Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I am building a gaming PC. Should I Go AMD64 or P4

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 21, 2004 7:57:30 PM

Well, the title says it all. Should I go the AMD64 route or P4. I currently have an ATI9800PRO 128MB card I want to use. I would appreciate some input and possible links to reviews. I would like to spend less than $1000. I already have the Video Card. I would like a powerful system that can play my MS flight simulator, planetside, 1st person shooters, doom3, unreal 2, etc. Can you guys recommend a motherboard as well. I currently have a AMD ATHLON 800 MHZ. Its time to UPGRADE.

Thanks

ABE

More about : building gaming amd64

July 21, 2004 8:26:29 PM

Definetly Athlon 64 for gaming. At the moment, I don't have time to suggest you a complete rig. I will do it later today or tomorrow if no one else have answered you!

--
Asus A7N8X / <font color=green><b>AMD Sempron 2800+</b></font color=green> (tbred @ 167x12)
Kingston DDR333 2x256Megs
<font color=red>Built by ATI Radeon 8500LE 128Megs</font color=red> @ C:275/M:290
July 21, 2004 9:54:57 PM

Thanks. I am planning on buying everything Monday or Tuesday.
Related resources
July 21, 2004 10:15:31 PM

Hi.

This would be my recommendation:

Power Supply: <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">Fortron 400w</A>: $58.00
Mobo: <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">MSI K8N Neo Platinum</A> : $130.00
Cpu: <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">Athlon 64 3200+ Newcastle</A> : $282.00
Memory: <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">Corsair XMS TwinPack 1gb</A> : $234.00
Sound Card: <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">SB Audigy 2 OEM</A> : $72.49
CD-RW: <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">Lite-On 52x32x52 CD-RW</A> : $30.99
DVD-Rom: <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">Lite-On 16x DVD-ROM</A> : $29.50

Total : $836.98

If you wanted DVD-RW instead of DVD-ROM:

DVD-RW: <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">Lite-On 8x DVD-RW</A> : $70.99

New total : $878.47

Of course you still would need a case which you could get a good one for under $75. And then mouse and keyboard if you wanted to upgrade those too. And speakers lol.

All of this is at Newegg.com. Great site.

Good luck.


--
MSI K8N Neo Platinum
Athlon 64 3200+ Newcastle
512mb Apacer pc3200
ATI 9800np 256-bit 128mb
3dMark01: 20,371 3dMark03: 6334 Aquamark3: 46,310
July 21, 2004 10:19:36 PM

Wow!!!. Thanks for the post. I was wondering what kind of frame rates you get on the best games. Do you have Microsoft Flight Simulator or X-plane? I would appreciate some stats.

Thanks
July 21, 2004 10:27:17 PM

i was in the same boat as you not too long ago but then pay cuts hit and i haven't purchased everything that i wanted. anyways, personally i am not an OCer so this is what i chose. i wanted to get the MSI neo platinum for my MB because of its strong performance. just make sure that you update the drivers as soon as you get it. Athlon 64 3200+, i wanted to get the clawhammer for the xtra cache but i haven't seen one for a while. so you may have to get the newcastle with the 2.2 core and 512k cache. the 3200+ has teh best price/performance for current cpus. i was going to go with some corsair xms xl ram but since crucial came out with ballistix i would go with that. it has basically the same CAS timings but is much cheaper and that brand will still work with the neo platinum. if you need HDs i wouldn't get raptors if you are going to stay under $1000, they are around $180-160. everything else you should have, video card, keyboard, mouse, monitor...ad nausem.
cpu ~ 270
ram ~ 270
MB ~ 130
HDs? ~ 160
TOTAL ~ $830
July 21, 2004 10:27:30 PM

pretty good picks I'd say... Although if not overclocking then cheaper RAM would probably be ok.

I admit I did have to chuckle when I read the top customer Review of the A64 3200+...:
Quote:
I stepped up from a 2400+ Tbred XP, and the speed increase is very noticable. I'm running this 3200+ A64 chip at <b>24.7GHz</b> on air cooling right now, and it's stable as a rock.

