Athlon XP vs Athlon 64

[rip]

Why are people paying more for Athlon XP CPUs than Athlon 64s?

 

[F1shF4t]

Cause some people still have old comps which work alright for what they need, and also athlon xp are no longer made.

 

[Stumps]

there is a pretty high demand right now for AXP's (at least in Australia anyway)....a lot of people are trying to upgrade their old rigs to run Windows Vista

It makes me laugh a bit because alot of those people are using NF2 chipsets...and it isn't supported by Vista :laugh:

 

[Bob Anderson]

Originally posted by: Stumps
there is a pretty high demand right now for AXP's (at least in Australia anyway)....a lot of people are trying to upgrade their old rigs to run Windows Vista

It makes me laugh a bit because alot of those people are using NF2 chipsets...and it isn't supported by Vista :laugh:

If people are actually trying to upgrade 32-bit AMD XP based machines to run Vista, they are foolish. At the very least, they should have a DEP-enabled AMD64. Personally, I wouldn't go the upgrade path to Vista at all. When I'm ready to go to Vista, I'll do an entirely new build with all new software. That's the expensive route but I'd rather pay money up front than spend months getting an upgrade to work properly.


Your comment about Vista not supporting NF2 is exactly what a lot of owners of AMD XP are going to experience, not to mention serious driver issues.

-Bob

 

[BladeVenom]

Maybe I should start selling my Athlon XPs.

 

[imported_kiwik]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
Maybe I should start selling my Athlon XPs.

Good idea, I'll do the same.

 

[Artanis]

Btw, NF2 chipset is supported very well by Vista.

 

[Maximilian]

Is NF2 supported or not? Conflicting info here

I would imagine it will be.

 

[josh609]

It's windows for crying out loud. Of course it will be supported. Now if Nvidia will update the Nforce2 driver, thats another question...........

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: Artanis
Btw, NF2 chipset is supported very well by Vista.

not by Nvidia it isn't...the basic windows driver doesn't work properly and leaves a few devices undetected...not to mention the NF2 IDE driver supplied by Microsoft is as slow as sh!t.

Nvidia have stated that they won't be supporting the NF2 chipset in Vista

 

[SickBeast]

The Athlon XP was a good chip, and was very popular due to their low price and good perfomance compared with the hot and slow P4.

I still run an Athlon XP/NF2 combo and it's been so fast that I've avoided upgrading to an A64/C2D. It does what I need it to very efficiently.

People probably want to upgrade old rigs. It doesn't make sense tho. You can get a Sempron faster than anything in the Athlon XP family for *cheap* these days!

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: Artanis
Btw, NF2 chipset is supported very well by Vista.

not by Nvidia it isn't...the basic windows driver doesn't work properly and leaves a few devices undetected...not to mention the NF2 IDE driver supplied by Microsoft is as slow as sh!t.

Nvidia have stated that they won't be supporting the NF2 chipset in Vista

Thats pretty lousy... theres probably lots of people with AXP rigs that are vista capable.

Originally posted by: SickBeast
The Athlon XP was a good chip, and was very popular due to their low price and good perfomance compared with the hot and slow P4.

I still run an Athlon XP/NF2 combo and it's been so fast that I've avoided upgrading to an A64/C2D. It does what I need it to very efficiently.

People probably want to upgrade old rigs. It doesn't make sense tho. You can get a Sempron faster than anything in the Athlon XP family for *cheap* these days!

The AXP was always hotter than any of the P4's it competed against (preshott was the A64's competitor) and the P4's were faster too.

 

[Aluvus]

Originally posted by: Soviet
and the P4's were faster too.

Not consistently, no.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Soviet
The AXP was always hotter than any of the P4's it competed against (preshott was the A64's competitor) and the P4's were faster too.

You're kidding right? If you look at the P4 from a performance per watt standpoint, it is the worst processor ever developed. Efficiency was not the P4, hence intel's scrapping of the architecture.

