Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

WHAT AMD IS EQUAL TO P4 4.0

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Water Cooling
  • AMD
Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 26, 2005 9:20:55 PM

I am thinking of getting a good water cooling kit in order to cool my newly acquired pentium 4 3.4 478 so that i can get it up to 4.0, any body have any idea what amd processor would compete with a 4.0? i know there is the 4000+ but i have a feeling those numbers to really matter.

More about : amd equal

January 26, 2005 10:11:03 PM

I'd say a 4000+

______________
OK it's your choice:
You can have the boat, or you can have the Mystery Box!
...Hey wait a minute! A boat's a boat, but a Mystery Box could be anything. It could even be a boat
January 26, 2005 10:14:12 PM

My A64 3200 is at 2.45ghz. I'd guess we would be close, if you can get to 4 ghz.
Related resources
January 27, 2005 12:37:42 AM

Their is no amd equivalent to that intel are fast, stable, and reliable processors made for everyday use and not just benchmark performance.
January 27, 2005 12:51:10 AM

I am just curious where you get your facts. A little reading may help you. I can foresee you grow into a real hardware guru if you can learn to throw away your prejudices and be discerning of the things you read on the web and the forums.

For example, if the poster is interested in the performance equivalent of an OC'ed P4 ~4GHz vis-avis A64 as far as gaming is concerned, he may want to try this link
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2330&p=...



On Cache and Bandwidth:
You do mean cash, and fan width goes to Intel right? - endyen 05
January 27, 2005 12:59:16 AM

id say the 4000+. Amd is good at gamin, intel for media. Buh amd marketing stragety sucks so the'll never beat intel.

ASUS NF4 A8N-SLI-DELUX, AMD 3500+, MSI 256 6800GT PIC-E (NO SLI), COSAIR TWINX 1024MB 2-2-2, CM STACKER BLACK, 250WD HD S-ATA, AUDIGY 2ZS,
January 27, 2005 1:05:57 AM

Too much talking out of your asses in this thread.

</font color=red><i><font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS </font color=blue><font color=red>AMERICA
January 27, 2005 1:12:30 AM

I would have to guess 4000+ to a FX 55.

They are our, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, friends, neighbors. They are OUR TROOPS! Please support them.
January 27, 2005 9:55:42 AM

Where did this G_K come from to pollute this forum with lies? Might be an Intel employee?
January 27, 2005 11:03:21 AM

It's funny exactly how obvious it is when someone doesn't know what the hell they're talking about. I wonder if that guy even read the forums before he decided to post that crap....

ABIT NF7-S v2.0
Athlon Mobile 2600+ 45-watt (IQYHA) (11x227) 1.825v
GeForce 5900 (BIOS modded to 5950 Ultra)
Kingston HyperX PC4000 1x512 (2.5-4-3-7)
January 27, 2005 11:17:17 AM

There area a lot of AMD fan boys here arn't there?
January 27, 2005 11:26:48 AM

Yes.

But on the other hand, AMD do make the better processors.

______________
OK it's your choice:
You can have the boat, or you can have the Mystery Box!
...Hey wait a minute! A boat's a boat, but a Mystery Box could be anything. It could even be a boat
January 27, 2005 11:28:39 AM

Rightly so. Have you read the reviews or owned one?

</font color=red><i><font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS </font color=blue><font color=red>AMERICA
January 27, 2005 11:32:51 AM
January 27, 2005 12:41:13 PM

Lost cause. Leave him to his DIY fusion reactors.