:eek:  Must be some new stepping I've not heard of! :lol: 

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL 2-2-2-4
Sapphire 9800Pro @412/740
July 21, 2004 10:31:53 PM

There is no game available today that wouldn't run like a dream on that system, so I wouldn't sweat it.

I suspect those games should easily run at a framerate exceeding that of your monitor, even at high res.

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL 2-2-2-4
Sapphire 9800Pro @412/740
July 21, 2004 11:52:29 PM

The only thing I am worried about is the new PCI express standard. Thats why I am confused. I am going to buy a new Video card when they drop in price. I will have a 1GB or RAM. I am just worried about the 3200+ designation. It runs at a lower clock speed. I know the whole AMD bit about performance, but is it truly superior overall to the P4's?

Thanks
Abe
July 22, 2004 12:00:46 AM

were are the AMD fag boys. they ant called intel yet!
July 22, 2004 12:05:35 AM

I know the whole AMD bit about performance, but is it truly superior overall to the P4's?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

It depends on what you do with it. You would be happy with a P4-3.0C. If you have bucks to burn, go the 775 route. Just wait a tad longer for better pricing. And yes, AMD64 is VERY good in games. :smile:


Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4 - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - THAT'S MORE LIKE IT!
July 22, 2004 2:17:23 AM

Ok, which board should I go with. MSI? I like that one. Also, one more questions. Which memory name brand should I go with?

Thanks

Abe
July 22, 2004 3:00:06 AM

For lot's of features either that board or the new ASUS KN8-E, I think it's called. A great value board is the Chaintech VNF3-250. Memory? See what <A HREF="http://forum.msi.com.tw/thread.php?threadid=51996&sid=" target="_new">these people</A> are running.

Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4 - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - THAT'S MORE LIKE IT!
July 22, 2004 3:55:22 AM

if you wanted a gaming computer, i always found the video card to make more performance boost than processor. get a <font color=red>Geforce 6800 GT</font color=red> $399 like me, and 16 parallel pipes, SM 3.0, superscaler design. than save money by getting a <font color=blue>3.0e prescott</font color=blue> $215 with hyperthreading technology, dual channel capabilities.

Prescott 3.0E 1MB L2 HT
1GB PC 3200 Dual channel(PAT)
Asus P4P800 Bios 1016
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
57,397 Aquamarks
July 22, 2004 4:31:21 AM

hmmm. There we go again confused. AMD64 or P4. The key thing here is gaming and I do a lot of it. Especially MS Flight Simulator 2004. Can someone benchmark that for me on a AMD64 and a P4?
July 22, 2004 4:41:32 AM

"The key thing here is gaming and I do a lot of it."

A64 is the answer. Video card DOES play a bigger role but all things = a64 will blow away a similar priced intel p4 setup in gaming... Of course if converting a movie to divX it might take an hour with the same p4 and an hour and 2 minutes with the a64 but if you use a different compession programe the a64 might have a small advantage. If gaming is what maters use an a64 cpu.

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.
July 22, 2004 4:45:16 AM

Ok AMD64 it is. Which memory company should I go with. I want a 1GB of Ram. I don't do any of the overclocking stuff so recommend the best!!!!
July 22, 2004 4:55:24 AM

Good question. First decide what board you want (chipset) the 2 popular options are nforce3 250 and via k8t800 and they are both produced by many mother board makers. Don't let people tell you the via k8t800 is bad cause its via all the review sites (afaik) love it if via ever made a winner the k8t800 is it. The nforce250 is good too. Once you know what board you want post here and ask about memory some boards can be finiky just like intel. It's not like all memory wont work but some work better at lower timmings etc.

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.
July 22, 2004 4:56:27 AM

Corsair or OCZ for MSI Board.

Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4 - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - THAT'S MORE LIKE IT!
July 22, 2004 5:46:47 AM

Hot Off the MSI Forum Press. First guy I've seen with Ballistix!



k8n neo crucial pc 4000 ballistix

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just received my crucial pc4000 after searching high and low for a stick of ram that will work on this board, i think i have finaly found it the board seems a lot more stable than any other ram ive tryed and ive tryed most of them corsair,ocz adata

my board is now running 260 cas 2.5,3,3,8
sandra mem bw is 3995/3996

with A64 3200 clawhammer C0 i am about to try my 3400 cg to see how it go's

still have more test to do but its looking very good

Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4 - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - THAT'S MORE LIKE IT!
July 22, 2004 7:22:18 AM

since whne does hyperthreading help in gaming performance?

while a p4 will play games fine, if he is looking for the ebst, then it is obvioulsy the athlon 64, i cant believe you would try to sell him on a 3ghz prescott...


anyway, motherbaord wise id say the msi k8n neo platinum for its extensive features and stability in using DS memory in all of its slots. if you want to save some money, the Chaintech VNF3-250 is an excellent value and also works well with memory using all of its slots.
July 22, 2004 8:27:06 AM

Why did you recommend a P4 over a A64 for a gamer?

</font color=red><i><font color=blue>Jesus Christ was a black homosexual woman
July 22, 2004 12:21:24 PM

First - The guy don'T want to change is GPU, so forget about the GeForce 6800GT path.

Second - P4E 3.0GHz would be slower for what he wants to do with is rig : playing GAMES.

Kavanit you should really STOP focusing on Intel only, when people buy a system to mostly play games, even a P4EE 3.4GHz is not a good choice. Any Athlon 64 or FX are better in pure gaming. So please, stop shouting everywhere that Intel is the way to go for everything.

By the way, your therad about your extraordinary upgrade prove us that you have a lot to learn about PC.

--
Asus A7N8X / <font color=green><b>AMD Sempron 2800+</b></font color=green> (tbred @ 167x12)
Kingston DDR333 2x256Megs
<font color=red>Built by ATI Radeon 8500LE 128Megs</font color=red> @ C:275/M:290
July 22, 2004 12:25:54 PM

First, don't listen to Kavanit. He is the most BIASED person on this forum. He usually get a lot of bad reply from "veteran" users.

He thiks that Intel are GOD, so anything else is crap for him. For gaming, AMD have the edge, PERIOD! No one can't argue this.

For your memory choice, you can get any decent DDR400 ram if you don't want to overclock. For overclocking, the best memory for AMD64 systems is OCZ 3500EB or 3700EB. But, this ram is not cheap!

To be sure, check the MSI website for their memory compatibility list.

--
Asus A7N8X / <font color=green><b>AMD Sempron 2800+</b></font color=green> (tbred @ 167x12)
Kingston DDR333 2x256Megs
<font color=red>Built by ATI Radeon 8500LE 128Megs</font color=red> @ C:275/M:290
July 22, 2004 2:37:41 PM

i don't think buying Processor for gaming only is logical. video card upgrade would be the wisest decision for gaming. A64 isn't cheap, has no hyperthreading and only runs single channel DDR. well the A64 3000+ s754 anyway. In some games, the A64 may boost gaming performance over the P4. However, in some games the A64 lags to the P4. The P4 is the way to go for overall system performance!

Btw, hypethreading has its uses. I just played Madden 2004 last night and downloading my new 6800 GT nvidia demos over 600megs, and the game ran flawelessy. no glitch , no skips, or lag whatsoever. On my old P4 northwood 2.8B 533mhz cpu, the game would stutter badly while performing other tasks.

------
Prescott 3.0E 1MB L2 HT
1GB PC 3200 Dual channel(PAT)
Asus P4P800 Bios 1016
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
58,178 Aquamarks
July 22, 2004 3:28:55 PM

<A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti...;/A> amd64 3000+ = 223$
<A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?descripti..." target="_new">http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?descripti...;/A> p4 3.0E = 210$

For 13$ more you get 64bit support and a hell of alot better gaming proformance.
Hyperthreading does little if not nothing when it comes to gaming.
And Double channel ram also has little signs of helping in gaming.
Sorry but you are why to baised. If the guy said he uses his computer for video encoding. Then we would all suggest a p4. And a northwood, not the prescot garbage that you keep trying to press on people.
Do you ever look at benchmarks? Because if you did you would notice the prescot has no advantages over the northwood besides a ton of heat!

