$600 for a new computer

[asuh]

Wow, so much information to take in.

So although the A64 will perform much better right now, does it seem that this processor, the socket 754 A64, is just a step between the current Bartons and the upcoming 939s, which might perform a lot better than the 754s? I'm looking for longevity in my upgrade to the 64 and I don't see that the current 754 will get that done because of the 939.

This being said, maybe I should just buy a little cheaper now. I wanna see where the 64 market ends up because Intel really hasn't gotten started either. I can live with a slower CPU for now, I can OC as much as I think would be stable whether it ends up to be a 2800+ to a 3200+. I hope I can push it to 400MHz but won't cry if I can't.

So now is just trying to figure out the memory thing. I don't think I'll go higher than PC3200 so that my next memory purchase can be a DDR-II.

 

[Varun]

"So although the A64 will perform much better right now, does it seem that this processor, the socket 754 A64, is just a step between the current Bartons and the upcoming 939s, which might perform a lot better than the 754s? I'm looking for longevity in my upgrade to the 64 and I don't see that the current 754 will get that done because of the 939"

Well, there is no upgrade path at all with a Socket A system, or a Socket 478 system. Even though it is a 64 bit CPU it performs very very well in 32 bit as well, and once the 64 bit OS comes out the performance of 64 bit programs will destroy the 32 bit versions.

I'm not sure where people get this idea that if they buy X chip, they will be able to upgrade to a faster version of X chip somewhere down the road. By the time that your X chip is outdated, there will likely be 2 or 3 different sockets, RAM will have changed, etc. When you upgrade anything, you have to expect a new Motherboard, CPU, and RAM. Even though the socket A has been the same since the Thunderbird, you couldn't or shouldn't run an Athlon 2800+ on a KT7 from way back.

Socket 754 will be outdated, but that is the way it always is with hardware. The 3000+ is a great CPU for a great price. If you are stuck on the XP, then just go with the P4 because it will do what you want it to better.

 

[asuh]

yeah, varun, you're pretty much right. you can't just upgrade your cpu... you usually just upgrade the whole shebang. i'm just trying to live in my little perfect universe.

Okay, so here's what I'm probably going to do. BIG CHANGE!

I think I'm going with this setup (this might change if I find a REALLY good reason to go with 64)

CPU - 2.6GHz Intel w/HT
Mobo - DFI Lanparty 875
RAM - Corsair Dual-pack 1GB (unless I can find equivalent but cheaper set of RAM somwhere else)
HSF - stock for now

I think it is the best solution because I think I can get the whole thing for $515. I thought about the Athlon 64 setup but I think it would cost me $50 or more and I can probably get more performance from the Intel rather than the Athlon.

So why a complete 360? Well, I might as well get something that's really gonna upgrade from my current 1600+. I guess I was very biased to AMD because it's cheaper and I like to keep my budget well under if I can. But I found a great alternative in this current setup. Hopefully I'll be able to OC it as well but I gotta figure out how it's possible.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: asuh
yeah, varun, you're pretty much right. you can't just upgrade your cpu... you usually just upgrade the whole shebang. i'm just trying to live in my little perfect universe.

Okay, so here's what I'm probably going to do. BIG CHANGE!

I think I'm going with this setup.

CPU - 2.6GHz Intel w/HT
Mobo - DFI Lanparty 875
RAM - Corsair Dual-pack 1GB (unless I can find equivalent but cheaper set of RAM somwhere else)
HSF - stock for now

I think it is the best solution because I think I can get the whole thing for $515. I thought about the Athlon 64 setup but I think it would cost me $50 or more and I can probably get more performance from the Intel rather than the Athlon.

So why a complete 360? Well, I might as well get something that's really gonna upgrade from my current 1600+. I guess I was very biased to AMD because it's cheaper and I like to keep my budget well under if I can. But I found a great alternative in this current setup. Hopefully I'll be able to OC it as well but I gotta figure out how it's possible.

You are right about $50 more, and even if you OC that 2.6 to 3.2, the Athlon64 will destroy it at everything but encoding if you even get a little OC out of the 64, and it will run cooler, and when 64 bit comes out, who knows. But hey its your money..... Read the reviews......

 

[asuh]

yeah, mark, we'll see what happens. i've got a big decision to make and will initiate transaction soon. instead of going on a first whim, i'm going to read, read and read some more about the athlon 64 to make sure that i'm not going to regret not getting it.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: asuh
yeah, varun, you're pretty much right. you can't just upgrade your cpu... you usually just upgrade the whole shebang. i'm just trying to live in my little perfect universe.

