The monitor and OS really jack up the price, but you should be able to pull it off if you are willing to settle for a GeForce FX 5200 or something equivalent for the video card. Definitely go AMD, perhaps Athlon XP if you think the 64 motherboards are too expensive. Monitors are expensive, but there are always deals on refurbished ones. In fact, the 19 inch one I'm using right now barely cost a dime!
Completely False. Intel is no more stable than AMD. I'm suprised with the amount of B.S. of stuff like this still circulates.
PEBKAC
I've had both intel and AMD and AMD is rock solid. ROCK solid. I haven't had an uninstentional reboot/BSOD/whatever since building this system.
I didn't want to affend anyone, like I said, just personal experiance. And yes, I use quality parts, and I know what I'm doing, I've been building systems for over 10 years. Maybe I got a bad chip or something.
P4 2.8c is $185~, 64-3000+ is $220~
Price isn't an issue, they are very comparable in terms of price.
It all depends on what you want to do.
Encoding - P4
Gaming - AMD
Since you want to do a mixture it makes it more difficult though.
If you're willing to overclock, go for the P4 2.8c, and spend the difference on the RAM, and you'll have a nice machine ot overclock (possibly up to around 3.6GHz)
The AMD might get an extra 300MHz if you're luck, whych would have it aroudna 3500+, so the average performance will be the same, but overclocking the P4 will be more fun I think
Price isn't an issue, they are very comparable in terms of price.
It all depends on what you want to do.
Encoding - P4
Gaming - AMD
Since you want to do a mixture it makes it more difficult though.
If you're willing to overclock, go for the P4 2.8c, and spend the difference on the RAM, and you'll have a nice machine ot overclock (possibly up to around 3.6GHz)
The AMD might get an extra 300MHz if you're luck, whych would have it aroudna 3500+, so the average performance will be the same, but overclocking the P4 will be more fun I think
I keep seeing all these posts that the AMD chips are cheaper than Intel - Huh? AMD Athlon 64 3000 ~$220, AMD Athlon 64 2800 ~$175, Intel P4 3.0C ~220, Intel P4 2.8C ~175
Motherboards - Intel 875 based ~$150 NForce 3 250 for Athlon ~$150
Memory = Same
Video = Same
Overclocking - Intel better
No Overclock - Advantage AMD for Games, Intel for Encoding
Value - Overclock goes to Intel, Stock goes to AMD - But who here runs stock?
Stability - Quality components assembled correctly work well. You get what you pay for.
Motherboards - Intel 875 based ~$150 NForce 3 250 for Athlon ~$150
Memory = Same
Video = Same
Overclocking - Intel better
No Overclock - Advantage AMD for Games, Intel for Encoding
Value - Overclock goes to Intel, Stock goes to AMD - But who here runs stock?
Stability - Quality components assembled correctly work well. You get what you pay for.
Mobile AXP Barton 2500+ -- $100.
And the A64 chips are generally faster than equivalent speed P4Cs at everything except encoding, so they're often a better value. Upwards 64-bit compatibility may be worth something as well (although right now it doesn't mean all that much unless you run certain specific things in Linux/UNIX).
If you compare the A64 to the P4C, yes, Intel does better with overclocking (but a lot of that is the relative immaturity of the available motherboards/chipsets for A64 -- NForce250 may help a lot there). If you look a the Athlon XP line, AMD is a WAY better overclocking value -- you can get the equivalent of a P4C 3.0Ghz for ~$100 (take a Barton 2500+ and crank it up to 3200+ speeds or higher), and on a cheaper motherboard to boot.
That's exactly why I am waiting. I do feel the dark side's pressure (read:Intel), but AMD looks to be the way to go, with me being more of a gamer. But the overclock on the Intel keeps haunting me. What are your personal o/cs (preferably with stock or reatively inexpensive hsfs) on the "C" series of Intel chips, and based on benches, are they beating the Athlon 64 (3000+ or higher (not FX)) that is of a similar price?
I'm 60% on the Intel side of the fence vs AMD atm, but its a very close race. I would not touch anything that wasn't dual channel, but that's just me. Thus the A64's imo, are out of the question. That makes the pricey FX, the option to compare and then the cheaper Prescotts and Northwoods start looking nice.
I think the judgement will be better made on seeing the scores when the tests come out. I'll note several points below to weigh in your decision.
Do not buy until socket 939 and 775 are out.
Do not think you have to have ddr2 - its ok, but not that great and its going to cost a bundle
DO NOT buy without Pci-express for your graphics slot - in 9-12 mo you won't see nearly any high end card come out in agp anymore
If they address even part of the heat issues in the 775 release of Prescott, it should oc great, and might perform superbly for a low cost
Remember in all the tests that pit a 3.2 Prescott against a FX-53 or FX-51 that the Prescott is a $200-250 chip right now
Remember that Intel chipsets are generally known for their rock solid durability - and able to run 24/7 without crashes for months.
that's something that plays into "why the heck is this game not working right" problems years down the road
Do not think that Intel is the only way to go just because everyone goes there
Hardware has become more standard and common now then any time in the past
If Prescott does do 64bit (and this is still an IF in my book), then it would be the only dual channel 64 bit chip at the low price point
If Prescotts are still hot, then you may not be able to overclock much with air cooling methods
typically stock Intel air cooling would give you a few hundred mhz more for free if you got a good motherboard
f you don't have to buy now DON'T. You'd be much, much better served to buy in the July-Sep timeframe.