AMD64 2800+
MSI Neo-Fis2r
512mb Kingmax ddr400
Sapphire 9800pro 128mb
10K WD Raptor
July 22, 2004 4:14:46 PM

ok you show me links where it shows a p4 of the same class outperforming the ahtlon 64 3000+ or any athlon 64 for that matter in games. as far as i know, the one that tends to favor the p4 is quake 3....

as far as gaming not a logical choice... wlel um thats your opinion, but if a person is palnning on gaming and not doing anything video wise and suchs, then he should pick what is better for the games he plays correct? would you tlel him to ignore the benchmarks? come on, give me a break here. grante the s939 ahtlon 64 would be nice, but evne in singal channel form, the s754 still outperformed comperable p4's in gaming, thats just how it goes.

you want to tlak about toher strengths. well lets see, if oyu check out anandtech's latest articel, youll see the ahtlon 64 can now boast better scores in encoding divx or xvid. it can also boast higher scores in more 3d rendering apps like 3dsmax. and lets nto forget its strengths in compiling. and remember im talking numbers evne including p4 with hyperthreading.

the one thing that you hit on was multiple programs open at once. now ill agree taht in some cases things will see smoother, but remember, if its a progrma that could use 100% of the pcu, then all hyperthreading would do is take more power form that app to share with whatever else your doing, defeating the purpose of it anyway.

bottom line, athlon 64 is an all aoround great chip, and for gaming it has the best performance for the money. intel just doesnt have the same dominating lead it once had, accept that. its not a bad thing to admit, and intel will be back soon if they get things together.

i do think s939 is a better long term upgrade, since oyu can expect to get dual core chips in there too, but the s754 is fine for at least a couple years of use.
July 22, 2004 7:40:05 PM

Quote:
A64 isn't cheap,

The Athlon64 is priced about right for its performance. An Athlon64 3000+ performs slightly better than a P4 3.0E, so it costs slightly more. The AMD part also happens to be cooler-running and just as stable/reliable.

Quote:
has no hyperthreading

HyperThreading isn't all it's cracked up to be. Obviously it only helps in multithreaded or multitasking scenarios. Not to mention which, it sometimes hurts performance. Northwood's HyperThreading had most of the performance regressions ironed out, but they've started to creep back in with Prescott/Nocona and its new pipeline.

Quote:
and only runs single channel DDR.

Yet still outperforms the 3.0E. Having bandwidth isn't everything; being able to use it efficiently is important too.

Quote:
Btw, hypethreading has its uses. I just played Madden 2004 last night and downloading my new 6800 GT nvidia demos over 600megs, and the game ran flawelessy. no glitch , no skips, or lag whatsoever.

I'd be disappointed with anything less. I'm able to run Q3A while playing an mp3 in the background without a hitch, and that's only on a T-bird 1.33GHz. I could probably do the same thing on my 1GHz P3 box if it had a decent vidcard in it (but it's only a network appliance).

A simple straight download (probably sans SSL no less) shouldn't cause a performance problem no matter how large it is.

<i>"Intel's ICH6R SouthBridge, now featuring RAID -1"

"RAID-minus-one?"

"Yeah. You have two hard drives, neither of which can actually boot."</i>
July 23, 2004 11:35:57 AM

WOW. Thanks for the posts. After reading this and doing my own research look at what I found. This review proves AMD's superior power in gaming.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjM2LDU=

Let me clarify a couple of things since I am the original poster of the tread.

1.) I am going to use it for gaming. Especially, MSFS 2004, DOOM3, World of Warcraft. I NEED POWER. I know I said I am not going to buy a card now, but I will get a new card by years end when prices drop.

2.) 2nd, I am planning on have RAID in this PC. Probably 4 hard drives in the near future. I want to edit movies and do encoding via WME 9.0.

3.) So my updated questions to you would be since I have been out of the loophole for some time now.

--Which motherboard should I go with. I want the best AMD board?

--Can someone update me on the differences between 939-940 AMD and AMD64Fx, blah, blah, blah?

--Can someone update me on memory architecture. I am rusty. What memory speed should I go with?