It's like AmDmElTdOwN but without the humour to redeem himself. (if you didn't lurk around the forums a few years back you'll not understand that one)

---
"Sex without love is an empty experience...
But as empty experiences go, it's one of the best" - Woody Allen
January 27, 2005 3:01:06 PM

I built a 386 as my first PC. Then I moved on to Pentium 100mhz. Then a P24 00 mhz. then Pentium 3 500hmz. Then P3 coppermine 850, till the Athlon XP came out and I ran a 1800+ then upgraded to a 2400+ on a the widly known value board the Shuttle AK31. AMD seemed to not be able to manage large hard drive arrays full of data very well and run windows XP. I switched a a Athlon 64 3200+ (Radeon 9800XT) almost a year ago. After 6 mo's of use Windows was crashing like it did on my Athlon XP's I also had Crash's in several games like Postal 2, Morrowind, and Neverwinter Nights they persisted even AFTER a system wipe.

About 2 months ago I grew sick of AMD unstability and decided to go LGA 775 with DDR2 and PCI-Express Video card the 6800GT. The best decition I ever made. The games I stated above run without crash's like they did on my Ahtlon XP systems and my athlon 64 that ran like a slug with over 300 GB of stored data.

What is a faster processor if it is less stable in games and cause's them to crash? In all the new games D3 and HL2 I have never had a single crash ever!

Everyone says the LGA775 runs hot and u need "special skills" and whatnot to deal with it. HELL NO! I have never once had a single problem with overheating with a stock solution and a case with good airflow.

I doubt any of you has much first hand experience with the LGA775 breed and are just talking out your ass. Half of those reviews do attest to the P4's stability and how much better it is to multitask etc. AMD is good at benchmarks but cannot peform in the real world applications. This is proved by intel winning the encoding and media menchmarks becuase AMD doesnt care about those its making a processor purly to perform under certain tests and conditions.

Try running 2 300GB drives on an Nforce 3 chipset full of data chug chu chug! then try intel smooth as butter.

Also, when games start multi-threading intel which we could possibly see on upcomming titels intel will own AMD once and forall.
January 27, 2005 3:20:20 PM

Quote:
Try running 2 300GB drives on an Nforce 3 chipset full of data chug chu chug! then try intel smooth as butter.


Try building a computer the right way, then come back and talk to us.

:tongue:

What did you do to troubleshoot the system other than say "Bah, it's AMD... it's the suxxxors!"? My guess is not nearly enough as people run similar configurations with no problems.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
January 27, 2005 3:30:06 PM

It has long been my opinion that AMD's belong in home computers for those who game more than anything else while Intel's belong in the workplace.

But if you really want to do the AMD vs Intel argument, you may as well argue Ford vs Chevy, Bulls vs Blazers, glass half empty vs half full, etc because I think just about everyone has a different opinion based on past experience, and what they primarily use the computer for.
January 27, 2005 3:55:47 PM

It's funny, because I'm typing this on my work computer... which happens to be a 1GHz Athlon (Thunderbird core). This has been my work computer for 3 years... and not a single crash. Not ONE blue screen. So I ask you... if AMD is so 'unstable'... how the hell do you explain that?

I await your explanation with baited breath.

(Oh and Crash, it also happens to have a VIA chipset :wink: )

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
January 27, 2005 4:05:28 PM

Yes, a XP1800+ on a KT266 chipset would probably crash. VIA back then consistently produced shite. They seem better these days, but I'm not buying anything from them again...

Quote:
AMD seemed to not be able to manage large hard drive arrays full of data very well and run windows XP.

Quote:
In all the new games D3 and HL2 I have never had a single crash ever!

I have 240Gb, split over 3 80Gb drives.. Not <i>that</i> large by todays standards, but a decent amount nonetheless... It runs flawlessly and is lovely and fast...

I've also never Had a crash in HL2 or Doom3..

And I'm running an Athlon XP.

Quote:
I doubt any of you has much first hand experience with the LGA775 breed and are just talking out your ass. Half of those reviews do attest to the P4's stability and how much better it is to multitask etc. AMD is good at benchmarks but cannot peform in the real world applications. This is proved by intel winning the encoding and media menchmarks becuase AMD doesnt care about those its making a processor purly to perform under certain tests and conditions.

