AMD System Vs. Intel

[robert5577]

I am looking to upgrade my MB, CPU and Graphics card. My system is mostly used for gaming, however I also dabble in video editing.

I have narrowed my search down to three possiblities and would like opinions.

AMD 3000+ s754--\--AMD 3000+ s939-\--Intel 3.0g 775
Gigabyte MB------\--Epox mB--------\---Epox MB
6800 Standard-----\-6800 standard---\--6600GT

I am looking to upgrade in the next two weeks. My budget is $600 firm, but would like to spend less. I also like thinking of the future capabilities. I also upgrade about ever 2 years.

Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[gothitbycar]

Its a tough choice

The s754 system would probably be the cheapest but you will only be able to upgrade the processor to a 3700+.

The s939 one would be my personal choice. The problem is the boards are all AGP, I would wait till a PCI-E board came out for it if you want maximum upgradibility in the future.

The Intel system isn't bad but the performance won't be as good as either amd processors and it has a weaker graphics option too. Also, upgrading will be harder too if they change to a 1066mhz fsb. This would mean a new mobo and faster (and even more expensive) DDR2 memory.

-----------------------
oh, its a nice day. TO EAT CHILDREN!!!

 

[RichPLS]

Gaming better on AMD, Video better on Intel

Its a draw.

I have a Gigabyte 775 chipset, with Prescott 3200mhz and ATI X800XT PE video card Raptor boot drive and 2GB Corsair TwinX 2-2-2-5 RAM
and I don't notice many slowdowns, and aircooled with no heat problems.

_____________________________________________
<font color=red> And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign </font color=red>

 

[Mr5oh]

Well for gaming A64 is the way to go. Certain video editting programs will perform better on the P4 system. Overall your best bet is probably the A64 system.

As for as upgradeability, in two years, there will be new hardware out that will make you want to upgrade your motherboard with your next CPU upgrade anyways (Stuff like PCI express, which isn't quite a standard feature yet).

The 6800 card will generally perform a little better the 6600GT, performance should be realitively close in some catagories though.

Pricewise I'm guessing (Didn't check prices, as you didn't list motherboard models), the AMD 3000+ s754 system is the cheapest. Also I would prefer a Gigabyte motherboard over Epox anyday. Not that Epox necessarily makes bad motherboards, I personally prefer GigaByte (Owned 9 so far, and won't be buying any other brands anytime soon). The downside to the s754 will be that it really won't be upgradable, AMD has stated they are only realeasing a 3700+, if I remember correctly, for s754. Of course like I said, you may want a new motherboard to by the time its time to upgrade your s939 setup.

My Desktop: <A HREF="http://Mr5oh.tripod.com/pc.html" target="_new">http://Mr5oh.tripod.com/pc.html</A>

 

[endyen]

I would choose the gigabyte solution as well. The only condition would be that it's with the nforce3 250 chipset.
Going straight 32 bit makes no sense at this point.

 

[Spitfire_x86]

Get A64 3000+ (socket 754). Make sure that you are buying a mobo based on nForce3 250 chipset

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

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>

 

[robert5577]

Well, I think I will see how the price drop later this week affects things. But I do believe I will go with the AMD system. I think if someone chases the upgrade path, they will either not get a computer or will not be happy with what they have.

Thank you for your posts.

 

[ChipDeath]

why is everyone in here saying the 6800 outperforms the GT? <A HREF="http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041004/vga_charts-04.html#3dmark_2003" target="_new">it doesn't</A> based on that, the P4 rig would actually perform slightly better in most games than either AMD rig.

Personally, I'd still go with AMD, but just thought I'd point that out to confuse things further

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL/1x512Mb Corsair XMS PC4000 2.5-3-3-7
Sapphire 9800Pro (VGA Silencer Rev3) @418/742

 

[Mr5oh]

why is everyone in here saying the 6800 outperforms the GT?

Notice he dropped down to a <b>6600GT</b> for the P4 system, used a 6800 on the AMD systems.