I am a quick learner so please post away.
July 24, 2004 1:38:31 AM

Motherboards- With your budget, you should be looking at socket 754. For this platform, the best chipset is the nforce3 250. The 3 most favoured boards are by chaintech. Msi and Asus.
Memory- The A64 chips have an ondie memory controller. This reduces system latencies to a very short time. Since you will not be ocing, the cheapest pc3200/400 DDR that the board supports, is all you need. That is usually samsung.
Processor- Get the chip you can afford, either an A64 3000, or 3200.
Graphics- If you use an old (pci type old) card to trade up at Ati, the R9800pro 128mb card for $149 <A HREF="http://shop.ati.com/tradeup.asp" target="_new">http://shop.ati.com/tradeup.asp&lt;/A> is a pretty good deal. It's about a 50% framerate increase from your current card.
July 24, 2004 7:07:57 AM

64-bit support? currently their is no support for 64-ibts. not officially. if you buy a64 for 64-bit support, then you could be out on a limb. plus, 64-bits isnt proven to be faster than Intel's IA-32 chips yet. No drivers, beta drivers show that games are slower in 64-bits. so throw that 64-bit feature out the window for now, hyperthreading is more useful.

as far as games is concerned, the P4 beats A64 in QuakeIII.http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-3...

A64 only beats P4 in UK2004 by a large margin, only because Sweeney optimized the game around Athlons. still very unoticeable. 270 fps from 256fps is undetectable by human eye. A64 wins in Halo, RTCW, AOD, again by 1, or 2 fps almost totally visually unnoticeable.

P4 beats A64 in Pcmark04. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-t...

P4 easily outshines A64 in MP3 encoding, Lame, Mpeg-2, Mpeg-4, and Windows media player.http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-t...

Finally, P4 wins in 3d rendering: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-t...

Adobe Photoshop 8.0, P4 victor:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-t...

------
Prescott 3.0E 1MB L2 HT
1GB PC 3200 Dual channel(PAT)
Asus P4P800 Bios 1016
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
58,178 Aquamarks
July 24, 2004 5:08:18 PM

Quote:
64-bit support? currently their is no support for 64-ibts. not officially. if you buy a64 for 64-bit support, then you could be out on a limb.

Windows XP WILL support AMD64. That's not just a possibility, it's a certainty at this point.

Quote:
plus, 64-bits isnt proven to be faster than Intel's IA-32 chips yet.

Except that 32-bit AMD64 is already generally faster than Intel's IA-32 chips.

Quote:
No drivers, beta drivers show that games are slower in 64-bits. so throw that 64-bit feature out the window for now, hyperthreading is more useful.

Except that even with HyperThreading in the picture, Athlon64 still has an all-around lead in 32-bit benchmarks.

Quote:
as far as games is concerned, the P4 beats A64 in QuakeIII.

And loses in just about every other game. It doesn't even get a solid win in Q3A:

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=206..." target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=206...;/A>

Quote:
Finally, P4 wins in 3d rendering: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-t...

Only as long as you don't consider Maya or Cinema4D:
<A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-t..." target="_new">http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-t...;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=athlon64..." target="_new">http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=athlon64...;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=65000309" target="_new">http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=65000309&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=noconaop..." target="_new">http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=noconaop...;/A> <font color=white>(hey, a HyperThreading performance regression? Say it ain't so!)</font color=white>

Quote:
P4 easily outshines A64 in MP3 encoding, Lame, Mpeg-2, Mpeg-4, and Windows media player.http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-t...

Heheheh, riiiight.

<A HREF="http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=noconaop..." target="_new">http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=noconaop...;/A>

MPEG-4/DivX encoding isn't a solid win either:

<A HREF="http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjI2LDM=" target="_new">http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjI2LDM=&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=206..." target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=206...;/A>



<i>"Intel's ICH6R SouthBridge, now featuring RAID -1"

"RAID-minus-one?"

"Yeah. You have two hard drives, neither of which can actually boot."</i>
July 24, 2004 8:15:28 PM

For gaming the answer is AMD64 since they consistently are ahead. <A HREF="http://www6.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20040619/socke..." target="_new">Link</A>
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=208..." target="_new">Intel's newest vs AMD's newest</A>
I'd say that's pretty consistent.

