Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

XP2000+ or P4 1.7 Help!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 11, 2002 11:38:41 PM

this is my current setup:

Celeron 500
256MB RAM
Western Digital 40GB HDD 7200 RPM
GF4 TI4200 Video (recently purchased)
Audigy Sound
Win XP Home Ed.

I am currently looking for a CPU,MOBO,RAM,CASE Upgrade

My problem is i am debating between XP 2000+ or P4 1.7.

I mostly play games and internet, little bit of word processing/CAD

I want these on my new mobo (in order of importance):

USB 2.0
ATA133
AGP 8X

As of right now, I am not going to overclock.

XP 2000+

- cheap price (questionable quality)
- easy to find mobo with all of above features
- can use DDR Ram, which is cheaper then RDRAM
- stability issue
- problem with audigy and via chipset
- heard of soft core, can damage during heatsink install

P4 1.7

-Market leader
-stable as hell
-better performance
-more expensive
-mobo hard to get with above features.
-P4 is better with RDRAM, more expensive and have to be paired.
- always had Intel CPU's

Thanks for all your help.

More about : xp2000

November 12, 2002 1:16:01 AM

The AMD setup will beat the pans off that 1.7 P4 willy.
If you plan on overclocking then the p4 looks alittle better.
But at stock speeds they are almost the same real megahurtz wise. And everyone knows Amd's are faster clock for clock!
November 12, 2002 3:12:20 AM

XP 2000+

- cheap price (questionable quality)
** quality is no better or worse than intel

- easy to find mobo with all of above features
**true
- can use DDR Ram, which is cheaper then RDRAM
** use DDR 333 CL2
- stability issue
** none if configured properly ( same as intel )
- problem with audigy and via chipset
** none i have both
- heard of soft core, can damage during heatsink install
** only if your a moron and use a hammer to put HSF
P4 1.7

-Market leader
**true
-stable as hell
** see above
-better performance
** not true, not false, depends on setup
-more expensive
**true ( at least outside of USA )
-mobo hard to get with above features.
** good p4 mobo are expensive
-P4 is better with RDRAM, more expensive and have to be paired.
**true
- always had Intel CPU's

Thanks for all your help.


overall i like amd better because of price, thats the only argument for me
Related resources
November 12, 2002 3:52:08 AM

Ditto the XP2000. It will kill the P4 1.7, even a 1.8 or 1.9. I have 7 Athlons, and right now thats the only way to go unless you overclock, or want to get the fastest CPU out (3.06) at a rape price.

Computer expert (sort of, after 20 years)
I learn something new everyday !
November 12, 2002 4:27:03 AM

if you DO decide to overclock, don't get a 1.7, it's the willamette core, which is why it's cheap. it's old (.18 micron core), it runs hotter, on higher voltages, all of which = bad OC if you get into it
and it only has 256k L2.
while these may seem to be characteristics of the athlon as well... the athlon is designed not to need 512k, it'll perform a lot better than the p4. as for the heat and voltages, yeah athlons are high in both, but no one said you were gonna get a great OC from it. between these two cpus, go for the athlon 100%
if you wanna OC, spend a few more bucks for a p4 1.8a and get yourself to 2.4Ghz, probably at stock voltages.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by ltblue14 on 11/12/02 01:29 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 12, 2002 5:50:37 AM

Athlon XP should be your only choice because you will not overclock and your choosen P4 sucks.

Tbe 1.7 GHz willy is lot slower than XP2000+. XP2000+ can ourperform both willamette 2 GHz and northwood 2.0 GHz. In fact a XP 1500+ is faster than willy P4 1.7.

A properly configured AXP system will be as stable as an Intel system. Quality of AMD cpus and Intel cpus are identical.

AXP core is as hard as a P4 or EVERY cpu's ever made. I didn't know sillicons vary in hardness :wink: . P4 has core protector, XP doesn't. But it is not a problem, because crushed core is extremely rare with AXP's or any other core protector free cpu's.

If you don't like VIA, then you can buy a nForce2 mobo. Leadtek's nForce2 is the cheapest of all nForce2 mobos (also stable). Intel chipsets have zero advantage over nvidia chipsets in terms of stability.

