How???

[ulty]

Is the 3200+ worth it? or should I just settle with the 3000+?

 

[Mik3y]

settle with the 3000+. the 3200+ is only 5-10% faster from wut i hear. well, if price isnt too bad for you and you dont want to overclock, then get the 3200+. if you dont mind overclocking, get the 3000+ and get a good cpu cooler and a good motherboard. that way, you can get it to probably 3400+ speeds.

 

[ulty]

Does the 3200+ have more overclocking capabilities?

 

[Mik3y]

the overclocking capabilities are about the same in a 5-15% increase in performance, so yes. you can overclock a 3200+ further then u can with a 3000+, so if you dont mind overclocking either way, then get the 3200+.

 

[dennisjai215]

WTF did you fellas read what he said?
he multitasks llike hell "atm i only have 9" ONLY he said means hes doing alot more so why would you guys recommend a64.. if he mutlitask and games he would lose alot of performance than just a regular a64 3000+ vs a P4 3.0C

Originally posted by: ulty
Alright, final question...

I plan on doing:

web design
graphics
gaming
LOTS of multitasking (I normaly have quite a few windows open, atm I only have 9)

Would an AMD 64 3000+ be better than an Intel 3.2C GHz? or should I go to AMD 64 3200+?

Thanks for this help so far, you guys/gals are great.


On an AMD 64 would everything load 'with the snap of the finger' or 'before you click on it'

Basically asking will this be FAST

 

[Mik3y]

good point. i wasnt thinking about gaming AND the other things together. but ya, all i can say is that i still would get the athlon 64 myself, but he might have better use with the pentium. BUT, it all depends on what he keeps open. if its apps and programs, then the pentium will do better. if its just brower windows, then athlon 64 is fine.

 

[Regs]

The problem with that point is on a Desk Top, the performance increase of HT is non existent. The only applications that are really developed enough to include the benefits of HT are on workstations. The reason is because the CPU cannot process the threads of data sent to it all at once. There is no parellism. It pretty much tells one thread to wait while it finishes the other. If he ran a game with other tasks behind it, hes CPU utilization will still be 100%. This is because the game thinks all available memory addresses is for itself and itself only do to the fact that the one (or more than one logical CPU) still shares off the single memory bus. You can add 100 threads to a 3.0C for all I care, but the CPU utilization will still be maxed out on the game.

I think you got his post wrong. I too multi task and even more relative to his post, I also web design. So the only thing that really can improve multitasking in his position is to get more ram. I switch through photoshop, 3 web browsers, and editors like a breeze with my A64.

 

[ulty]

Thanks for the insights! AMD seems to be owning it up!