I always like this chart for photoshop comparison. <A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-3..." target="_new">Link</A>
Shows you the exact numbers for different filters on a few CPUs.
All you have to do is wait for it to be done and we are talking seconds. Only if I did this all day every day and got paid would I really care or base my choice off of this.

I think his posts are rather amusing. Just hope no one actually acts on such advice.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by piccoro on 07/24/04 04:16 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 24, 2004 9:35:15 PM

as you can see, there are plenty of benches to contridict your claim that the p4 is the ebtter buy, especially for someone buying it mainly to play games. why would someone choose a p4 becuase it plays quake III better? tell me that.

this is a p4 vs athlon 64 debate. this person wanted it for gaming, why cant you admit that the ahtlon 64 is better for that job? its nto liek youd be admitting defeat or anything, its just one instance...
July 24, 2004 10:40:44 PM

QuakeIII is the biggest game engine currently.

I must refute the statement that A64 will run 32-bit apps faster than the P4 overall. It is definitely not true.

You will find in numerous review sites, that the P4 is better overall than the A64 which only wins in games, mathematical programs, and scientific applications. 3 things which are completely useless.

buying a chip that currently have no support is a total complete waste of money. I'd rather go for a real 64-bit cpu the itanium. the A64 /opterons are not full blown 64-bit chips, but extended to address more than 4gb of memory.

the days of x86 processors are numbered. IA-64 architecture is the future.
------
Prescott 3.0E 1MB L2 HT
1GB PC 3200 Dual channel(PAT)
Asus P4P800 Bios 1016
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
58,178 Aquamarks <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Kanavit on 07/24/04 06:42 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 25, 2004 12:31:43 AM

The guy is building a GAMING PC! G-A-M-I-N-G! Even Intel's new 925/775 boards get absolutely CRUSHED (C-R-U-S-H-E-D) by the AMD 64 - 939 Platform. The Quake Engine is being replaced by Crytec and the updated DOOM III engine. Build an A64 and see how fast they are for yourself, or get a buddy that has one and check it out in ACTUAL game frame-rates. You will be impressed! :smile:


Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4 - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - THAT'S MORE LIKE IT!
July 25, 2004 1:16:13 AM

ok i get ur point, lol.

but i still think s939 is a rippoff. $400 for the cheapest model to me is not worth it.

------
Prescott 3.0E 1MB L2 HT
1GB PC 3200 Dual channel(PAT)
Asus P4P800 Bios 1016
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
58,178 Aquamarks
July 25, 2004 2:43:46 AM

ok and compare that to a buying in lg755? lol exactly, it would cost as much if not more given you have to buy ddr2 ram.

anyway, your point about quake III is meaningless. if the quake 3 engine was so highly pro intel and it was in every game around, why is it 90% of all games favor amd? your statement means little and only applies to quake 3 itself.

ok you think the p4 is the all aorund better chip, wlel i can throw some credible benchamrks at you as well:

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2128&p=13" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2128&p=13&lt;/A>

here you can see thalon fx 53 leading in most bencmarks, even your beloved rendering and sound encoding marks.

your claim that the p4 is the overall leader is incorrect, just as much as id be wrong in saying the ahtlon 64 is the overall leader. now if you take top against top, as is in that review i posted above, then its leaning more towards the athlon. but since this guy isnt after spending that much money, you have to look at how the lower end models perform.

in the end, you have to choose based on what you use it for. you cannot go around just telling everyone to buy a p4 no matter what, thats nuts and its unfair to these people looking for help. your just filling thier heads with bias...

its ok if you prefer p4's and dont like athlons, thats your choice, but there is no reason to try and make excuses for it by trying to say its becuase the p4 is the ebst cpu, which it isnt. look there are apps taht will encode audio faster on an athlon 64 compare to an equally rated p4, plus their are video apps and 3d rendering apps taht to do the same thing, you know its true. if someone uses something like lame to encode mp3's then a p4 3.2 would probably outperform the ahtlon 3200+, but if you use besweet (which i do quite often for my audio encoding work), its alot faster on that athlon 64 3200+.

so again, the performace in the p4 3.2 and athlon 64 3200+ range comes down to what apps you use, becuase performance is nearly evenly split alogn many lines. and lets nto get into a debate over wether 64bit is a selling point. it can be for some and might not be for others. you may not want 64bits, but some may want it and if its one of many reasons they want an athlon 64, then thats fine with me. i agree no oen should base any choice on only one aspect. i would say the same thing about hyperthreading. no one should buy a p4 just becuase it has hyperthreading.

if this guy wants this pc for gaming, dont be hard on him for getting an ahtlon 64, when you yourself know it is the ebtter performer for that. did he say he would be editing audio or video? was he going to be rednering 3d? nope, so lay off a bit.
July 25, 2004 3:02:28 AM

LGA 775 is cheaper than s939. 3.0e s775 is same price as s478. DDR400 is compatible with i915 chipset. You get Intel Azalia 8 channel high-fidelity audio, Intel matrix storage, and PCi express slot. what do u get with s939?? less L2 cache and 2x more expensive!! maybe UK2004 run faster by 10-20fps out of 300. Like anyone can tell the difference , except that you are $600 lighter wallet. LOL!!

------
Prescott 3.0E 1MB L2 HT
1GB PC 3200 Dual channel(PAT)
Asus P4P800 Bios 1016
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
58,178 Aquamarks
July 25, 2004 6:00:45 AM

Considering no place even sells the 3.6GHz P4 could you be right about price? Looking at pricewatch the lowest I can get a P4 550 3.4GHz CPU for is 422$ while for 345$ I can get a 3500+. Add 80$ to the cost of the P4 550 and I could get a 3700+. Newegg has the P4 550 3.4GHz is 422$ while the S754 3400+ is 399$, that's still a much better deal.

Look at the Comanche 4 performance <A HREF="http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_pentium_4_560..." target="_new">here</A> and <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20040619/socket..." target="_new">here</A> the Prescott CPU performs low enough were it could be below 60 depending on your video settings while the A64 and Northwood would be well above. That's a quick example where you would notice the difference in FPS.
July 25, 2004 7:17:23 AM

ok lets see indeed what do you get on an s939 and at what price:

the current nforce 3 250GB offers the following:
onboard gigabit lan
onboard firewall
simulatneous ide/sata raid

now lets see about price, you seem to have forgotten, since it uses a pci-e slot, youll be spending more on a pci-e card at this time:
P4 530 (3.0e) retail - $225
MSI 915GM-FR I915G retail - $136
(this isnt even that great of a board considering it only has 2 dimms, please suggest one youd rahter use for the comparision)
MSI RADEON X600 XT 128MB - $190
(i just chose the midrange, since they seme easier to come by then the highest end)
total: $551

Athlon 64 3500+ retail - $380
MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum - $165
(a much better baord as far as features and expandibility compared to the board i listed for the p4)
MSI RADEON 9800 PRO 128MB retail - $192
(i decided to list what you could get for the same price under agp cards)
total: $737

ok now first of all, looking at those numbers (which i collected all of them from pricewatch if you would like to check me), the first thing id like to ask is where in the world you came up with 600 dollars difference? Here i see that the amd system would net $186 dollars more then the p4.

secondly, look at what you get for that 186. you get a 3500+ versus a 3.0e (this is an unfair comparision for the p4, so sure its cheaper, the 3500+ isnt in the same performance level, its more in line with a 3.4e which is $422 btw) , you also get the very robust nforce 3 250 GB chipset that competes nicely agianst intel's i915 you suggest. as far as the azalia audio, ill agree its better then the 7.1 offered on the msi k8n neo2, but for me it wouldnt matter, i dont use onbaord audio anyway, its jsuta nice bonus if its good. azalia is better, but its not bettert hen an audigy 2 , and the 7.1 on the neo2 would be fine for most basic uses and sound exceptable. you also get NV raid for using those ide and sata drives together, afeature i will probably use, more then ill use matrix raid, but ill grant that both are equal in terms of usefullness. and the pci-e slot iwll be nice in the future, but it doesnt command any performance boosts at this time. also with the amd system you get an ati 9800 pro versus the X600XT for the i915, now that can arguable be a draw between the two, but id rather have the 9800 pro 128 myself.