So suddenly you <i>believe</i> the reviews which are spouting so much bull$hit about the A64's being faster.... Make up your mind please... here I was thinking benchmarks don't matter, yet you're pointing out the P4 <i>does</i> win some! Why do you care - it's all BS right?

Encoding suits the architecture of the P4. That's why it does so well. Games, and almost everything else, suit something like the Athlon more.

Quote:
Also, when games start multi-threading intel which we could possibly see on upcomming titels intel will own AMD once and forall.

Ever heard of Dual core? dumbass.

What evidence do you have to say the A64 chips don't perform as well in 'the real world'? This just your opinion? I would say provide some proof but that would involve benchmarks which you distrust..... So it's your word against everyone else in the universe. Look at it logically: are all those reviewers and end users wrong?

---
"Sex without love is an empty experience...
But as empty experiences go, it's one of the best" - Woody Allen
January 27, 2005 4:16:31 PM

"Try running 2 300GB drives on an Nforce 3 chipset full of data chug chu chug! then try intel smooth as butter."

Ok, I dont run 2 300 gigs drives, but 2 160gigs in RAID0 on nforce full of data..enough data to fill up another 200gigs.. and a 40 gigs... on that nforce3 controller...

It might be true that I have no personnal experience with lga 775, but I remember, in the Athlon Thunderbird time, how Intel user, with no experience, were saying how much those thunderbird were overheating.. They were running just hot, as the prescott do today. And it is true, even if I never had any overheating problem with the Tbird, that you had to think about heat management in your case, thing that were not current in these time, with P3 and older AMD chip. I'm pretty sure that if I had to build an Intel system now, I'll be able to put a nice system without any heat problem. But I dont really see why I would do that because I save money with perfectly stable and performing AMD system. And guess what ?? ...I am able to build an Intel system that will crash and be plagued with instability problems anytime if I want to.

Yes I make some fun about heat Prescott, but Intel did meke some fun about my older AMD... If you spit in the air, it sometime fall back in your face.

I dont feel any emotion about either AMD or Intel, as some do. I just feel better value. Just as I dont feel sorry about you lack of succes with AMD or happy with your Intel succes.

I'm pretty sure that I could have make both of your AMD system stable. Fact is, my last board, which was running rock stable in my case has some issue in my friend case. He cannot even oveclock it as I did... and it is a mobile 2500+... same board, same cpu, but a cheap 450W PSU that my TT 420w outperform by every way. Put that PSU in you lga 775 rig, an come back about your stability. I dont means that you have put some cheaper component in you AMD rig and better one in you Intel rig. Or you get a better vented case for your Intel.

As for AMD being only benchmark chip... well, maybe. But isn't what most of the peoples buy??? they dont buy Intel or AMD, they buy 10 FPS more... I dont care about any benchmark. I look at feature and performance for the price I pay. That is my benchmark. And the reason that I get AMD every time I upgrade.


And why Intel is faster at encoding and media benchmark is fairly simple. If you know a bit about how encoding, or rendering work, you'll know trhat they are boring task for CPU... Same instruction over and over..take that chunk of data, apply some math to it, then send the result back, then take another chunck, ... That why pure clock speed win. But take complex operation with lot of instruction change. Why AMD perform better here is because of its shorter pipeline. Both CPU has a branch prediction unit. This unit try to guess what will be the next instruction used and start the execution. But let say that the prediction unit did a mistake, because game, for example, is not something easy to predict, as it rely to user input. Both CPU'S pipeline are full of instruction. happen the mistake, both pipeline has to be flushed and refilled. Which pipeline will fill up and process the next instruction faster? the shorter one. And which CPU has the shorter one..The AMD. It is just that.... the way the processor is designed. There is no magic. just design.

I'd like to see which one will encode faster. The 2.4GHz AMD or the 2.4GHz Intel. I have no idea.

I dont want to argue in favor of one or another. If you read the forum, you'll see that there is as much as instability problems with Intel than AMD. It just happen...

