Want opinions

[BLANCO]

I'm building a new system and I'm not sure which cpu to use. I'm a social oc'er, nuthin' heavy. I want stability more than anything. I also want maximum software compatibility. Which road do I take Intel w/a P4 or AMD w/their latest and greatest? I'm not too worried about the cost. I'm more concerned about longevity. I play lots of games (FPS, and Sims), and want it to be a screamer!! I'm also on the fence about IDE vs. SCSI. I look forward to your input.

TIA,
Michael

 

[MeTaLrOcKeR]

Well, you want FPS at real-world resolutions right ? Go for an AMD Athlon 1.4Ghz CPU. Intel's P4 and Socket 423 is going down the tubes, soggy performance and no upgrade path, as opposed to AMD and the Socket A which will be supported for years to come.
IDE is the best bang for the buck, but if you want the performance extras that SCSI gives u and are not worried by price at all than IDE shouldnt even be considered, go for a 15,000RPM SCSI drive...CD/DVD-Rom's and writers etc.
You wont be disapointed...


-MeTaL RoCkEr
My <font color=red> Z28 </font color=red> can take your <font color=blue> P4 </font color=blue> off the line!

 

[FUGGER]

Spoken like a true lemming Metallemming.

Go with the P4, AMD still lacks SSE2.
AMD is piss poor record for manufacturing a quality product. Nothing is built to AMD spec. everything is built to Intel spec. so when it comes to compatability and stability Intel wins every time. Lemmings try to deny this but take a minute and read a few posts and you will see that 90% or more are AMD's with stupid problems like overheating, cracked cores, incompatabilities, PSU too weak, HSF needs upgrade, and so on. just read a few, there are too many to read them all. you will have to go back many pages to find Intel based problem if you find any. (unless a lemming goes and "bumps" one).

P4 is best choice for games, video, multimedia, and other stuff. AMD wins benchmarks in MS word. yeah. who cares if someones AMD can do 121 FPS and your P4 can only pull 120FPS. we all need more horsepower in MS word like we need a hole in our head.

Longevity Intel wins with SSE2 extensions. thats something you cannot get with AMD for another 6 months or more. Next thing AMD lemmings will try to push is there are no SSE2 apps, well that is complete bullshit. New titles are released everyday for SSE2 (I dont have list, check intel.com) Lemmings deny any existance of SSE2 apps becuase it scares them and they live in fantasy land.

P4 pricing is comperable to AMD's, You dont get fustration when you buy from Intel. you get a rock solid product that will work usually first try. On teh opposite end AMD sucks extreamly bad for having to pre-certify each part to make sure its up to spec for AMD and then pray that everything fires up. Speaking of firing up, AMD still lacks thermal diode on most of the processors produced. so they will still cook themselves in less than a minute. Lots of keychains reported on this forum. Even the most experianced builders (grizely1) screw up AMD processors at a fairly high rate. we all laugh when his watercooling rig breaks cause its a total joke what he goes thru to cool his processor.

At 1.5+ Ghz you will very happy and will not need to overclock. why take chance at screwing up your rig or having a unstable machine. Might as well go for a Geforce3 now that they dropped below 300 dollars. you can build very nice P4 computer for around 1000.00.

 

[FatBurger]

I'm more concerned about longevity

Hello??? Read his post, people. Well done, MetalRocker (sorry, not gonna bother with all the funky caps

AMD is the way to go right now. Intel has released way too many slot/socket types in the past 3 years, and they're not showing any sign of slowing down. AMD has had 2, yes 2! types in the same amount of time, one slot and one socket. Socket A will be around for a while.

And don't worry too much about SSE2. If programmers widely accept it (which they probably will, because it's really good), then AMD can add it down the line, without even having to buy a new motherboard. Imagine that.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize

 

[FatBurger]

Also you have the choice of going with WindowsXP.

Why are you saying that?

