Athlon 64 3200+ is not worth money

joe2004

Senior member
Oct 14, 2003
385
0
0
I have this thing for about a month. I see no significant gain over Barton at 2.2 GHz, say 2500 overclocked. There might be a gain of 5% performance if you overclock it to 2.2 GHz and that is all. Hardly worth $400+ that AMD expect to get for it. Don't waste money and enjoy your Bartons, I know I do.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,487
20,581
146
How much you want for it Joe? :D
 

Shinei

Senior member
Nov 23, 2003
200
0
0
Yeah man, if it sucks so bad, maybe you could sell it to me for, say... $20? ;)
 

andreasl

Senior member
Aug 25, 2000
419
0
0
Originally posted by: joe2004
I have this thing for about a month. I see no significant gain over Barton at 2.2 GHz, say 2500 overclocked. There might be a gain of 5% performance if you overclock it to 2.2 GHz and that is all. Hardly worth $400+ that AMD expect to get for it. Don't waste money and enjoy your Bartons, I know I do.

Are you saying that an Athlon 64 3200+ does not significally outperform an Athlon XP 3200+ ? Wow, who could have known.. :)
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Originally posted by: joe2004
I have this thing for about a month. I see no significant gain over Barton at 2.2 GHz, say 2500 overclocked. There might be a gain of 5% performance if you overclock it to 2.2 GHz and that is all. Hardly worth $400+ that AMD expect to get for it. Don't waste money and enjoy your Bartons, I know I do.

According to what I read last night, you should have gotten an Opteron. Read this entire article. It was very interesting, to say the least! Now I want an Opteron-based system...

 

joe2004

Senior member
Oct 14, 2003
385
0
0
so .. what do you do with that Athlon64?
I play online chess. That uses 100% of CPU all the time, like Prime95 so it is a good measure of the CPU power. Athlon64 is nothing impressive at all, very little better than Barton 3200+, if at all.
You cannot use three memory sticks because it brings the performance down a lot. At least on K8V. For $421 I payed it is really a huge disappointment.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,487
20,581
146
Originally posted by: klah
I know, I wish somone would benchmark these things and put the results online for us to read.
Well done. Also, it would seem his primary usage with the online chess favors mhz, but to confirm it I'd like to see how the Pentium-M performs at that task.
 

joe2004

Senior member
Oct 14, 2003
385
0
0
I did all sorts of benches but I don't write many. I benched say Radeon 9800 Pro and I got like 19,000 on 3DMark SE, which is about what I get with 3.2 Pentium and a little better than 3200+ Barton, I get 98-99 seconds for SuperPi 2 MB, and so on. Sorry for not being scientific but in general it is all about 1-2% in the range of Barton 3200+. I overclocked A64 to 2.25 GHz and then I get perhaps 5-10% gain but it is certainly not worth $400. I think this processor is just way too much for the value. That is all. I am very, very disappointed in chess play with this CPU. I pair it with Barton on a null modem and they are comparable, not an inch better results.

If you are thinking about buying one, I strongly suggest to invest in watercooling and get much better performance gain using standard Barton 2500+ for less money.
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Originally posted by: Shinei
Yeah man, if it sucks so bad, maybe you could sell it to me for, say... $20? ;)

Hey, Joe, I'll give you twice what Shinei offered you for the Athlon64, for the 2500. Seriously, if you're interested, PM me, or e-mail me at myocardia@yahoo.com.
 

KF

Golden Member
Dec 3, 1999
1,371
0
0
Didn't we go through this once before?

$400 processors generally are not worth the money. $800 ones are even less worth it. Generally speaking, performance does not keep up with dollars. When you get around $50, you are doing pretty well. It really depends on how much $50, or 400, is worth to you. I sometimes wonder why I went for a $50 1700+ (OCed to 2000MHz) when I already had a Tbird that ran at 1400MHz. Sure the OCed 1700+ is real zippy, but so what?

But I have to say if you are disappointed in that A64, you should start getting into things that'll respond to the capabilities it has. This is what being a computer geek is all about. You are in the vanguard. If OTOH you are computer USER and are concerned with cost, then you should have asked some one for a computer recommendation given your usage.

Are you the first one on that chess site to spring for an Athlon 64?
 

joe2004

Senior member
Oct 14, 2003
385
0
0
Hey, Joe, I'll give you twice what Shinei offered you for the Athlon64, for the 2500.
Yeah, I'll send you a heatsink for that, you and shinei can swap it so you can both use it whenever the other one is not using it. ;)
Funny, ha-ha.
 

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
I'll trade you my Barton that runs at 2.3 Ghz for that Athlon-64. I'll even throw in my A7N8X Deluxe motherboard.
 

mechBgon

Super Moderator<br>Elite Member
Oct 31, 1999
30,699
1
0
*gets in line and takes a number* :D:D:D

I wish I had that kind of power on tap instead of a 1GHz Duron @ 1.33 right now. trueSpace 4.3 looks like it'll take a couple of days to get me past the 90% mark on my radiosity computations ATM, and I don't have the funds to upgrade anymore. :( Appreciate what you've got, joe2004, it could be worse.