I'm maybe just a lucky guy that has got everithing right every time. And I'm a bit sick about all the bashing at AMD and Intel because I know that both can be as stable as the other. But I wont stop making fun at Intel guy that has hot chip... because they once had fun at me.. I remember!!!

So, my friend, start your AC and have some fun with your computer...

Did I had some fun at an Intel user right now??? :eek: 

-Always put the blame on you first, then on the hardware !!!
January 27, 2005 5:13:22 PM

Back then the SIS735 was the superior chipset and the VIA KT266 had to be replaced by the KT266a.

I still run my K7S5A and I've had over half a terrabyte of drives running on it no problem with both a tbird1000 and a tbred 2400+.

Next time read the reviews and get the better chipset.

Quote:
In virtually all of the benchmarks, the KT266 is unable to match the performance of the SiS 735, which is still the fastest chipset to date for the AMD platform.


<A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20010808/via_kt..." target="_new">The reviews</A>

</font color=red><i><font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS </font color=blue><font color=red>AMERICA
January 27, 2005 5:15:33 PM

It's interesting to note that you once again didn't go with the best platform.

Will you ever learn?

</font color=red><i><font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS </font color=blue><font color=red>AMERICA
January 27, 2005 5:50:08 PM

I feel bad, that you have had such bad luck with Amd systems. I tell you what, ship me any Amd systems you still have. I will set them up properly.
If I can not make them run better, and as stable as a P4 with the same brand of chipset, I will replace them with an equivalent P4. PM me.
January 27, 2005 5:59:22 PM

Me too, please. :smile:

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
January 27, 2005 8:08:48 PM

I have long been an AMD fan. My first AMD was a K6-2 @ 300Mhz. I have since had a K6-3, a K7 Slot processor, a 1.4Ghz T-bird, and an AXP 2600+. 8 months ago I purchased a used 2.6Ghz P4 from my roommate to replace my AthlonXP 2600, and I have to admit that it SEEMS faster in day-to-day operation. It just feels smoother; boot time, large file transfer, software installation, AND gameplay. I'd like to add that I have no "proof", no documented benchmarks to illustrate my point, the P4 is just.....smoother. No hiccups. I'm still an Athlon fan, and my next build will probably be an FX-53 or FX-55. I'm not trying to get flamed, just offering my personal experience.
January 27, 2005 8:21:13 PM

List the specs of each system. I'm curious.

</font color=red><i><font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS </font color=blue><font color=red>AMERICA
January 27, 2005 8:23:58 PM

I had the Shuttle AK31 V3.1 that is based on the new K266A Chipset not the older one.

I to was an AMD fan when you could build a brand new system for 500 bucks verse spending a boatload more for an equivalent intel. But those Days are over. Fact is AMD systems are starting to cost more than intel. For half the price of Intel I can deal with half the stability but when I'm spending the same amount for the "equivalent" and get crash's its unacceptable.
January 27, 2005 8:38:07 PM

my AMD Systems are :

Athlon XP 1800+ @ 1.53 Ghz
Shuttle AK31 V1.3
ATI Radeon 9600XT (upgrade from AIW Rage 128 Pro)
Foxconn case with Allied TRUE 350W psu
Maxtor 40 GB 7200 RMP ATA 133
2X maxtor 120 GB ATA 133
Lite on 48x16x48 cd-RW drive
2X256 MB Crucial Micron PC2100

2400+ Thorton Core @ 2.0 Ghz
Shuttle AN35
2X512MB Crucial Micron PC 2700
9800XT
Artec CD burner
2X 250GB Maxotr ATA 133 7200 RPM
Allied 350 watt PSU

Athlon 64 3200+ @ 2.2ghz
MSI K8N NEO
2X 512 MB Kingston PC 3200
2X Maxtor SATA 300GB drives
Radeon 9800XT
Antec 400Watt Smart power PSU
8X Dvd Burner
January 27, 2005 9:06:04 PM

