Building a New Computer, I'm hung up on the Intel/AMD question. Thoughts wanted :)

[Rainsford]

Sorry if this topic has been discussed to death (like I'm sure it has), but I looked through a lot of Intel/AMD threads and I still haven't been able to decide whether to go P4 or Athlon XP. A little help for an indecisive AT poster would be great

Here's the deal, I have an 800 mhz Athlon T-Bird with 512 megs of PC133 and I'm looking to upgrade most of my computer. I already have most of it, and the only thing I'm undecided on is the motherboard/CPU. I'm going to get 512 megs of Samsung true PC2700 DDR memory, I already have a Gainward GeForce 4 Ti 4200 128 meg, and if I get an Intel P4 system I'll get the Epox 4G4A+ and if I go AMD I'll get the Asus A7V333 w/RAID. I haven't decided on a CPU speed yet, but given the budget I have and the fact that the motherboards are almost the same price, I can spend up to $200 on the CPU itself. I use my computer mostly for gaming and some light office stuff (email, Word, some Dreamweaver).

I got this pretty well planned out, but here's where I get hung up. I read about how P4's are overclocking beasts and that they are supposed to run cooler and are more stable than Athlon XPs. But then I think about how Athlon's are still the fastest CPU for the money (at least in my price range) and that if I didn't overclock at all a $200 Athlon XP (about a 2000+ counting the aftermarket heatsink I'd get for it) would beat a $200 P4 (about a 2.0A) in almost every benchmark (especially gaming which is mostly what I use my computer for).

I guess my issue is, do I really want to get a slower chip and then overclock it to get some better performance out of it? We don't really know anything about longetivity of all those massivly overclocked P4s out there, and I keep my systems for quite a while. But on the other hand, I feel like I'd be missing out getting a chip that isn't the best overclocker since the Celeron 300A. Arghh! Any thoughts? Should I take the plunge and just go for a P4 and hope it doesn't break on me when I overclock it? Or should I get an Athlon XP that I know will run nice and stable and be a good deal even at stock speeds? Or is there some reason to get a P4 if I'm just going to run it at stock speeds? Or am I obessing over a few percent anyways and I should just get a computer and be happy with whatever it is?

Thanks in advance!

 

[ElFenix]

you're pretty much hit the nail on the head... the performance of the athlon is a sure thing, while the performance of the p4 can be better if you OC it, its not a sure thing. theres always people getting ones that don't OC too well. then they turn bitter. i'd go with the sure thing and get a little extra out of it rather than banking on a big OC and perhaps either damaging the processor or not getting a good OC. too many what-ifs for my taste.

of course... my next will almost have to be a p4 seeing how much heat my xp puts out.

unless i can get a nice t-bred with the 1.5V (lower clocked models)

 

[Texun]

I have an XP1700 and a P4-1.6a.

I use the XP 90% of the time and left it stock clocked. The 1.6a is now only mildly overclocked. The reason is because I have no need to push either one to the wall. I'm not a heavy gamer and either one work fine, as is, at least for me.

In my opinion, the stock XP is a workhorse. It plows through graphics with ease. The problem I faced when deciding was to have heat or not to have heat. The XP is in an open area where air flow is not a problem. I went with the P4 in the other system due to the limited flow of fresh air. Since I resolved the heat and fan noise issue with the XP, I consider both to be good performers and stability has never been an issue with either one.

This may not give you the deciding info you are searching for, but that could be a good thing... at least you know that either one will provide solid performance, and with the right innards, a level of reliability that you can feel good about. As far as OC'ing and longevity, it's a dice roll.

 

[cmdrdredd]

In my experience AMD systems are either super stable or super un-stable ;-@

You get hit and miss usually...with Intel chips your not so wishy washy with the stability. I never had trouble and my friends have never had trouble with Intel Mobo/CPUs.

That being said you'd have to spend a bit more on the Intel side...I'd go for the SIS645DX chipset if you want DDR memory. Wish I'd have known that sooner myself...for top P4 performance you gotta go RDRAM with the i850 chipset however the SIS is very very close and beats the i850 in some tests.