The Athlon XP outperformed the earliest revision of the P4. The P4C was quicker in some benchmarks and slower in others. The Prescott was very hot and a little slower per clock than the P4C.

From a price/performance standpoint the AXP always blew the P4 out of the water, especially factoring in motherboard/memory cost (rambus anyone?).

 

[metalmania]

I still have two old AXP 2500+ OC 3200 running. I cannot believe I have not upgraded for 3 years!

 

[lopri]

OP: Did you check the prices of RDRAM?

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: lopri
OP: Did you check the prices of RDRAM?

what about the millions of P4 systems that used DDR ?....my 3.06ghz P4 rig didn't cost much more to build than my AXP 3000+ rig back in early 2003....and they used a lot of similar components...the only differences being the CPU and Mobo....IIRC there was less than AU$50 in the price difference.

the old excuse of P4's cost more than AXP rigs to build was moot once decent DDR chipsets came out....but IMO the AXP was always a better performer....I know my 3000+ was definately faster than my 3.06ghz at stock speeds.

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Soviet
The AXP was always hotter than any of the P4's it competed against (preshott was the A64's competitor) and the P4's were faster too.

You're kidding right? If you look at the P4 from a performance per watt standpoint, it is the worst processor ever developed. Efficiency was not the P4, hence intel's scrapping of the architecture.

The Athlon XP outperformed the earliest revision of the P4. The P4C was quicker in some benchmarks and slower in others. The Prescott was very hot and a little slower per clock than the P4C.

From a price/performance standpoint the AXP always blew the P4 out of the water, especially factoring in motherboard/memory cost (rambus anyone?).

You're both right... and wrong. The AthlonXP had a better performance per watt as well as lower overall power consumption than the P4. However, it did typically run at a hotter die temperature than contemporary P4 chips. This is because whatever P4 was out at the time generally was anywhere from 120% to 160% of the die area of the competing XP chip.

Die temps are not the same as power consumption. Conroe's generally run hotter die temps than .90nm X2s, especially when both are OC'ed. The Conroe still uses quite a bit less power. Die temp is function of power consumption as well as surface area, with several other factors thrown of course.

 

[A554SS1N]

I always remember seeing a 3200+ Athlon XP performing as good as a 2.8Ghz P4 Northwood - it was miles behind the 3.2Ghz P4.... maybe that's just a few tomshardware guides I'm thinking back to (which were controversial at the time because people accused them of being Intel supporters).

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: A554SS1N
I always remember seeing a 3200+ Athlon XP performing as good as a 2.8Ghz P4 Northwood - it was miles behind the 3.2Ghz P4.... maybe that's just a few tomshardware guides I'm thinking back to (which were controversial at the time because people accused them of being Intel supporters).

compared to the Northwood C P4's (800Fsb) the AXP was usually a bit behind, but the AXP was usually ahead of the 533Fsb....funny thing is once the prescott was introduced an AXP became competitive with the P4 again until the Prescott passed 3ghz.

But I know that my 3000+ IS faster than my 3.06ghz Northwood and my 3.0E prescott at stock speeds.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

always depends on what u use the computer for. my younger bro he got a AXP3200+ on a Abit NF7-S and let me tell you this old rig still rocks. boots up faster than 10seconds, plays WoW with an 98pro @ 30-40 fps. Now if ur like that kind of guy who likes to play WoW, WC3, surf the net, listen to music and thats it...what u need to upgrade for? time for upgrade is when he decides to play a new ressource hungry game but until that day comes his old shity rig is still workin like a charm.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
always depends on what u use the computer for. my younger bro he got a AXP3200+ on a Abit NF7-S and let me tell you this old rig still rocks. boots up faster than 10seconds, plays WoW with an 98pro @ 30-40 fps. Now if ur like that kind of guy who likes to play WoW, WC3, surf the net, listen to music and thats it...what u need to upgrade for? time for upgrade is when he decides to play a new ressource hungry game but until that day comes his old shity rig is still workin like a charm.

Totally, with enough RAM and an x850xtpe that rig would kick ass against more modern rigs.