Shuttle is a respectable company with high quality products take a look at their XPC line its the best on the market
January 27, 2005 10:08:31 PM

When people show stuff like that, you have to feel sorry for Intel fanboys.
I remember that you were a little reluctant to make the switch from your P4c. I guess you are glad you did.
January 27, 2005 10:26:19 PM

A P4 clocked at 4.0 ghz will pound most anything into rubble! An A64 clocked at 2.6ghz will pound most anything into rubble! Now, how many people here have either one of these CPU's clocked like that for everyday use? Not very many I reckon! As for stability issues with A64 and multiple or large volume drives, I think there are more AMD MB problems than Intel MB problems. Not everyone has dealt well with the "on die" memory controller. There are probably 80 Intel motherboards produces for every 20 AMD motherboards. Just a hunch.

Abit IS7 - 3.0C @ 3.6ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
January 27, 2005 10:35:21 PM

Since you responded to my post;
My A64 is running 24/7 at 2.45. I figure it will pound most systems that can run that long perfectly stable.
Your numbers for Amd boards may be about right, but the number I would use to build systems on would be 1/4 of that. Since I tell people who want S775 to "go elsewhere", the same % is true for Intel boards.
January 27, 2005 10:42:30 PM

*warning* bulsh1t quotent dangerously high in this thread!

I especially loved the bit about AMD being home pc's and intel work ones...

Our computer room has 8xdual MP2000+ rackmount, and a coworker has just got a dual 2Ghz opteron rig for number crunching.

As for whats equal to a 4Ghz P4...
THe answer would have to be a stock to overclocked 4000+ or FX55.
Depending of course on the application.
Some apps the A64 cant match the sheer speed of the p4, even overclocked. Others it spanks it.


<b>For those who are wondering, I am NOT anti-religion. It is just that most religions have more plot holes than your typical Arnold Schwarzenegger movie.
Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.</b>
January 28, 2005 2:45:19 AM

Hey, I'll build anything any time and anywhere for the right money. You don't have to be an "anti-Intelite". Prejudice is not good. That's like a mechanic saying, "Sorry, I only work on convertibles"!

Abit IS7 - 3.0C @ 3.6ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
January 28, 2005 3:59:43 AM

In the meantime Dell is just selling the living hell out of them. They must be getting better stepping, case cooling, or a combination of both. In the meantime, nobody has asked me for one or I'd build it. I would recommend A64 or P4 Northwood, but if someone insisted what the heck. Id just throw on the <A HREF="http://www.wholehousefan.com/theghost.html" target="_new">ghost.</A>

Abit IS7 - 3.0C @ 3.6ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
January 28, 2005 4:23:28 AM

Quote:
*warning* bulsh1t quotent dangerously high in this thread!

Amen!

I havent been a member here for that long, but I have visited the forum for over a year. The information that I have received here has been priceless. One thing that I have noticed is that different types of cycles that occur here just as they do in the industry. Its unfortunate, but right now we are in an extremely biased cycle. Before anyone gets their panties in wad, im not just talking about Intel vs. AMD. So many have a chip on their shoulder. This has turned into more of a competition of which brand in better A or B.

I am an Intel man myself, but according to all the data that I have seen I am confident that in most categories AMD is the better choice as of now. I doubt that it will always be, but I suspect that it will always be a quality choice. Many of the members that posted here when I first started coming here are now gone or spend most of thier time elsewhere. Im sure that there are many different reasons for this, but I do wonder if one of the major ones is the climate that exist here at the present.

I wish that I knew more than I did so that I could answer more questions than I am currently able to. In the last three months alone my posting has increased dramaticallly. That is a testament to THG and its members. The reason that my posting has increased is not because I spend more time here, but because I know more from the knowledge as well as the practical experience that i have gained from being here.