The AthlonXp route will save you some bucks, but as I said before i've found all too many problems for my liking. Sure i may just have bad luck, but I dunno. I'm liking intel now. I'd say stick to Asus, Abit, MSI for board manufacturers (mobo) and the CPU is really up to you as far as speed and retail vs OEM. When choosing a AMD mobo it's hard not to say VIA KT333, but the N-Force chip is getting good feedback from users. The benchmarks show it lagging, but I'd take someone's word over a number as far as stability, price/performance and overall quality.


If i had to recommend something i'd say get a P4 2.26(533Mhz BUS version) and a SIS645DX mobo. The P4 can go up to 2.7ghz+ on just Intel's stock cooler. I've seen it go to 3Ghz under good conditions.

I guess it all comes down to money...what can you afford.

 

[Duvie]

If you don't feel comfortable ocing then by all means get the amd as it is the best bang for the buck at stock.....

I think ocing the p4 to even 1.65v max is pretty safe....At 1.66v I get 2.67ghz and many with same packing date in this forum are getting the same type of numbers....I haven't heard of damn near anyone who hasn't with a 1.6 of the last 3 months been not able to get to 133fsb or 2.13ghz...all but guaranteed...so 2.1ghz is equal to likely that of a 2000+ xp...currently same cost as xp 2000+ but runs quiter with stock retail hsf and the heat is often less even at that overclock. Now I said that is about guaranteed...MOst now only get upset cause they can't run 2.4ghz...MOst around here have been getting that...Often the choice of mobo and ram limit them from higher...At 2.4ghz you would be running 150fsb for a 600 total fsb...That should compete with any stock amd and that 130 dollar 2000+ xp is unlikley to get to comparable speed.

I have had many amd athlons in the last year and a half and I have yet to really ever have a successful stable oc...NOt much past default and they became unstable...

I spent 130 bucks for the cpu and get performance of over the 600 dollar chip...I get to have the super high fsb to run my memory at top speed, and to have 666fsb versus stock 400's and 533;'s...


However I like to get a new chip every 6 months regardless and I know this chip will and should last that long. So my idea of longevity is likely very different...


The epox 4g4a is a great ocing board...It locks the agp/pci bus to avoid putting other devices out of spec. Very stable.....


You could always get the 2.26ghz p4b chip...Many are getting these to 2.66ghz with little or no extra vcore...which translate to very safe with just average cooling...Some are talking near 3ghz...BUt if it doesn't turnout to be a good ocer it still is very competitve with the 2200+ t-bred (nickname the "toaster" )

 

[mastertech01]

I dunno, Big Lar is running his 2.2a at 3035 now... I cant imagine how cool that must be. I bought in to the MP Dually thing, and have a boat loaded SCSI board. Seems rather foolish for my case to do anything right now but upgrade to faster MP processors, keeping this board going. But Im still not satisfied with MP2100.. Im gonna wait a few more months and hope for a 2400 and do it then.Hammer will prolly cost big time bucks, like the first 1GHZ Athlon, so Im not counting on a first of the year upgrade with AMD. But those Intel systems sure look good right now for the single processor user.

 

[HikkiFan]

I had a few AMD system and 2 P4 system.... personally I would go for the p4. That's of course if you are going for stablility. Two of my AMD systems were rock stable while the other ones crashes every few mins or so.... So far I had great experience with the 1.6 and 2.0 ghz p4, Running rock stable as a server for 2 month now :-D.

 

[xxsk8er101xx]

What it boils down to is speed vs stability and noise.

Intel's are stable and very quiet, while AMD's are hit and miss with stability, loud, and speedy.

I highly doubt your gonna notice the speed. I will say that you will notice the loudness and stability. Think about it.

 

[Jmmsbnd007]

First of all, stability is crap. They are both "stable". If it's unstable hardware-wise, it can most of the time be fixed. Software-wise is also easily fixed. Grab an 1800+, or wait for the hammer (kind of a long wait).

 

[cmdrdredd]

stability is NOT crap. Especially with agressive memory timings and other things short of pure overclocking.

 

[Siddhartha]

If you want to overclock get an Intel 1.6 or 1.8 gHz Northwood. If you do not want to overclock get a retail Athlon XP 1800+ or faster.

I have had an Athlon XP 1900+ (retail)\MSI KT266A\PC2100 system for seven and a half months it has been running perfectly stable and quiet even when the room temperature in my apartment got over 90F. I have not worried about the cpu temperature because the system is working without any problems

The only time I have had stablility issues with any of my systems was after I "tweaked" something.

 

[Mikki]

Another thought: Beside the fact that I wanted to play around with overclocking, the main reason I went Intel was future upgradability. All I have to do right now to upgrade is buy a cpu. If had I bought AMD, my next upgrade will have to include a motherboard also.

Also, after browsing the Overclocking forum for the last two months, I haven't seen anyone complaining that they couldn't get a 1.6A to 2.4. That is 800MHz above it's rated speed! Even at 2.1, it's still a 500MHz overclock. That's not even mildly exciting? And heat is not an issue at all. My 1.6A @ 2479 is running idle 35c with a stock hsf, that's not even remotely close to it's limits.

AMD rocks, there's no question about it. But Intel rocks more, at this point in time. AMD will come back at some point, but Intel's got it and whether you're overclocking or not, I just don't see AMD as an option until they come out with a true affordable P4 killer.

My three cents......

 

[Wingznut]

If you could stretch your cpu budget to $250, you could get a P4-2.26 (533fsb). Run the cpu at default speeds, the DDR at 333mhz, and have the best of all worlds (stability, low temps, and performance with no overclocking... or the option of very high performance with overclocking.)

 

[PerfectFit]

if I get an Intel P4 system I'll get the Epox 4G4A+ and if I go AMD I'll get the Asus A7V333 w/RAID.

I'll let you decide AMD/P4 for yourself - but if you go P4, you should consider the ASUS P4B-533-E w/LAN/Raid/IEEE 1394.

 

[Jmmsbnd007]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
stability is NOT crap. Especially with agressive memory timings and other things short of pure overclocking.

So you're telling me that out of the box an intel will be more stable than an AMD?

 

[Mikki]

Originally posted by: PerfectFit

if I get an Intel P4 system I'll get the Epox 4G4A+ and if I go AMD I'll get the Asus A7V333 w/RAID.

I'll let you decide AMD/P4 for yourself - but if you go P4, you should consider the ASUS P4B-533-E w/LAN/Raid/IEEE 1394.

That's the board I have and I love it, but some people don't like it because of the cpu/mem ratio (or lack thereof).

 

[glugglug]

3 Months ago I would have said to go with an Athlon.

Now I would say you're better off with a P4.

P4 looks like the line is going to continue (probably in the same socket) for some time.
Athlon looks like they are ditching it and putting everything in the Hammer basket.

So P4 has better future upgrade potential. Plus it has better top speeds in the here and now.

 

[Rainsford]

Thanks for all the input everyone. Based on what you've all said, I think I'll go with Intel. Actually the main reason is the possibility of upgrading to a faster P4 in the future, and the fact that the P4 seems to be here to stay (at least for a little while) while I don't think we'll be seeing a whole lot more from the current AMD lineup. Another reason was heat, even my Athlon 800 puts off a lot of heat, and in the fall I'll be carting it back to my dorm room and I'd like something that runs cool (even when overclocked apparently).

PerfectFit, you suggested the Asus P4B533E over the Epox 4G4A+, any reason? I've read a lot of good things about the Epox (especially from people that actually own one, like NFS4) and how it is an overclockers board. I figure if I'm going to try my hand at overclocking, I might as well get a board that's made for it.

 

[Hendrik]

What it boils down to is speed vs stability and noise.

Intel's are stable and very quiet, while AMD's are hit and miss with stability, loud, and speedy.

AMD based systems are every bit as stable as Intel based ones provided that the component between the chair and the monitor is a quality part.

As for noise, you can build an AMD system using quiet fans (like Silencers or Panaflos), and your system is going to be as quiet as any. I have two systems right now - one with an Athlon XP 1700, the other with a Pentium 4A 1.8 - and the noisiest thing in both is the hard disk drive.

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: Hendrik

AMD based systems are every bit as stable as Intel based ones provided that the component between the chair and the monitor is a quality part.

LOL! It's funny, because it's true...

Either platforms are better than what you have. Good choice in going with Intel, you won't be disappointed, and if you do, then just remember the quote above.

 

[ceZium]

I would also say that if your not going to overclock, get the AMD as the performance is great. They are both good cpu's but I prefer the AMD over Intel, just my opinion.

 

[ultimatebob]

Yes, this is true most of the time. AMD CPU and Motherboard combos often need some BIOS updates and updated chipset drivers before they are completely stable. There are also updated drivers and BIOS updates for Intel CPU's and mobo's, however, but they often aren't required unless you're trying to add some cutting-edge hardware to the system.

 

[xxsk8er101xx]

might wanna check out the Abit IT7. It has no legacy ports though. So you need to find a USB keyboard. I got a logitec fone for 30. it has 8 USB 2.0 ports, can have up to 10. and 2 firewire ports, can have up to 3. It alos has onboard LAN and onboard 5.1 audio. Uses DDR too.

I don't trust RDRAM (read Rambus) only because they are being sued and probed majorly. My fear was will rambus be around in 2 years? I know DDR is here to stay. So if i need to RMA or upgrade i'm fairly confident DDR will still be around.

 

[xxsk8er101xx]

Originally posted by: Hendrik

What it boils down to is speed vs stability and noise.

Intel's are stable and very quiet, while AMD's are hit and miss with stability, loud, and speedy.

AMD based systems are every bit as stable as Intel based ones provided that the component between the chair and the monitor is a quality part.

As for noise, you can build an AMD system using quiet fans (like Silencers or Panaflos), and your system is going to be as quiet as any. I have two systems right now - one with an Athlon XP 1700, the other with a Pentium 4A 1.8 - and the noisiest thing in both is the hard disk drive.

i gave thought to this and here is my thought to you.

Ok ya you got your athlon which is a decent chip. And it's quiet. Now here is my question, How much did that "quiet fan" cost you? At least an extra 30 right? so a 1700+ cost about what 150 retail? 130 OEM about give or take 15 bucks. Now add on another 30 at least. It's probably more for that specialized fan. Which i bet you have to go to a specialized shop to get it and pay premium bucks. The intel i just had to buy the cpu retail. So my way is simpler. Simple is good when you get older. It saves time.

Now you have to worry about drivers. So now your wasting time on a 56k modem to download drivers. If you got cable no big deal. Still a waste of time that shouldn't be necessary but it is for AMD motherboards. I'll admit it has gotten better with winxp. But if your running win98 or win2k you must download the latest drivers. Now if you're a newbie and have no idea what your doing, now you got problems. You're talking cpu being fried because the kid didn't put the heatsink on right etc etc etc . ... Thats where your comment falls in.

After all that now you hear the VIA chipset has some compatibilty issue with something. Or VIA chipset causing data curruption download the latest latency patch. You do that and your system crashes and no longer works again. (thats seriously from experience). So now you gotta reinstall windows all over again. Read all of the above and follow through again.

I have a computer science degree. I switched majors (long story don't ask why) to computer information systems. That doesn't escape the fact computers is basicly my carreer. So i know my stuff.

<added>
i bought 3 AMD mothebroards and each one having problems in 3 years
<end>

<edited>
Just after 3 times in 3 years my AMD board having stability issues and compatibilty issues you start to think should i still buy this product?
<end>

ok done rambling

 

[gf4200isdabest]

I also like Intel because of the great retail fan and the overclocking!

Does anyone know when we can expect an 8x AGP mobo for Intel to be sold? I heard Soltek has one in the works (based on the VIA P4X400)