Converting an AMD system to Intel

[walla]

Hi.

My current system specs are as follows (and i'm a bit hazy here)

CPU: Athlon 2100XP+
MOBO: Gigabyte GA-7XRXP rev 2.0
RAM: 2x256MB PC2700, 333MHz crucial ddr sdram
CASE: ATX form factor
P/S: 330W Antec True330

Well, the system died after 2 years. After very extensive testing, I believe it is either the CPU or MOBO that is malfunctioning (constant system resets while trying to install OS). So I decided to go with intel, replacing the mobo, CPU, and heatsink and salvaging the rest.

This is what I have my eye on...


CPU:3.0Ghz p4 Northwood (socket 478 type)
Mobo:ASUS "P4P800-E Deluxe" i865PE Chipset Motherboard for Intel Socket 478 CPU -RETAIL
Headtsink: Dunno yet

My question is...will I be able to keep everything else (RAM, P/S) with this configuration? Any caveats?

Thanks!

 

[SneakyStuff]

Get an Athlon 64.

$141

And an nForce 3 motherboard

$74

And some PC3200 RAM

$80

And you're good to go. AMD has better price/performance ratio than intel, and it's equally as stable, that is the only reason I reccomend it to you.

 

[stevty2889]

You PS should be fine, but that PC2700 ddr would starve the 800Mhz FSB P4.

 

[boomerang]

You're certain it's not the RAM or the PS?

Agree on the RAM. Too slow. PC3200 would be way better.

 

[walla]

--"You're certain it's not the RAM or the PS?"

The only way it could be the ram is if both sticks are failing. I have tried different combinations in different slots...as well as ran mem tests that passed. And I replaced the P/S to be sure, didn't fix anything.



My main concern with this new system is that I don't want it to be too expensive, and I need it to be good for about 2 years (through grad school).

With the system I proposed, I'm already looking at about a $350 upgrade. Upgrading the ram will add even more cost I guess.

What would you estimate the limit to be as far as a CPU speed vs. the type of RAM i already have? I am not against going with a "slower" CPU but you are right, I want to make the most of the technology if I am investing in it.


And as far as my choice of Intel over AMD - I am tired of the heat. Plus, I just had an overall bad experience trying to get my AMD system up and running and I want to avoid that with a new system.

Thanks again.

 

[bigboxes]

Current AMD processors run cooler than Intel.

 

[walla]

Current AMD processors run cooler than Intel.

Is that true for both Northwood and Prescott Intel's?

 

[walla]

"Get an Athlon 64. "

The operating frequency is only around 1.8GHz evidently. The 2100XP+ is nearly 1.8GHz. And I don't know that I have many applications that could take advantage of 64 bit. Where is the performance gain?

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: walla
"Get an Athlon 64. "

The operating frequency is only around 1.8GHz evidently. The 2100XP+ is nearly 1.8GHz. And I don't know that I have many applications that could take advantage of 64 bit. Where is the performance gain?

Optimized branch predictor, on-die memory controller, SSE2.

 

[arod]

Originally posted by: walla

Current AMD processors run cooler than Intel.

Is that true for both Northwood and Prescott Intel's?

Yes AMD64 is much cooler. AMD has really gone on a "technology" upgrade with AMD64, as a 3000+ really runs at around 2.0 ghz but runs as fast as a p4 3.0 ghs (hence the name) because it does more per clock speed (again the tech factor) which keeps it ultimately cooler.

 

[Connoisseur]

yeah walla, no offense but it seems you haven't been keeping up with news lately. An Athlon 64 3000+ def runs cooler than a similarly configured P4 3.0 ghz. As far as stability,compatibility and so forth, it's a non issue. Unless you plan on doing mostly encoding, the A64 is the way to go. SneakyStuff had the right idea. The system he proposes would be as fast as the P4 in daily use applications and gaming. And it'll save you quite a bit of change.. that's WITH the ram. You could use the extra money to get an A64 3200+ and get even better performance and still save a bit of money. your call.

 

[Sonic587]

Originally posted by: walla
"Get an Athlon 64. "

The operating frequency is only around 1.8GHz evidently. The 2100XP+ is nearly 1.8GHz. And I don't know that I have many applications that could take advantage of 64 bit. Where is the performance gain?

Athlon XP MHz != A64 MHz.

On the A64, 1.8GHz is roughly equal to about a XP @ 2.2-3GHz. This is also in 32-bit mode. Microsoft has yet to get off their lazy butts and release any 64-bit OS. That doesn't play into the performance yet.

What do you plan to use this PC for?

 

[CaptainWafflos]

The Megahertz Myth - the belief that clock frequency (MHz/GHz) is the only true measure of real processor performance. In reality, processor performance should be measured by how quickly an application completes an assigned task.