Okay, so here's what I'm probably going to do. BIG CHANGE!

I think I'm going with this setup.

CPU - 2.6GHz Intel w/HT
Mobo - DFI Lanparty 875
RAM - Corsair Dual-pack 1GB (unless I can find equivalent but cheaper set of RAM somwhere else)
HSF - stock for now

I think it is the best solution because I think I can get the whole thing for $515. I thought about the Athlon 64 setup but I think it would cost me $50 or more and I can probably get more performance from the Intel rather than the Athlon.

So why a complete 360? Well, I might as well get something that's really gonna upgrade from my current 1600+. I guess I was very biased to AMD because it's cheaper and I like to keep my budget well under if I can. But I found a great alternative in this current setup. Hopefully I'll be able to OC it as well but I gotta figure out how it's possible.

You are right about $50 more, and even if you OC that 2.6 to 3.2, the Athlon64 will destroy it at everything but encoding if you even get a little OC out of the 64, and it will run cooler, and when 64 bit comes out, who knows. But hey its your money..... Read the reviews......

Hey mark I think that is a bunch of crap....Let a guy buy what he wants. I didn't come back into the thread and whine when he started thinking about an A64....

How come my 2.4@3.0ghz with 2 instances of seti benchmark work unit gets one done every 1 hour and 43 minutes??? I believe yours was like 2 hours for 1 unit.... You got a little OC out of yours, right???

Edit: It is not just multimedia right?? Everybody knows that adobe products are extremely optimised for P4's. There are tons of SSE2 optimizations which AThlon64 can cash in on some but I believe some of the newer adobe product are actually HT enabled as well. Some are multithreaded and have been so I can imagine they can possibly take advantage of the HT...

The fact is he listed what he needed it for and ppl should respond to his wants and needs....He said maybe he wanted to game a bit more and I thought "A64 could be a nice overall option then", but I stayed out of it....

Edit2: Check this list!!

According to the list I compiled from ppl who have used the apps and pm'd me with the programs photoshop 8.0 is HT enabled as well as about 3-4 other adobe products....

Someone find a review if one has been done testing this between the 2 platforms...

 

[Bovinicus]

Originally posted by: Varun
I'm not sure where people get this idea that if they buy X chip, they will be able to upgrade to a faster version of X chip somewhere down the road. By the time that your X chip is outdated, there will likely be 2 or 3 different sockets, RAM will have changed, etc. When you upgrade anything, you have to expect a new Motherboard, CPU, and RAM. Even though the socket A has been the same since the Thunderbird, you couldn't or shouldn't run an Athlon 2800+ on a KT7 from way back.

Socket 754 will be outdated, but that is the way it always is with hardware. The 3000+ is a great CPU for a great price. If you are stuck on the XP, then just go with the P4 because it will do what you want it to better.

Actually, I am on the verge of just upgrading my CPU, video card, and adding another stick of memory to my system. My motherboard is an EPoX 8KHA+. I'm upgrading from a Thunderbird 1Ghz@1.13GHz to an Athlon XP 2400+, which is 2GHz. I have 512MB of PC2100 memory. I'm just going to add a 3rd 256MB stick. I'm also going from a Radeon 8500 to a Radeon 9700 Pro if I can still get ahold of one in a few weeks. Granted, it won't be a top of the line system, but it will be a big boost in performance for relatively cheap.

Originally posted by: asuh
I think it is the best solution because I think I can get the whole thing for $515. I thought about the Athlon 64 setup but I think it would cost me $50 or more and I can probably get more performance from the Intel rather than the Athlon.

It doesn't make sense that you say that, and then consider paying $180 for the motherboard. You could just as easily get the ABIT IS7 for a lot less, or go with the Athlon 64 for that matter. I'm not really suggesting the Athlon 64 because $50 saved is definitely nothing to scoff at; also, you are using programs that work well with the P4. On top of that, you stand to get a pretty nice overclock out of your 2.6GHz P4.

 

[asuh]

i have bought my system and will post pics as soon as i get everything up and running. turned out better than i was thinking.

CPU - 2.6GHz Intel w/HT
Mobo - Asus P4P800 Dlx
RAM - 1 GB Mushkin PC3500 BH-5 (also bought Kingston HyperX PC3700)

Once I figure out which RAM is better, I'll probably return or sell the other set.