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize

 

[MadCat]

Wanna know what I think: Wait for the desktop Athlon 4 to arrive on the scene. This will give you SSE capability. Wait for the nForce motherboard to arrive. This will give you more choices of motherboards not based on VIA. Another advantage of going AMD is the knowledge that they will stay with the socket A technology for another two or three technology iteration. A simple BIOS change may be all that is needed to take advantage of the latest Athlon processor generation (if not, upgrade the motherboard to get the latest motherboard technology, then upgrade the processor later. No need to upgrade the processor and motherboard all at once).

I view the Athlon 4 as a direct replacement for the Pentium 3 (identical functionality), but with much greater clock speeds avaiable. I don't like the P4 because much of performance benefit is only realised for memory bandwidth limited application (I believe I read somewhere that the applications need to take advantage of the SSE2 instructions for faster data loads). I do believe that the DDR solution for the AMD platform will reduce that lead somewhat. It bothers me that the IPC is very low under a P4 as compared to a P3. The term "Hollow Giga-Hertz" come to mind.

My dream system is a Desktop Athlon 4 processor on an nForce motherboard. I don't care for an AMD Thunderbird on a VIA chipset motherboard. The introduction of the Athlon 4 and Intel's 2 years of missteps is what going to finally cause me to join the AMD camp. The Athlon 4 is the only viable upgrade path for me at present, a direct speedy replacement for the P3, without the lousy IPC times of the P4. Not holding out for the Northwood, as Intel has disappointed me once to many times over the last two years (Intel's history is my guide).

Any application that was written to use SSE2 will surely use the SSE capability when SSE2 capability don't exists (SSE is an industry standard). I have read that a <A HREF="http://www.jc-news.com/index.cgi?peek=20010619" target="_new">1.2 GHz Athlon MP beats the Intel P4 1.7GHz by 20% in one of Intel's own SSE benchmarks</A> (must be the lousy IPC issues again).<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by MadCat on 07/20/01 06:17 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[MeTaLrOcKeR]

I am very tired of you calling me an AMD Lemming...
For your info. bud, I don't even own an AMD machine, I'm runing an old Celery 300A @ 450....but I still know what I know.....
Read reviews, look at benchmarks, look at the 2 company's CPU Roadmaps......which one seems to be mroe consistant ?? AMD or Intel's?? Thats what I thought...

-MeTaL RoCkEr
My <font color=red> Z28 </font color=red> can take your <font color=blue> P4 </font color=blue> off the line!

 

[FatBurger]

Right, but it looks like you're saying that XP will only run on an Intel.

MadCat, that was only on one aspect of the test, not the whole thing.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize

 

[Guest]

>so when it comes to compatability and stability Intel wins every time.

<b>You've been claiming this forever but still have not backed it up. Where's your proof? Links please, otherwise STFU.</b>

>AMD wins benchmarks in MS word.

And anything FPU intensive that isn't SSE2 optimized (and even some that are SSE2 optimized).

>P4 pricing is comperable to AMD's

What a joke.

From <A HREF="http://www.mwave.com" target="_new">mwave</A>:
<font color=blue>
A04-N083-97-08- ATHLON 266MHz (OEM) BUNDLES
(IWILL KK266-R-Specs ; AMD T-BIRD 1400(266MHZ); MWAVE 32X64 256MB PC133; NO TESTING) $351.00 $351.00

A05-P025-97-03- DDR BUNDLES
(AOPEN MK7A-Specs; AMD T-BIRD 1400(266MHZ); MWAVE 256MB NON-ECC PC2100; NO TESTING) $391.50 $391.50

I01-N022-69-02- PENTIUM 4 (RETAILED) BUNDLES
(ABIT TH7R-Specs; INTEL P4 1.7G(W/O MEMORY); MWAVE 128MB NON-ECC RIMM X 2; NO TESTING) $650.00 $650.00

I01-N022-68-02- PENTIUM 4 (RETAILED) BUNDLES
(ABIT TH7R-Specs; INTEL P4 1.5G(W/O MEMORY); MWAVE 128MB NON-ECC RIMM X 2; NO TESTING) $556.00 $556.00
</font color=blue>

The 1.7 GHz P4 costs 66% more then the 1.4GHz DDR Athlon!