My Desktop: <A HREF="http://Mr5oh.tripod.com/pc.html" target="_new">http://Mr5oh.tripod.com/pc.html</A>

 

[Imp]

In looking around for my new system, I found a couple mobos in socket 775 that support both DDR and DDR2 RAM, as well as having both an AGP and PCI-e slot. Here's one:

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=13-135-157&depa=0

$94 too =) That's cool because you can still use your regular DDR with the new CPU's, and have your pick of any video card on the market. Downside is that your RAM is limited to 2 slots in either case, but not too many people buying a 94 dollar motherboard are going to worry about putting over a gig in anyway, I'd think. The only other upgrade consideration would be that the new features in the upcoming processors are only going to be for the 925x chipset, not the 915 supposedly. But hey, for 94 bucks you can always upgrade hehe. Geez, decent RAM costs more than that, how do mobo manufacturers stay in business?

At the risk of starting another AMD vs Intel war, I'd have to say that if you did decide to go with a P4, having one of those badass video cards you probably wouldn't notice much difference when you game, if at all. And if you do other stuff with it, you can take advantage of some of the P4's strengths in video editing, etc..

 

[robert5577]

Hey ChipDeath you are right about the performance of the 6800 vs. 6600GT. I have found on most reviews that they perform mostly equal. In some circumstances, the 6800 did perform better, but not by much and at high resolutions. Now I must say that most of my gaming resolution is at 1024x768 and AA is not required. I think the capabilities of each card becomes a mute point when you consider the 6800's 12 pipelines but low clock core and DDR vs. the 6600GT High clock core and GDDR3 and 8 pipelines.

However I think the 915 board that incorporates an agp slot accually sacrifices the perfomance by 15-20%. I notice in the few board that I have seen with that feature, ECS and Gigabyte, they do not represent the agp slot as 8x. And in the Gigabyte, they state not to use it for long.

Thank you all again for your thoughts.

 

[ChipDeath]

My mistake! I mis-read it as 6<b>8</b>00GT.

I was thinking everyone was saying a plain 6800 outperforms a 6800GT!

Maybe I should pay more attention....

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL/1x512Mb Corsair XMS PC4000 2.5-3-3-7
Sapphire 9800Pro (VGA Silencer Rev3) @418/742

 

[ChipDeath]

As I said above, I simply mis-read your original post...

I would get the 6800 over the 6600GT if it were me, <i>especially</i> considering it's in an A64 system ...

AFAIK, the PCI-Express boards that have an AGP slot actually attach it to the PCI bus, so yes it will probably bottleneck a high-end card.

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL/1x512Mb Corsair XMS PC4000 2.5-3-3-7
Sapphire 9800Pro (VGA Silencer Rev3) @418/742

 

[Imp]

Yeah I saw that one board with the half-ass AGP slot, REAL or something they called it. They said that because it was adapted from the PCU-e bus that you may be reducing the life of your video card due to voltage concerns. The board I linked to has a regular agp slot though.

I don't think PCI-e is even a consideration at this point really, because AGP is just fine. When I was working up an Athlon build it didn't even phase me because I know I'm always going to buy one really good card rather than 2 not-so-good cards to run in SLI. (Obviously it's too spendy for some of us to run 2 top-of-the-line cards) Since that's out of the picture, there is no performence loss in AGP, and it's going to be around for quite awhile, there is no reason to wait on building an A64 on that account.

The tech is solid on the 939 from what I can see and they've already gone to the 90nm process with no problems to speak of. I think the 3500 with some really tight RAM and new generation graphics card would set you up just fine for quite awhile. One thing I think I'd do would be to spend a little more of your budget and bump the video card up to the next level. I found that spending a little more there will give your system a lot of life- my 4200ti carried me a long way.

I'm building a Pentium system just because I want to do something different. The last 5 computers I've built for people have been Athlons, and it's kind of fun to explore different tech and learn about things. If I don't like it or get tired of it fast I can always sell it for a good amount where I live, since everything is so overpriced. The local used-computer shop sells XP systems for over a grand, up to 2 if it's above a 2800xp.