Our new memeber numbers dont seem to be expanding like they should be. Some members are probably happy about this while others like myself would like to see an increase. Strength comes in numbers as well as quality. The level of BIAS in way to high. There is not much harmony except maybe at the extreme ends of the pole. Its time to get back to basics and talk about the thing that really all love, and its not one company or the other, its COMPUTERS. Without competition, there would be far less need or desire for a corp. to develope the new technonogy that keeps us interested. BTW, thanks to all of you for your help. It has been a life saver at times and is very much appreiciated

Sincerely

MOZZ


To save us both time, assume I know EVERYTHING :tongue:
January 28, 2005 4:26:42 AM

LOL! If that wouldnt give you enough air flow then nothing would.

To save us both time, assume I know EVERYTHING :tongue:
January 28, 2005 6:00:55 AM

I only build as a sideline. I have a "day job" that pays well. I warranty all my builds for a full 3 years. I just wont use parts I dont trust, and the prescott on s775 is just too much of a strain on the whole system.
Most of my customers are by word of mouth. They think I know what I'm doing, so they usually listen to recommendations.
a b à CPUs
January 28, 2005 2:26:27 PM

ROFLMAO! Again you were able to smooothly slip in the Ghost cooling - NICE!

"He who will not risk, cannot win"
- John Paul Jones
a b à CPUs
January 28, 2005 2:39:06 PM

I'll admit that I prefer AMD. I have been sonsistently impressed with their price/performance ratio. Not just price/perf for the chip, but also for mobos and RAM. I also think that the performance pendulum will swing back and forth. That is the natural reaction to companies competing for consumers. In the end, this competition benefits us because we receive better products, faster and at lesser prices, than if there was only a single provider. One of the things we consumers need to be careful of is mfrs racing products to the market to satisfy consumers without proper testing of the systems. Those types of issues are why THG's forums are GREAT! It enables consumers to share experiences - good and bad. I enjoy reading the slap-in-the-face <b>informed</b> banter between AMD/Intel supporters. It teaches me a lot about both and allows me to make informed purchases.

"He who will not risk, cannot win"
- John Paul Jones
a b à CPUs
January 29, 2005 1:28:48 AM

Sorry G, but the best benchmarks use actual programs. So better performance in the Doom3 benchmark means better performance in the Doom3 game as well. These are called application benmarks because they use actual applications.

In fact, Intel seems to do better at SYNTHETIC benchmarks than applications benchmarks, compared to AMD, so what you said about benchmark performance applies to Intel more than AMD.

I've usually built Intel systems because of their superior chipsets. Intel doesn't have anything on the market anywhere near 4GHz that's worth buying, the CPU does waste a lot of power (2x that of the top A64's), it WILL heat up an office space (even in the summer when you don't want it to) and Tom's showed these things throttle down due to thermal overload even under Intel's specified configuration.

<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 29, 2005 2:58:57 AM

Hey Crash, if you ever need someone to vouch for the fact that you are an Intel fanboy (almost as much as you are a performance fanboy) I am glad to be your go to guy.
January 29, 2005 2:59:42 PM

Quote:
Try running 2 300GB drives on an Nforce 3 chipset full of data chug chu chug! then try intel smooth as butter.

What does your hard drive configuration have to do with AMD? It's a chipset issue ... if there is an issue.

I have 2x200 SATA plus 2x74 GB Raptors on two K8 motherboards both on the VIA controller and they have been running without an issue.

...well except VIA's pathetic on-screen messages in an impossible-to-understand English.
January 29, 2005 7:38:06 PM

Quote:
I remember that you were a little reluctant to make the switch from your P4c. I guess you are glad you did.

Yeah, that was me. I was and still am a big fan of the IS7 and the P4C chips. Still very capable & very stable machines. But no, I wouldn't think of building one now with todays prices on A64's.