And how about that price/performance ratio?
On my app, a 1.5GHz P4 is 48% <i>slower</i> then a 1.4 GHz Athlon. That gives the Athlon a <b>110%</b> price/performance advantage over the P4.

>we all laugh when his watercooling rig breaks cause its a
>total joke what he goes thru to cool his processor.

*shrug* grizely likes to fool around with that stuff. Most people run their CPUs @ spec with stock cooling and have no problems at all.

If the P4 is the best solution to your problem, by all means use it. But I doubt you'll find to many cases where that is true at the moment.



<i>The early bird gets the worm...
but the second mouse gets the cheese!</i>

 

[noko]

Either cpu can be dependable and run the same applications. You need to choose the rest of the system to be of high quality to get what you want. Longevity and protecting your investment can be argued different ways. If you buy a cpu in which has a limited upgrade path means you will have to upgrade motherboard to upgrade the cpu. While a cpu which is top of the line today maybe upgraded again to the top of line a year and half on a consistent socketed cpu. It really is a matter of choice. If someone sat anyone of us down to a 1.4ghz T-Bird or a 1.8ghz P4 I doubt any of us could tell the difference in speed by the feel or look of the programs in about 99% of the programs tested. If you buy a Retail T-Bird you have a 3 year warranty. If it goes out, new replacement. Don't know about Intel. I have a 1.2ghz T-Bird running happily at 1.46ghz, one 80mm case fan, cpu temperture right now is 39c and yes the case is closed. Sisoft Sandra in its CPU benchmark, FPU benchmark and multimedia benchmark indicates it is much faster then a 1.6mhz P4. Which really doesn't mean anything, the real question is does my computer do what I need it to do and the answer is yes. That is what you have to do, build your machine so it does what you want it to do, P4 or T-Bird or Palamino. Either way will work.

 

[MadCat]

Here's the source of the data (in Japanese) that JC's News linked to: <A HREF="http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/pc/docs/article/20010620/hotrev114.htm" target="_new">Performance of the Athlon MP is measured </A>. Use <A HREF="http://babelfish.altavista.com/translate.dyn" target="_new">Babel Fish</A> to get an English translation (Seems to translate ok, except for the fact it sounds like Lawyer speak).

According to the PC Watch article, they tested using IAL's "Incoming Forces" and "Megnitrax V1.02" benchmarks. The effect of using SSE mode has negligble effect on the execution times of "Incoming Forces", but makes a substantial improvement in the execution times of "Megnitrax V1". Here's the data illustrating the differences between 1.2GHz Athlon, 1.2GHz Athlon MP with SSE mode off, and 1.2GHz Athlon MP with SSE mode on:

From Graph 11,
Incoming Forces: Athlon MP 1.2GHz with SSE (84), Athlon MP 1.2GHz without SSE (83), Thunderbird 1.2GHz (79).
Megnitrax V1.02: Athlon MP 1.2GHz with SSE (178), Athlon MP 1.2GHz without SSE (37), Thunderbird 1.2GHz (36).

This seems to suggest that when SSE is a significant part of the total execution time, the Athlon 4 seems to do especially well against the P4:

From Graph 6,
Incoming Forces: Athlon MP 1.2GHz (69), Thunderbird 1.2GHz (68), P4 1.7GHz (95).
Megnitrax V1.02: Athlon MP 1.2GHz (172), Thunderbird 1.2GHz (36), P4 1.7GHz (143).

(Don't understand the reason for the different benchmark numbers between Graph 6 and Graph 11 for the Athlon processors, but it is not a wide discreprancy. The lower Athlon benchmark numbers were used when comparing with Intel P4).

 

[lhgpoobaa]

social overclocker??? lol

i reccomend a athlon 1 to 1.333, C model, for the following reasons.

