over the Intel for what I am doing? (and if/when u suggest what would be best for me, please specify if you consider yourself an Intel fan, AMD fan, or neutral).
I really don't know the latest on mobos. What would be my two choice mobos for an Intel Prescott, and Intel non-prescott, and the AMD? I don't mind spending the extra $$ cuz I want a high quality mobo, but I DO NOT need or want integrated video/sound.
I have old AMD-Thunderbird era RAM, 512MB. I take it this will not work eh? I think corsair is still the best to get, is that right? What kind of RAM do I want? I would like either 512MB or 1GB. Do I want PC3200, or higher? Specfic suggestions here?
Oh, and lastly, I know this question would be more suited to the PSU section, but my PSU just died and I think it fried my mobo, so, what are the best PSU brands again?
The northwood has better performance at stock speed than the prescott. You might want to consider an Intel board since you're not overclocking.
On the AMD side, I'd go with the ECS 755-A2, unless you're looking for more features, in which case the MSI K8N Neo has them.
Either way, Crucial offers stable timings on their memory, some other makers require raised voltage to stabilize their memory.
<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>
I am an Amd fan, mostly because I never want to spend as much as the current Intel chips cost ($150 max.)
If you do go Intel, do not get current P4e chips as they run hot, about 103 watts. The upcoming scotties will only be slightly better. They will be on socket 775. I dont like the idea of LGA at all, from potential heat to socket failure issues. The LGA boards will also require a new case, and power supply aka BTX ff.
The P4c is the best choice from Intel.
I would of course preferr the A64. The new Nforce3 250 boards look very nice. The asus K8N should be good.
They have the advantage in games, and will gain once win64 is released.
For Intel chips, the best socket 478 boards use 865 and 875 chipsets. Abit seems to have the upper hand atm. The IS7 is the current favorite, but the 875 board isnt too bad, though more money.
From the age of your current rig, it looks like you hang onto your systems for more than a couple of years. Soon 64 bit will be mainstream so you will need A64 before this setup is done.
Crucial is good, pc3200/DDR400 is all you need, without oc-ing.
Fortron makes high quality psus but sell them for a low price, great value.
If you mostly do Video editing, the P4 should be faster, but it will depen on the apps you use. So, search reviews of AMD64/P4 with bench of the apps. you use. Don't buy Prescott. And if you want top video performance you will prebably be better served py the P4C.
Intel seems it would be the more reliable of the two
Why there is still people that think AMD CPU are not reliable? If they were not reliable, they would not sale CPU at all. CPU can't be unreliable. No one would buy a CPU that miscalculate. AMD/Intel CPUs are both stable. Most of the reliability issue comes from RAM/MB choice, not from the CPU you get.
Lookin' to fill that <font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> shape hole!