Hence, processor performance is not only determined by MHz/GHz, but by the combination of frequency and instructions executed per clock cycle (IPC.)

 

[walla]

What do you plan to use this PC for?

Everything from your latest 3d game, word processing, music composition, media player. Not going to overclock anything. I have a geForce 4 4600 (or something like that) but I am finding myself less interested in games these days.

I also may be running engineering simulations on it (circuit/mathematical/engineering) so while speed is not critical, it is certainly appreciated

My last setup was working fine for just about everything. Except MATLAB (math software) was a little sluggish.

I am also planning on starting to use Linux, which I hear takes better advantage of 64 bit than current WinXP 32 bit o/s.


I am more interested in teh Athlon64 the more I read/hear about it. Will the retail stock HS be good enough since I'm not OC'ing?

Thanks mucho.

 

[walla]

The Megahertz Myth - the belief that clock frequency (MHz/GHz) is the only true measure of real processor performance. In reality, processor performance should be measured by how quickly an application completes an assigned task.

Indeed. In fact that sounds a lot like that Hennessy and Patterson would say

Yeah it is ignorant to look just at clock speed. I guess i made a quick assumption that across similar architectures that clock speed is more indicative of relative performance. Of course, this was before I even considered the radical differences between the XP and 64 architectures.

 

[justly]

What everone has been telling you so far is true. The only thing the P4 has over the the Athlon 64 is HT and the Intel name (and possibily a little lead in encoding). I don't think anyone can stop you from going Intel, but for your own sake brush up on some reviews befor you make your decission.

 

[CaptainWafflos]

You'll probably want to use Windows XP if you're looking to play the latest 3D games. A lot of games don't play on anything but Windows.

With $2000, you could really build a killer system.

 

[walla]

You'll probably want to use Windows XP if you're looking to play the latest 3D games. A lot of games don't play on anything but Windows.

I have legal copies of both so I think I am going to dual boot it. Which makes me want to buy another HD but that is perhaps luxury at this point since I could just run them on different partitions. Money is an issue, which is why I would like to use as much of the old system as possible while getting a mid range replacement to take me to 2007 abouts (when I should have a nice cozy engineering job with any luck).

 

[Zebo]

You don't need new ram. That Crucial will hit 200 Mhz aka PC3200 all day long.

As far as processor mobo. Look into a 2.8C for $160 and an ABIT IS7 for $90. It's just as fast as the 875 chipset and much cheaper. One of the best clocker boards ever? Maybe. OC to 3.5 if you so desire.


Alternativly you could get a chaintech VNF3-250 and a a64 3200 for cheaper and it will be a little faster. OC to 3800-4000 levels if you so desire?

Whatever you do, get a combo from mwave.com. They are cheaper than newegg with freebees and same type of service,

 

[walla]

Mwave has the deal for a retail a64 3200+ with the chaintech vnf3-250 for about $260 dollars which is lookin good to me right now.

Does anyone else think that the Crucial PC2700 will be good enough to keep up with this setup? I really don't want to be bottlenecking the system with the RAM...but don't want to go overboard either.

If not, I may as well go back to the a64 2800 and save myself the cash.

And the price of the combo at mwave defintely looks better than the newegg alternative.

 

[ts3433]

The RAM should OC to PC3200 speeds and be fine. If not, then PC2700 shouldn't be starving it for bandwidth too badly.

 

[walla]

The RAM should OC to PC3200 speeds and be fine. If not, then PC2700 shouldn't be starving it for bandwidth too badly.

Oh so this is to say I must overclock the RAM. Is this as easy as a BIOS setting? Cooling considerations? Is this recommended?

 

[Sonic587]

I'd suggest this: Purchase a stick of 512MB 3200 RAM along with your new setup, sell your old 2700 RAM, then use the money you get from the 2X256MB to get another 512MB.

This is of course if you don't want to O/C your current RAM.

 

[ts3433]

It should just be a matter of going into the BIOS. I wouldn't forsee special cooling being necessary for this kind of an overclock. It wouldn't hurt to try it (this should work--Crucial DIMMs are supposed to be very OCable), but as I said, if it doesn't work, you won't seriously cripple an A64 at all.

(edit: Wait, you have 2x256? On second thought, sell that and buy 2x512MB or 1x1GB. The latter is better for S754 overclocking, if you ever get into that.)

 

[Zebo]

Crucial is the most underated ram in the business/ All thier 2700 can run at 3200 since it was the exact same modules they used on both when introduced. *but* you may or may not have losen timmings to 3-3-3@3200 instead of 2700 's advertised 2.5-3-3 (but it could really run 2-2-2)


Basically you just set ram voltage to 2.8 (which is very safe) and set memory setting to 200 and 3-3-3 and tweak down (meaning lower timings) from there using memtest86.