Advice on high-performance system

kapoli

Junior Member
Nov 13, 2004
13
0
0
I'm buying a new system soon. Since I don't upgrade often, I want to buy a good one. I like to have everything stock and will not overclock. I am having trouble deciding between these two configurations:

1)
Athlon 64 FX-55
Geforce 6800 GT
2GB of cheap RAM

2)
Athlon 64 3800+
Geforce 6800 Ultra
2GB of same cheap RAM (Samsung)

I am tired of waiting for nForce 4. Is it better to buy one of these systems now or wait for nForce 4? Also, should I make any changes to the above configurations? Thanks for your suggestions.
 

sswingle

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2000
7,183
45
91
Just get what you can afford. I personally say the 3800 as the FX-55 is overpriced, but I'm sure others on here will say to get the FX-55.

Oh, and save some money on the RAM and just get 1 gb for now. You can always add more later.
 

Zinn2b

Banned
Jan 9, 2004
361
0
0
GET THE 4000 don't buy the 55 if you are not going to O/C as they are the same except the 55 is unlocked which u don't care about because your not O/C Also ATI just released there chipset and there very good and very fast good luck
 

imported_NoGodForMe

Senior member
May 3, 2004
452
0
0
Zinn2b is right about the 4000 versus the FX55. You can still OC the 4000 by upping the motherboard FSB. The Asus A8V will do it for you up to 10% from the bios menu just by selecting it.
On the memory, 1 gig is plenty, just depends on what you are using the computer for. If you have many apps running, then you would want the 2 gigs. Plus I've read that it's better to have only 2 sticks in the machine.
So what are you using the computer for? The FX55 or 4000 are fast gaming chips, but if you want to run multiple apps, it's not as fast as an Intel setup.
 

gobucks

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2004
1,166
0
0
Actually, it kinda depends on what you want to do. Do you have any experience overclocking? If so, the new 90nm socket 939 chips are great performers. The 1.8GHz 3000 and 2.0GHz 3200 both overclock to 2.6GHz, a 45% overclock in the case of the 3000+, and that's on AIR! At these levels, performance is equal to a FX-55 (less cache, but faster bus speeds). Even if you play it conservative, say 2.3-2.4GHz with a 3200 or even 3500, that's still 3800+ levels of performance. My recommendation would be for a 3200+ with a good heatsink and good RAM, maybe 1GB crucial ballistix (great performance, great overclocking). Besides, dual core will be a must in the future, anyways, so getting a lower end 3200+ now and dropping in a dual core CPU in a year or 2 makes for an easy, pain-free upgrade. Even if you run at stock speeds, the 3500 is about $300 cheaper than the 3800+, and only about 8% slower. With the extra cash, you could spend an extra $100 on the ballistix, netting you about the same gains as the 3800+ over the 3500, plus you save $200, plus you can overclock more. Since you are looking for the most time for your money, the $300 extra for a few months more time isn't really worth it, I would think. My advice is to work the price points - from FX-55 down to 3800, there are marginal drop-offs. Then, from 3800+ to 3500+, there is that huge dropoff, followed by smaller drops to the lower-end models, so the 3500+ will be the best value in terms of buying you a lot of time for not too much money, unless you overclock, then I'd go with the 3200+.

As for the motherboard, I wouldn't give up on nforce4 yet. This week, Asus, Gigabyte, and MSI are all supposed to be shipping their boards. Gigabyte even had one of theirs reviewed by anandtech, and the results were amazing. The board was about 5% faster than nforce4 reference, which was faster than the nforce3 ultra, plus you get all the new nforce4 goodies. Prices are expected to be in line with nforce3 prices, so you'll basically be getting that extra performance and features for free (maybe a little bit extra at first, but still, not too much). If you want your computer to last a long time, you're gonna want a PCIe board, maybe more for the expansion slots than the graphics, since the new high bandwidth devices, like SATA-II controllers, Creative's Soundblaster Zenith cards, 10GB Ethernet, etc. will all need the speed.
 

uOpt

Golden Member
Oct 19, 2004
1,628
0
0
The FX-55 is the only 2.6 GHz Athlon 64. If you don't overclock and your applications mostly depends on clockspeed (most do with the Athlon's basic cache and mem bandwidth), then it will be faster. It is only $110 more expensive and will be quite a bit faster for many CPU-intensive applications.

If you are into games, then obviously a little less CPU and the 6800 Ultra will overall be better.

I think your major problem will be actually buying one of those video cards.
 

loic2003

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2003
3,844
0
0
Do you really need a 64 bit computer? Are you going to be running a 64 bit operating system on it or just windows XP? Longhorn won't be out for another 2 years, minimum, in which time you may be looking to get some hardware upgrades anyway.