1.they are very well priced at the moment
2.they deliver very high performance
3.if you shop around a little you may find an AXIA stepping processor, and more processors are being sold with the L1 bridges intact. both things make overclocking very easy.

Other things you will need for "social overclocking"
1. a mobo that supports overclocking, well derr most do now just pick on that suits you best
2. a decent fan/heatsink, MINUS the thermal pad and ADD some thermal grease.
3. decent 300+ watt powersupply. this will help when you begin to push your processor to higher voltages.
4. a case fan or two. they dont have to be 7000rpm monsters. ive got two 80mm 2800rpm fans that provide ample circulation. and they arnt deafening
5. have a look though toms articles to find what items suit you best.

enjoy


"i love the smell of Overclocking in the morning!" Says my Hamster.

 

[Guest]

Lol..The way you say that FUGGER, makes it sounds like your saying Intel started it all off.
I remember watching a documentry of a scientist taking the credit for making the first resistor over his two co-scientists (sounds familiar)many years ago before transistors, way back in them dark ages of the first light bulbs and vacuum tubes , dont think his name was Intel or AMD though. Someone remember who he was? I didnt pay attention. And no he wasnt called FUGGER!
Umm this wouldnt be the SAME basic idea that all chipmakers use today? its all resistors isnt it?

Roflmao...lemmings where?????? F*&^ing everywhere!

I dont care if Iam right or wrong just like agood FUGGER flame to vent my frustrations on. arrr thats much better now..hehe


Too damn hot in that kitchen!
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by scotty3303 on 07/18/01 11:43 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Crashman]

Not that I care to agree with Fugger, but the one point you argues is the one point where he is right-Intel wins hands down for compatability/stability, I have owned almost every kind of PC you can think of, I build them for a living. After too many nightmares I switched to the PIII, having long been a supporter of AMD. It was chipset problems that turned me away from AMD. If I were building a system right this minute, I MIGHT use and AMD chip, but only on the ALi chipset. VIA has always been a thorn in my side, and SiS has not yet produced a decent chipset that is on the market (we will see with the 735). Since I built my system before MAGiK, I had no other choice but to build one with an Intel chipset or suffer the consequences. Just because it works for you doen't mean it works for everyone, each system is different, and the combination of cards makes a HUGE difference in whether a VIA equipped system will function or not.
About the ALi, it looks good, so it would be the exception to the rule of AMD systems having stability or compatability issues.

Video killed my Radio Card!

 

[Guest]

I believe you. I have both systems, Intel has been good to me to date P2's and P3's. But recently for me, AMD cuts it for PRICE and performance needs. Why spend all that money on something that will possibly be behind in 12 months I will decide in 6-12 months after all the battles are finished in this latest war to see which is the best rig.

Too damn hot in that kitchen!

 

[Crashman]

Yes, if I had the money to experiment right now, I would have an A7A266 and a 1.4GHz T-Bird. I've had far too many problems with VIA chipsets, not so bad on the simple systems I do for customers, but on my own, which use a variety of cards that never configure properly on VIA chipsets.

Video killed my Radio Card!

 

[D33]

if i had the money i will probably wait a bit until the new P4 will be released, a socket 478, DDR memory and an excellent 3d accelerator will be all i need and i don't think that then any system will beat this piece of beauty.
but if you'r in a hurry, just go for a nice athlon at 1.4.
it is well priced, stable and delivers very good performance....the choice is yours

 

[Crashman]

It would be nice to play with, some of my friends have them, but I'm happy for now with my current system.

Video killed my Radio Card!

 

[NickM]

From all the above about AMD (cheaper, upgradeability, overclocking) I can see clearly: AMD is still a budget product. AMD is an official winner in some points, Intel benefits from its own advantages.
But Michael is “..not too worried about the cost... more concerned about longevity…”
And he’s “...building a new system and ...not sure which cpu to use...”
Sounds a bit controversial that’s why that post provoked such a dispute. The question sounds politically incorrect to me.
Just an example: many people have like a hobby to assemble a system. And of course, trying to achieve the most cost-efficient result, the highest reliability. And then they share their experience with others on this forum.
Some world-wide-known computer specialists, authors of famous computer books spend leisure time on car restoration. Can you imagine the initial reliability of those cars compared with brand new models?
But when it comes to “..not too worried about the cost. I'm more concerned about longevity…”
(Sorry, just one more example. A friends of mine for whom money isn’t an issue just buys ready-made $$$ complete systems and separately $$$$ monitor even not knowing what to do with those MHz and resolutions. I think he’s enjoying the life his way and he’s right. It’s like buying a BMW or Mercedes: more satisfaction and not only. As for me, I bought a fully loaded Toyota as I thought, and now I found that I need to add some soundproofing, and more…and more…I compared: the same problems on Lexus, Acura, but on the cheapest BMW everything is factory-preinstalled).
If money don’t matter, go with either complete system, don’t bother yourself with assembly. Think about a Mercedes.
SCSI is good…, Alfa server for home use sounds even better. Oops… no games on it?

 

[Guest]

>Not that I care to agree with Fugger, but the one point
>you argues is the one point where he is right-Intel wins
>hands down for compatability/stability

sounds like your beef is primarily with Via, but as you say yourself, Via isn't the only chipset option for AMD CPUs.

I'm just sick of Fugger shooting his mouth off about AMD incompatibilities but not backing it up. Personal reputation only carries so much, and Fugger has been so FOS so often that his means nothing.

From reading your posts over time, you seem like a more reasonable & experienced person. So I do respect you opinion on the matter. But I'd still like to see some evidence.

>If I were building a system right this minute, I MIGHT use
>and AMD chip, but only on the ALi chipset.

What about the AMD chipsets? I haven't heard anything bad their at all.



<i>The early bird gets the worm...
but the second mouse gets the cheese!</i>

 

[FatBurger]

Bill: Hey look! It's a dead horse!! Way cool!

Ted: Yeah, let's ride it!

Bill: No way dude! Let's flog it!

Ted: Excellent!!


-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize

 

[OmegaX]

For your info. bud, I don't even own an AMD machine, I'm runing an old Celery 300A @ 450....but I still know what I know.....
Read reviews, look at benchmarks, look at the 2 company's CPU Roadmaps

So, what you are saying is that you don't have any practical experience with any modern processors, well most of us here have built up several machines (I for one, have worked in a computer store for 5 years and have built up machines from 486's to P4's and from Celeron's to Durons, Multiple Processors, and have dealt quite a bit with AMD). I would say that AMD has a far worse track record then Intel, sure Intel has not been on it's ball for the past year, because they have set up risky situation which could either put AMD back where it Intel wants them or put them where AMD was (In other words, htey are trying new products which are really advance to gain industry standard with games, os's, and different components, but at the risk that other companies might not choose to incorporate their new technology). I personally have had many problems with AMD over the years, they're version of the 486 was [-peep-], the K6-2 was the most overated and instable processor I have ever seen. Even the original Athlon which brought AMD out of the stone age had compatibility problems. Ever since then, AMD has produced Processors which have high power requirements and therefore produce massive amounts of HEAT (simple physics, energy can not be created or destroyed so where does this electrical and potential energy go to heat).

A lot of people overlook the heat issue. They don't realize what heat does to not only shorten the life of the CPU, but to the rest of the components, most people don't talk about heat burns on ram, but believe me I have seen it. People bring in their computers for repairs, they have invested all this money into this good equipment, but overlook the cost of better cooling. To have still air in the computer no matter how low you case temperature may be is a dagerous thing.

I personally think that AMD is on a good track right now with lots to improve, they have come a long way from those instable and incompatible processors to entering the high-end workstation and server market and threatening Intel all over the place. I think that the Athlon 4 will be exciting to finally see their great performance with 30% reduced heat and lower power requirements. The Pentium III Tualatin is also somewhat of a bargain processor for the performance.