If you are looking for P4 1.7 GHz like performace, an XP 1600+ will satisfy you. It is faster than P4 1.7 GHz. Then you should have no problem buying a nForce2 mobo and two DDR333 memory sticks. With this setup, you will be able to upgrade to a XP2800+ or faster 333 FSB AXP or upcoming Barton core AXP's (will have larger L2 cache)

My advices:

CPU: AXP 1600+ or faster

Mobo: Leadtek WinFast K7NCR18D

Ram: Any good brand DDR333 CL2.0 Ram. 2 sticks of 256 MB recommended. Many CL2.5 ram's can run stable at CL2.0, but to gurantee CL2.0 operation, you will need CL2.0 ram.


Let us know <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new"> What File compression format you use? </A>
November 13, 2002 1:43:00 AM

The XP2000 would simply rape the 1.7GHZ. It's technically 3 speed grades better, AND outperforms a 2GHZ Northwood. Not to mention it costs less in most places.

I would recommend a Northwood 1.8GHZ or above, otherwise the AMD system will save you lots.

--
*You can do anything you set your mind to man. -Eminem
November 13, 2002 1:47:43 AM

Get THE ATHLON. If money was no option I'd say get the fastest Intel BUT the P4 you're looking at Bites. The 2000XP will beat the pants off ot it.
Yes AMD systems are stable.
Yes you have lots of mobo choices Stay away from 400 mem get 333 instead.
I'm happy with my system but it does not have AGP 8x

The Men Behind the GUNS!

<A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=327" target="_new"><b>MY SYSTEM</b></A>
November 14, 2002 3:47:17 AM

I currently purchaced a XP2000+ using the MSI KT400 (which has USB2.0, ATA133, and 8x AGP) with 512mb ram ... im extreemly happy with and would highly recommend.
November 14, 2002 8:54:44 PM

<<<I currently purchaced a XP2000+ using the MSI KT400 (which has USB2.0, ATA133, and 8x AGP) with 512mb ram ... im extreemly happy with and would highly recommend.>>>

sweet system!!! can you hear the tv over the cpu fan?
November 15, 2002 12:47:35 AM

You're so funny, it tickles me.

--
*You can do anything you set your mind to man. -Eminem
November 15, 2002 11:25:36 AM

Quote:
<i>Originally posted by: <b>northernstar</b></i>
My problem is i am debating between XP 2000+ or P4 1.7.

Well, plenty of us have told you why the XP2000+ would be a better choice. If this P4 was a northwood, and you planned to overclock it, things might be different.

Quote:
<i>Originally posted by: <b>MeTaLrOcKeR</b></i>
ur really funny.............ur sarcasm wasnt needed as it has nothing to do with the current thread.....

Quote:

<pre><northernstar> Hmmm, should I go with a P4 1.7GHz, or a similarly-priced XP2000+?
<zer0> .oO(shyte, someone has a perfectly legitimate reason to buy AMD! <i>MUST...TROLL...THREAD...!!!</i>)
</pre><p>

Some sarcasm of my own. You're right MeTaL, that <i>is</i> pretty funny. :wink:

<i>I can love my fellow man...but I'm damned if I'll love yours.</i>
November 15, 2002 12:20:43 PM

Athlon XP 2000+.
nForce2 SPP+MCP-T w/ dual channel RAM or KT333 CE (It doesn't support AGP 8X but it is cheaper than nForce2 and easyer to find).

Don't buy the Pentium 4!!!
December 3, 2002 2:30:32 AM

I like Athlon XP 2000+ better.
December 3, 2002 6:21:06 AM

1.7Ghz is a very old processor. I have one now and it's 1 and a half year old. Better choose for something else cos I can start to feel that my 1.7Ghz is quite slow...

FYI, the max clock I can go is only 2Ghz with that processor cos it's S423 willamette core. So go for those which is S478 northwood core...
December 3, 2002 6:36:04 PM

I use the P4 1.7Ghz daily. It's a horrible processor. It's extremely slow even compared to a 1 Ghz AMD processor.

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">Forum Assassin</A></font color=red>
!