 

[El_Jefe_77]

There is absolutely no point to buy 775 slot before the chipset comes out. and after that, still no reason again!
I foresee 2 years solid from this past spring to 2 years from spring where intel really is just for companies wanting to meet the nuisance needs of I WANT PENTIUM 4 IN MY COMPUTER I LIKE DELL types of customers.

I have a 3000 130nm chip. The thing runs at 110 degrees F (screw celsius, we live in america) during normal gameplay loads (battlefield 1942, forgotten hope), with a zalman 7000AL-cu on slowest rpm (1380 rpm according to Guru).
The thing smokes some serious games. I havent seen a drop of lag, and it was 152 dollars retail boxed, no oem 2 minute warranty, it had 3 years on it, AND was bought from a storefront. I dont think many can say that about a sick system, being near body temperature at normal running... boards for 754 are very nice, cheap, stable, solid, kv8 pro is pimp, worked fine on first try from scratch.

Cool and quiet actually had my computer proc temps go down to 85 degrees idle!! my room is 69 degrees...

 

[RichPLS]

I forsee early 2005 the performance curve favoring intel.
THG has an update on the 925 chipset using DDR2 1066 memory and when the P4 breaks 4 gigaherz we will see.

_____________________________________________
<font color=red> And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign </font color=red>

 

[Blasphemy]

Yes and if you read the article on the new chipset, it's a total bomb. Preformance didn't go up, and is beaten by the 800mhz chipset in some tests. Intel is really going to have to pull a rabit out of a hat to catch up.

----------------------------------------------------
AMD Athlon XP 2100+ stock
Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe
1GB generic RAM
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro 360/335

 

[ChipDeath]

I for one hope Intel do bounce back well. Competition benifits all of us

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL/1x512Mb Corsair XMS PC4000 2.5-3-3-7
Sapphire 9800Pro (VGA Silencer Rev3) @418/742

 

[Mephistopheles]

Ah, but at least the average P4 benefits much more from 1066Mhz FSB than the EE, because the EE has that 2MB L3 cache already and doesn't gain that much of a boost.

The "common" P4 will benefit more from this right now.

However, I wouldn't expect this to be the lifesaver that intel desperately needs right now. While current 1MB Prescotts will benefit more than the EE, the newer 2MB L2 Prescotts (6xx series) will probably only have the same minor boost the EE got from 1066Mhz FSB. And that is just sad.

There's also DDR2-667 and possibly even DDR2-800, but even so, Intel needs to think of something different and quickly. Their "next-gen" platform has very little appeal if compared to A64s. And AMD will probably manage to clock its chips to 2.6Ghz and 2.8Ghz, which will put Intel to shame. Approaching 3Ghz while Intel is still playing around in the 3.4Ghz ballpark figure even lessens the clock gap, which is <i>very</i> bad news for Intel.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 10/12/04 09:57 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[endyen]

When you consider the FX55 is due out at the same time, or before the new EE, things do look rather grim for Intel.
With the added heat from the fsb increase, scotty will need another stepping before it can go to 666. Oh well. number of the beast and all, expect it to be hotter than hades.
I wish they wood just bring out a northwood on 90 nanos, clocked to 4 gigs+ using the 266 fsb.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I wish they wood just bring out a northwood on 90 nanos, clocked to 4 gigs+ using the 266 fsb.

Oh yes... If only our wishes were of any importance... :frown: ...

I for one would wish for a dual-core dothan in 2005 on desktops. It would be a clean kill for Intel in terms of keeping a reasonable power envelope with top-notch clock rates.

 

[trooper11]

and id like to see an athlon 64 at 3ghz, but we dont always get what we want do we lol.

dual dothans wouldnt be bad to have either hehe

 

[El_Jefe_77]

dual 2.0 dothans would be my dream machine lota processing power with very low heat and such.
plus its jus cool to say i have 2 mobile half speed proc's pumping.

 

[Mephistopheles]

The current 90nm process would even manage a quad dothan, but that would only be good for workstations/servers/very high end.

And that's just thinking thermal. There's also electrical specs... But a quad dothan on LGA775 would have plenty of bandwidth. Just imagine working on a quad dothan 2.13Ghz and LGA775 would look much more interesting. I wonder how easily Intel's arbiter chip can be installed?