now if oyud like to make a fair comparison, ill be glad to compare a 3.4e system to that same athlon 64 systems, but you wanted to see it this way, so here it is. if you think the p4 3.0e would still be the better performing system , then by all means take it, you deserve it. now if i look at it, forgetting the fact that its amd or intel, the $186 is well spent...
July 25, 2004 12:21:27 PM

all good arguments, I do not deny that the A64 is faster than P4 in games. But people, i don't want beat on a dead horse. why spend $400 on a cpu, when you can spend only $219, and buy a super video card which is most important part in a gaming system.

For example: Lets make believe. I spent $850 on A64 FX-53 s939, than buy a Geforce FX 5200 . What that beat my Prescott 3.0e in gaming??? NO! my 6800 GT will eat it alive. The prescott feeds it just enough to make gaming happy. YOu don't need the xtra 20fps in UK2k4 , you cant tell the freakin difference. Don't you see? Painkiller looked the same on my 2.4B P4 /9500 pro @ 1024x768 as it did on my current rig. Ok well thats just my opinion.

------
Prescott 3.0E 1MB L2 HT
1GB PC 3200 Dual channel(PAT)
Asus P4P800 Bios 1016
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
58,178 Aquamarks
July 25, 2004 4:14:11 PM

Using that logic, why not buy a 2500+ XP-m and then OC? You'll have a great quiet little chip for what, <b>88 dollars </b>?

<font color=blue>The day <font color=green>Microsoft</font color=green> will make something that doesn't suck is the day they'll start making vacuum cleaners.</font color=blue>
July 25, 2004 4:49:31 PM

um did you read my post? i said the differnece was $186 dollars, plus youd get a better video card compared to the p4 system i showed. ok so you want to compare the two with the best video cards out then. well id be glad to.

id like to point out that you cant buy an ati X800XT or nvidia 6800 Ultra in a pci-e version yet, so those are not options. you cant even get a 6800GT or ati x800 pro card in pci-e yet, so i unless you know ofa place that sells any of those in stock now, you cant say that pci-e is the better deal yet....

so as of today, the best you could hope for is an ati x600xt pci-e card, versus getting a 6800GT or whatever with agp on the athlon system.

also let me point out something, my system included a 3500+, not an fx system, why are you so hung up on that? a 3500+ outperforms a 3.0e. lets stick to as close a comparison as possible. if you want to compare the fx, compare it tot he p4ee, cuase thats what its aimed at, not the p4e.

i asked oyu if you looked at those two systems, disregarding amd or intel names, which would you rather have, im just showing the facts here, not any bs, you can check yourself...
July 25, 2004 7:22:38 PM

Have you seen this HardOCP Review? It compares The X800 Pro, X800XTpe, and the GF6800U on 3 intel and 3 AMD systems. AXP-2500+, A64-3000+(@ 2.45GHz), A64-3500+ as well as P4 2.4C, 3.0C, and 3.4C. Pretty good review to show how these new cards scale and just how each cpu holds them back. Although I would have like to have seen even more Apples to Apples resolutions tested not just 1600x1200. Also OC'in that barton to 3200+ speeds would have been another nice addition to the charts showing how the top AXP or a typical OC'ed one, compares to the P4's and A64's.

Another thing I totally can't understand is why they bothered to OC the A64 3000+ to 2.45 GHz for this test. What was up with that? Should have left that at stock speeds or overclocked the XP2500+ and P4C chips also as those are OC'in champs themselves. Is also took away from us knowing how a lower end A64 lets these video cards perform.?.

<A HREF="http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjMy" target="_new">http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjMy&lt;/A>


ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 1GB Corsair XMS 4000 Pro Series, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt
July 26, 2004 1:21:07 AM

yeah i read that one, pretty good review. hardocp and anandtech are usually my favorites when it comes to cpu reviews.
!