For anyone wanting to buy a new system or upgrade, I suggest waiting for:

1)AMD Athlon 4
2)Nvidia nForce
3)PC-2400 @ CAS 2 DDR RAM to be an industry standard
4)Intel Pentium III Tualatin / Pentium 4 Northwood
5)DDR Ram support for the P4
6)The ATI R200

Although, personally I have never liked ATI's products (even though I live where they're headquarters is: Toronto, Canada). Once these are available, I would suggest to wait for the reviews and what people are saying about the new products on the forums to make a decision between Intel or AMD then make an informed decision on which route to go.

Just remember to buy proper cooling wheteher you overclock or not. Even though both of these products will feature lower heat output and more cache due to reduced die size, never neglect what heat damage does overtime.

If you plan to run your system for at least 5 solid years then trust me you can't back off of good thermal paste like Arctic Silver II, a solid copper heatsink/aluminum heatsink with copper underlay (Alhpa or Swiftech). A fan that can move air away with a good cfm/rpm rating (Delta).

Make sure you have proper airflow in your system. Use rounded IDE Cables, tie up all loose calbes, make sure you buy a large case that is easy to work with, mount fans in the front to suck air in and fans to vent air in the back, make sure you buy a power supply with a grill or fan underneath to suck air out of you case. Be sure you read the cfm and rpm ratings of the fans you buy and the size they are, if you are worried about noise you can get sound proof insulation for your case or purchase products with low decibal ratings.

Failing this check out <A HREF="http://www.quietpc.com/products" target="_new">http://www.quietpc.com/products</A> for some good products to reduce noise levels.

Remember to go to <A HREF="http://www.overclocker.com" target="_new">http://www.overclocker.com</A> for some great reviews of cooling products, tips to reduce noise and some neat little case mods which help out if you are on a tight budget (they work well too, I have tried most of them).

I hope I was able to help. If you have any questions send me a message or reply to this post.

My System: <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=9417" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=9417</A>

 

[MeTaLrOcKeR]

Very good post OmegaX....you brought up many valid points...
Just for your information, just becasue I don't own an AMD system myself, does not mean I have never worked on them or had personal experience with them. I have to use all sorts of different systems everyday of my life. I've been building systems since I was a kid, I know a lot, not everything...I have seen many problems with AMD based CHIPSETS with certain somponents, like the SBLIve! etc.
I've built countless T-Bird systems, 3 Athlon classic systems..and 2 Duron systems...I've alos, on the other hand built more Celeron/P2/P3 systems than I have T-Bird systems.....
Anyways I just wanted to clarify that.. But thank you for your valid points, most people (well average user anyways) overlooks cooling all the time. Just yesterday I went over to a friends house and she asked me if I could tell her why her computer always has long beeping sounds when you do lots of stuff.....
I go into bios..shes running a P233mmx on a Super 7 board (which has Temperature sensors) and the CPU was running at an INCREDDIBLE 61D Celcios! This was shocking!
She said the computer has been doing this ever since she upgraded (couple years ago) as the Bios was set to Warn her at 60D Celcious for temperature and Shutdown at 70D Celcious....I open up the computer, check out the HSF, what do I notice? It's an old P100 HSF that u'd find on an old IBM system with no FAN at all....She knew there was a problem with the comp. but seeing how she said it was still working fien she didnt let the beepign bother her....
Goes to show you how much people care...

-MeTaL RoCkEr
My <font color=red> Z28 </font color=red> can take your <font color=blue> P4 </font color=blue> off the line!

 

[OmegaX]

Well, I am glad to see that you have had some hands on experiece. I am still on the fence about whether to start trusting AMD as much as I trust Intel, I still think that AMD has a long way to go to achieve the stability of my system, and many other P3 systems.