*goes off to design a green-with-envy smilie* :p
 

destaccado

Junior Member
Oct 31, 2003
14
0
0
So what your saying is your feel it's fair to compare an oc'd processor to a non-oc'd processor? No doubt the 2500+ easily overclocks to 3200+, I've done it many times and have 3 pc's with that processor in it, but still......In terms of lack of a big performance difference I honestly can tell between a 2500+ oc'd and my A64....the a64 is the fastest feeling processor I've ever owned...what do I mean? Simply that it has a quick desktop feel to it with virtually no lag....teamed with my R9800xt and ocz pc3500 plat le I get 20,8xx 3dmarks (2k1) 6689 (2k3) stock....to me that's fast......

Now if you think you are going to go up 4x the performance for 4x the money you're way off.........everyone on here should know that the closer you get to high-end equipment, the more you pay in markup, if it bothers you, don't buy into it......I just think it's funny you had a 2500+ @ 3200+ and thought a a64 3200+ was going to be that much faster...........

Personally, maybe you just made an honest mistake but don't dis something because you don't think it's worth it.....your value of worth and mine or anyone else's on this forum may be completely different, the truth is the A64 is an awesome processor with industry leading performance right now (disreguarding EE or 64fx).....$420 is a small price to pay for that if we step back in time a little bit.....
 

VIAN

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2003
6,575
1
0
Filling up all RAM slots is a problem on all boards because only 2 full slots work at full speed, and then when you add another, it bumps the speed down.

Athlon64 rules, benchmarks say it all. Chess, yay - big CPU stresser, try playing a game with a video card without a T&L engine. That should show you how good the CPU is. Try loading 3dmark2000 v1.1 and place a TNT2 Ultra in your slot and then tell me the difference between scores.

Right now, I have regular applications going, running like a firewall 3dfx tray icon, SETI@home, and Norton Antivirus 2002. My CPU is being utilized 100%. But wait, I can still load up Day of Defeat and get great performance, how is that possible, maybe application priority or usage depends.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Consider driving a ferrari F60 vs. Lamborghini Diablo SV on a street to take your mom grocery shopping

Either one will feel extremely fast because they can get around the city streets faster than most traffic (just like 2500+ and athlon 64 3200+ are way faster than say 1000 ghz p3)

but unless you put those 2 cars on the test track or drag race them you wont tell the difference.

In other words, you have to use applications which stress the processor.

There are many, but i cannot tell the difference between 1500+ to 3200+ athlon xp or 1.5ghz p4 and 3.2ghz p4 by just interacting in windows xp environment (in fact speed of the hard drive will matter way more)

but once i play games its a matter of being able to play a game at high detail at 1600x1200 and in another case not being able to play it at all

so if u do other things like encoding, rendering, games, etc.....you'll tell the difference

I can play chess on Yahoo.com all day long with my P2 233MMX and I wont tell the difference between my p4 3.06ghz with Hyper threading because i am limited by application (chess being non-intensive) and speed is depending on internet speed

so please before you judge a product, see if you are using it as it was intended => ie athlon 64 - high end processor not for general applications but for an enthusiast who needs power
 

nCred

Golden Member
Oct 13, 2003
1,105
98
91
Did you buy the Athlon 64 just to win in some online chess game?
 

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
Originally posted by: nCred
Did you buy the Athlon 64 just to win in some online chess game?

If he did he bought the wrong one... the FX would have been a better choice.
 

joe2004

Senior member
Oct 14, 2003
385
0
0
I'll trade you my Barton that runs at 2.3 Ghz for that Athlon-64. I'll even throw in my A7N8X Deluxe motherboard.
I have both plus two Abits NF7-S and another two Bartons. So no more NF2 for me. Great processor but the top is already reached.
I succeeded to overclock this 64 to 2.28 GHzon a retail heatsink. I'll try more.
Yes, I wanted to get the edge in the chess games, I have the best software, I only needed proper hardware. I don't know about FX, that would require a $1,000 more. I'd rather put that in Vapochil or Prometeia.
 

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
Originally posted by: myocardia
Originally posted by: VIAN
LOL, you could've just bought a Celeron. LOL
Or maybe even my old 486DX4! Hey, it OC'ed to 120Mhz...

I don't think you guys have any idea what type of Chess program he's talking about. He's not playing Yahoo chess with some Indian guy. The Chess program he has is a test of computing power... if I understand it correctly, the computer has a set amount of time per move, and it calculates as many possibilities as possible and makes the best move it can "think of." The more calculations it can do, the more possibly bad movements it can rule out, and you'll be more likely to "win."