To be honest, the switch to A64 did little to nothing for me. I had the fun of benching it the first few weeks. But HL2 performance is about the same as my IS7/P4 2.6C, but that's because the 9800 pro is holding it back. If I upgrade video cards, then I will see a big difference for sure.

The upgrade for me was based on I liked what I was reading about the MSI K8N neo 2 platinum, and that I could potentially have near FX53 performance out of a cheap OC'ed winchester. I do like the cool & quiet feature, and the performance is good for sure. But if I was only worrying about one system, I would have been better off just putting the $350 into a 6800GT and keeping that IS7/P4C. But jumping on a highly Overclockable A64 was too much for me to resist. :redface:

But it basically for me was wanting an A64 rig to play with. I still have 2 systems with the IS7, and my previous 2.6C gamer is currently used as much as this A64 is. But when I myself sit down to game now, it is on this A64. It's all about what's best for the time you upgrade. I'll stand by my arguement that the P4 "C" chips on a nice IS7 was a good route to go for a long time period. But no I will not be building anyone an i865pe system anymore, and espeically not for gaming. Most likely that will be almost exclusively A64 for me, or some real budget Athlon XP or XP-M systems since I still have many of those mobos in stock. :frown:



<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3400555" target="_new"> My</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8268935" target="_new">Gamer</A>
January 29, 2005 11:25:06 PM

I can get a 400 MHz boost on each without problems. But at 2.2GHz, the A64 easily outbenched the P4 @ 3.0GHz, or a AXP @ 2.6GHz in 3dmark2001se. I never broke 20K with the overclocked AXP or the Overclocked P4C and a 9800 pro. But the A64 broke 22K @ 2.2GHz with the same video card. The ram was corsair PC4000 pro series, I don't think it held me back. Experimenting with Async ram even, my 2.6C never went much over 3.0-3.1GHz. Also, my Winny isn't great as 2.3GHz is about it. Maybe I needed to buy more chips. 400-500 MHz isn't bad, but I was hoping for 600+ MHz. It did take me two Mobile XP's to get a 2.6GHz capable one, the first only did 2.4GHz. It sure would be fun to have a 2.6GHz A64 Winchester though, especially for under $200. :smile:




<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3400555" target="_new"> My</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8268935" target="_new">Gamer</A>
January 30, 2005 2:07:00 AM

Yes it is in my current Rig. No issues whatsoever, but very relaxed timings unfortunately. I wasn't going to buy new ram when I have so much in stock. It is ok when OC'in, but I wish I had 1GB of low latency instead. My current choices are:

1GB 2*512MB Corsair PC4000 pro series
1GB 2*512MB HyperX PC4000
1GB 2*512MB Geil PC3200
512MB 2*256MB Corsair PC3200LL
512MB 2*256MB Geil PC3200

All of these are in use except the 1GB Geil kit is still new. By far I like the corsair LL the best of all these dual kits I have, but I want 1GB in my gaming rig. Anyway, I am yet to try the Corsair LL in the the A64 to see how the timings helpout. But I am not in the market for any new ram for quite a while or I'd probably try some ballistix next.


<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3400555" target="_new"> My</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8268935" target="_new">Gamer</A>
January 30, 2005 2:31:36 AM

Everything that I have been reading lately is putting Corsairs high performance RAM towards the top of the list. I just bought come Crucial Ballistix, but I have some of the Corsair XMS in regular DDR and like it also.

To save us both time, assume I know EVERYTHING :tongue:
January 30, 2005 9:43:28 AM

Im not sure if this holds true for AMD, but there is an article over at Anandtech that discusses some advantage to having all 4 memory slots populated as long as you were using 2G or less. Crashman could tell you more about this. I know that part of the article was talking about how anything over 2G would start to slow your system down becase Windows had problems with more than 2G.

Testing and benching the different Rams is about the only way to know for sure. I would be interested to see what 4 X 256 would do in comparison to 2X512.

To save us both time, assume I know EVERYTHING :tongue:
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!