I leave my system on all the time (digital equipment is worn down, not by length of use, but by turning it on and off, besides components that have electriacal motors in them, they will eventually wear out), the only other major possibility of your comp wearing out on you is heat damage, but my case is very well ventilated and has amazing cooling, my case temp averages around 25 - 28d Celcius, and my CPU never goes above 35d and it is overclocked from 550Mhz to 733Mhz.

I think that this next release of processors by AMD and Intel might make me end up favoring AMD more, but I can't assume until I see it for myself. That is one thing I find with posters on the forums, they make all sorts of claims about product that are not even out just by looking at the specs. Look at what happened with the original Pentium or the P4?

If, people don't remember the Pentium was another one of those risks/gmables Intel did to set new industry standards with a revolutionary product, but back then the competition for Intel was not as much and all companies quickly realeased compatible hardware and software to use the "enhanced" features of the Pentium.

Anyway, for the person who started this thread. If money is no issue for you as you say then I suggest you do what I said in my last post, wait for the release of those products and make an informed descion. Also, definetly go with SCSI, preferably get a good SCSI Raid Adapter with 32Mb+ Cache and set up a Raid 0 system with at leat 2 HD if not 4 (since you are going for speed for games), look into getting a good SCSI DVD drive and SCSI Plextor Burner (they are still #1 for SCSI Burners, I prefer Yamaha for IDE due to the 8mb Cache on them, even the latest 24x CD-RW from Plextor only has 4mb Cache).

What you may want to do is look into going for a Dual Processor Situation and using an OS like Win2k or XP. Wait to see the performance of the R200 when it comes out, it might just be another hyped up product like the Radeon, and Nvidia has a whole department that just make drivers and they may release a new driver for the GeForce 3 if they feel threatened (remember the release of the Radeon?).

Anyway, I have been slacking off enough at work, and I like to appologize to MeTaLrOcKeR for making a false accusation saying that he does not have any practical experience. It is good to see some people that have more experience with building computers than the more recent influx of people with experience that is maybe 2 - 4 years. The knowledge of building an XT-style system is great to know, plus you have a greater foundation of how a computer actually works and have seen a greater deal of changes to the computer world.

It was not common place to build your own computer in the late 80's and early 90's. Everyone wanted a genuine IBM.


My System: <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=9417" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=9417</A>

 

[BLANCO]

I didn't intend to start a fight about who's got a bigger Johnson. I just wanted informed, educated, expert opinions. Ever since I was a kid, I'm 32 now, I've built my own boxes. The system I have currently is a "canned" system. This was the first, and will be the last one of it's kind I own. I won't mention the brand, but I've had more problems (read instability) with my current box, than all my previous systems combined. So for that reason, and my aversion to proprieitary hardware, and absurd case design, and others that I can't think of that the moment, I've decided to go back to old skool, and roll my own. Hell my wife even comments, frequently I might add, "That last system we had, THAT YOU BUILT, performs an order of magnitude better than this POS!!"

So now I"m ready to roll up my sleeves and get back into it. But this time I've got much deeper pockets than I did the last time I built a box. So now I'm not so concerned about squeezing every last hz of performance out of the new system. I'd rather spend a bit more money on a faster cpu, and spend significantly less time "tweaking" it, than save some and spend hours, upon hours "milking it for all she's worth". Of course the other side of the coin is that I want a trouble free, STABLE system. I too leave my box on 24/7. I don't want it BSODing on me every day, or every other day like it does now. I don't want more speed at the cost of stability.

In regards to a previous posters sig:
I used to be that early bird getting the worm. I'm just sicked of working so hard to get that worm. I'm much more like the second mouse. I'd rather let someone else spring the trap.

Also someone else mentioned about going with SCSI for better game performance........I realize that, but my question is, "is it worth the extra money for the performance"

BTW whoever posted the overclocker.com link my want to check it out.........

I like the idea behind Falcon's custom made systems, but I object to being raked over the coals to get it. I know I can do better.

Should I build a great system now, or wait until the new cpus, and XP are on the market??? What to do??

appreciate all the advice so far,
Blanco