$.02
I think the judgement will be better made on seeing the scores when the tests come out. I'll note several points below to weigh in your decision.
Do not buy until socket 939 and 775 are out.
Do not think you have to have ddr2 - its ok, but not that great and its going to cost a bundle
DO NOT buy without Pci-express for your graphics slot - in 9-12 mo you won't see nearly any high end card come out in agp anymore
If they address even part of the heat issues in the 775 release of Prescott, it should oc great, and might perform superbly for a low cost
Remember in all the tests that pit a 3.2 Prescott against a FX-53 or FX-51 that the Prescott is a $200-250 chip right now
Remember that Intel chipsets are generally known for their rock solid durability - and able to run 24/7 without crashes for months.
that's something that plays into "why the heck is this game not working right" problems years down the road
Do not think that Intel is the only way to go just because everyone goes there
Hardware has become more standard and common now then any time in the past
If Prescott does do 64bit (and this is still an IF in my book), then it would be the only dual channel 64 bit chip at the low price point
If Prescotts are still hot, then you may not be able to overclock much with air cooling methods
typically stock Intel air cooling would give you a few hundred mhz more for free if you got a good motherboard
f you don't have to buy now DON'T. You'd be much, much better served to buy in the July-Sep timeframe.
$.02
I reckon the two platform are currently very close...AMD64 has some slight advantage is games...but P4 is faster at encoding and has HT.
The current P4 is at the end of the line, its very mature technology which has scaled all the way from 1.3 GHz to the current 3.4GHz. I
really doubt Intel will be abletosucessfully implement90nm manufacturing with out SOI (Silicon on Insolator) technology.(And the chance of Intel usingSOI is very remote, theycurrently don't have access to the technology).
At the higher end, for server, the Opeteron definately out perform the Xeon...but at desktop level, the distinction is that big.
The current P4 is at the end of the line, its very mature technology which has scaled all the way from 1.3 GHz to the current 3.4GHz. I
really doubt Intel will be abletosucessfully implement90nm manufacturing with out SOI (Silicon on Insolator) technology.(And the chance of Intel usingSOI is very remote, theycurrently don't have access to the technology).
At the higher end, for server, the Opeteron definately out perform the Xeon...but at desktop level, the distinction is that big.
Depends on what you want. I'd personally Go with AMD because its cheaper and I'm pretty much broke. But IF you have the cash get a p4
Just, as a note, dual channel means a LOT more to Intel chips than AMD -- especially the A64s, which have an onboard memory controller. Intel's quad-pumped bus gives a HUGE memory bandwidth, but it also cripples the processor unless you use dual-channel memory with it (since single-channel DDR just can't keep up). AMD doesn't really have this problem, at least not to the same degree. In any case, Socket 939 A64 chips (which should be out in a few months) will use dual-channel DDR.
Yep.
This is all good advice *IF* you intend to keep this motherboard/system for at least 18-24 months. The upgrade path for Socket 754/DDR/AGP won't go any further than that. But if you don't mind buying an entirely new system 2 years from now, it's not a problem. But if you intend to keep this for a long time, wait for Socket939 and PCI-E (AMD has not set firm plans to go to DDR2 until at least next year, but I agree that DDR2 will take a while to catch on).
There's an 'if', 'should', and 'might' in that sentence. This seems like a long shot, but may be worth waiting to check out.
Well, yes, but I usually see the FX-51 and FX-53 going up against the P4EE, not the Prescott. Who's benching those against each other?
I have to disagree (at least with your implication that AMD is less stable) -- I'm running a Barton/NForce2 system right now, and it's as solid as anything I've ever had. Runs for weeks on end without a hitch (haven't tried months/years yet; I've only HAD it about 5 months, and I tend to install Windows patches every few weeks). I will say that the VIA/KT133 board I had before this was a bit flaky at times, but the newer AMD chipsets are just as good as anything I've used from Intel. Stability should not be a problem with *any* newer machine.
Um, except for the Socket939 A64s.
I think this is the real bottom line. If you want a high-end system right now, wait for the new chipsets (with DDR2/PCI-E) and/or better Prescotts and Socket939 CPUs. If you want something midrange (slower P4C, AthlonXP, or Socket754-based), prices are pretty good -- just don't expect a system you buy today to last more than 18 months without a total overhaul.
- Aug 22, 2001
- 32,087
- 32,615
- 146
The standard 10% overclock will go bye bye with nF3 250 having functioning AGP/pci lock because it's more a limitation of the boards most are using than the ability of the A64 to ramp higher than 2.2ghz. You can get substantially more than 200mhz/10% overclock with a 3000+ if you have the right board, mine runs 2.4ghz on air no problem thanks to the AN50R having AGP lock and decent voltage adjustments stock. It's also a highly moddable board that some get 2.6ghz+ from
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter