Right now I have a POS computer, 1.4ghz with a geforce2 gts and 256megs of generic pc 133 and I am planning on doing a full upgrade. For right now I can live with my computer, The only comp games I am really intrerested in are War Craft 3 and Counter Strike and my 1.4 can power through the toughest of webpages. But as we all know the next generation of games are right around the corner and I am going to need a lot more computing power. I am not sure when the Athlon 64 is coming out but i am sure it is not before Oct 1st (Half Life 2). I guess my question is how good are the new Athlon 64s going to be, how important is 64 processing going to be and should i wait to upgrade?
Is it worth just waiting for the Athlon 64?
- Thread starter milldakill
- Start date
Jeff7181
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2002
- 18,368
- 11
- 81
I believe the Athlon-64 release date has been moved up to September 17th... someone correct me if you know for sure...
My advice would be to wait for these new games, as well as the new video card GPU's from nVidia and ATI, see what the new games require, and how current hardware will run them. Then make your decision based on that when the time comes. If you wanted a little more speed in your games right now, you could pick up somethin cheap like a GeForce4 Ti4200 64 MB card for around $70, and Counter-Strike would really fly.
*EDIT* Another 256 MB of PC133 RAm wouldn't hurt either. Check the For Sale/For Trade Forums here, you can probably get a stick for $15 shipped.
My advice would be to wait for these new games, as well as the new video card GPU's from nVidia and ATI, see what the new games require, and how current hardware will run them. Then make your decision based on that when the time comes. If you wanted a little more speed in your games right now, you could pick up somethin cheap like a GeForce4 Ti4200 64 MB card for around $70, and Counter-Strike would really fly.
*EDIT* Another 256 MB of PC133 RAm wouldn't hurt either. Check the For Sale/For Trade Forums here, you can probably get a stick for $15 shipped.
yeah.....Athlon64 will be launch on September 17th but not sure if it is actual launch or just paper launch
Jeff7181
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2002
- 18,368
- 11
- 81
Consider they moved the launch up, and they're stated that they're stock piling Athlon-64's in preparation for it's launch... I think it's safe to say it won't be a paper launch. I bet they moved it up because they got a better yeild than they expected, so they have more processors ready now than they predicted.
I personally never snap up the new product anyways...If you are not a big upgrader then wait a few months after the A64 release to have better options in mobos, more of the bugs worked out with the mobos, price to come down, and oh yes maybe a higher speed A64 as it begins to ramp up...
The old side note is if you keep waiting for the latest and greatest you will never get anything. I would maybe think about getting a Barton line chip now and wait to see if 64bit support in OSes and games come out quickly to make the A64 shine. With just speed and no 64 bit optimization it is my opinion the A64 with its single channel memory and probable 2-2.2ghz wont be mind blowing fast and likely may just best the 3.2ghz....The price will likely be higher then most amd users are accustomed to...
The old side note is if you keep waiting for the latest and greatest you will never get anything. I would maybe think about getting a Barton line chip now and wait to see if 64bit support in OSes and games come out quickly to make the A64 shine. With just speed and no 64 bit optimization it is my opinion the A64 with its single channel memory and probable 2-2.2ghz wont be mind blowing fast and likely may just best the 3.2ghz....The price will likely be higher then most amd users are accustomed to...
dullard
Elite Member
- May 21, 2001
- 25,934
- 4,525
- 126
I'd say first of all you don't have a POS computer. I kept my 300 MHz 64 MB computer with integrated graphics until recently - and it could STILL play 98% of games out there. Sure I had to turn some settings down - but it got its job done. So for that reason I think you can afford to wait a bit.
However in my opinion, the Athlon 64 initially won't be a great buy. Read this article or a similar one on the 100 series Opteron. It will be very similar to the initial Athlon 64. Yes there will be some minor changes and the top Athlon 64 will likely be released with a 10% faster clock speed than the one in that article. But heck it is the best estimate we have so far of the Athlon 64 performance. Looking at the benchmarks, the 3.2 GHz P4 will dominate over the 3400+ Athlon 64 in everything but games - and in games it will be a toss up. But by the time the Athlon 64 is easilly available a 3.4 GHz Prescot will be available - which will win in everything even games. Then look at the pricing. The top Opteron 144 is being priced at $669. Of course the Athlon 64 will be cheaper than that - but AMD said it will carry a "significant price premium" over the top Athlon XP which currently is at $450. Lets pretend the initial price is in the middle - $550ish. At about the same time the 3.2 GHz P4 will have dropped to the $400 price level. So you have a 3.2 GHz P4 which is cheaper and wins in most tests.
If you won't go with the P4 then look at the Bartons. A 3400+ Athlon 64 won't be much faster than a 3200+ Barton - but will cost a lot more. So again theinitial Athlon 64 isn't a good buy.
Other reasons to maybe wait on the initial Athlon 64s:
1) Some will be 940 pins, some 939 pins, and some will be 754 pins. If you get your hands on a 940 or 939 pin Athlon 64 you won't have any upgrade path.
2) The initial chips always have a few kinks to work out and later revisions always are better - run cooler, overclock more, etc.
3) It will give time for more motherboards to be released and refined - meaning better selection and better prices.
4) Prices should plummet within a few months.
5) 4000+ and 4400+ speeds are rumored to be just around the corner - that is a huge jump over the initial 3400+ released speed.
6) The move to 0.09 micron die size early in 2004 should give AMD lots of room for improvements and possibly price declines. Those are the Athlon 64s I'd look at getting.
7) Most people don't need the abilities of a 64-bit chip now - or even in the next few years. Plus will you even want to buy a 64-bit OS (assuming you use Windows) - if not you will never even use the 64-bit capabilities. Thus going with a 3200+ Barton or P4 won't be any harm in that region.
So can you wait 9 months or so until these improved Athlon 64s are out? If not, I'd just buy a Barton or P4 now.
However in my opinion, the Athlon 64 initially won't be a great buy. Read this article or a similar one on the 100 series Opteron. It will be very similar to the initial Athlon 64. Yes there will be some minor changes and the top Athlon 64 will likely be released with a 10% faster clock speed than the one in that article. But heck it is the best estimate we have so far of the Athlon 64 performance. Looking at the benchmarks, the 3.2 GHz P4 will dominate over the 3400+ Athlon 64 in everything but games - and in games it will be a toss up. But by the time the Athlon 64 is easilly available a 3.4 GHz Prescot will be available - which will win in everything even games. Then look at the pricing. The top Opteron 144 is being priced at $669. Of course the Athlon 64 will be cheaper than that - but AMD said it will carry a "significant price premium" over the top Athlon XP which currently is at $450. Lets pretend the initial price is in the middle - $550ish. At about the same time the 3.2 GHz P4 will have dropped to the $400 price level. So you have a 3.2 GHz P4 which is cheaper and wins in most tests.
If you won't go with the P4 then look at the Bartons. A 3400+ Athlon 64 won't be much faster than a 3200+ Barton - but will cost a lot more. So again theinitial Athlon 64 isn't a good buy.
Other reasons to maybe wait on the initial Athlon 64s:
1) Some will be 940 pins, some 939 pins, and some will be 754 pins. If you get your hands on a 940 or 939 pin Athlon 64 you won't have any upgrade path.
2) The initial chips always have a few kinks to work out and later revisions always are better - run cooler, overclock more, etc.
3) It will give time for more motherboards to be released and refined - meaning better selection and better prices.
4) Prices should plummet within a few months.
5) 4000+ and 4400+ speeds are rumored to be just around the corner - that is a huge jump over the initial 3400+ released speed.
6) The move to 0.09 micron die size early in 2004 should give AMD lots of room for improvements and possibly price declines. Those are the Athlon 64s I'd look at getting.
7) Most people don't need the abilities of a 64-bit chip now - or even in the next few years. Plus will you even want to buy a 64-bit OS (assuming you use Windows) - if not you will never even use the 64-bit capabilities. Thus going with a 3200+ Barton or P4 won't be any harm in that region.
So can you wait 9 months or so until these improved Athlon 64s are out? If not, I'd just buy a Barton or P4 now.
ponyo
Lifer
- Feb 14, 2002
- 19,688
- 2,811
- 126
Initial Athlon 64 will be crap. It will take at least a year for it to mature into something useful like P4. It will be expensive crap.
1700+ Tbred B or 2500+ Barton is best bet on AMD side. With retail 2500+ Barton around $80-90 shipped, I would lean towards that.
Your computer is not POS. Something like Ti4200 would let it run just about any game along with additional 256 meg memory.
1700+ Tbred B or 2500+ Barton is best bet on AMD side. With retail 2500+ Barton around $80-90 shipped, I would lean towards that.
Your computer is not POS. Something like Ti4200 would let it run just about any game along with additional 256 meg memory.
Jeff7181
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2002
- 18,368
- 11
- 81
<--- wonders how people are able to spout off info they pull out of their arse about how the "Athlon-64 3400+" will perform when there's not single peak at them, and no information about how the processors will be named, or what name will correspond to what actual speed.
ponyo
Lifer
- Feb 14, 2002
- 19,688
- 2,811
- 126
Doesn't take a genius to guess how initial Athlon 64 will perform based on early testing infos. Check Overclockers.com or Xbit labs to read about not so hot Athlon 64 benchmarks.
Initial Athlon 64 will be crap and expensive. I stand by my statement. I don't need to wait until release date to call a POS a POS.
Initial Athlon 64 will be crap and expensive. I stand by my statement. I don't need to wait until release date to call a POS a POS.
- Oct 30, 1999
- 11,815
- 104
- 106
Incorrect.
If you get your hands on a Socket 940 Athlon-64, you'll need an expensive Opteron motherboard, so I agree that this isn't such a good idea for Joe Q. Enduser (no offense). Your upgrade path, as far as Athlon-64's go, will be limited because the Socket 940 Athlon-64 will be short lived. Of course, once you have the motherboard, upgrading to an Opteron, which will remain in the Socket 940, later on isn't such a horrible thing.
As for Socket 939, these aren't expected until middle of next year, but really would be the best upgrade path. The extra pins are necessary to support the extra features of the newest Athlon-64's (dual channel memory, et al), but the socket is a larger size in order to reduce motherboard costs (larger footprint means the pins are spaced father apart so boards can be thinner.)
What really sucks is that NONE of these sockets will interchange, so just buy a Pentium 4 and call it a day.
i think it is its like moveing from a psx to a ps2, 64 will be so much than the xp's. unless it turns out like the n64
For a gaming pc? Hell no. Get a P4.
The only people that need 64-bit are scientific/medial computing and maybe 3D animation/CAD users. With 64 bit (I don't know of the AMD but with Itanium) you can run dual processers again, and use more memory than 4GB (up to 16GB right now I believe).
Keep in mind you also need a 64-bit OS like Windows XP 64-bit, which I don't think you can even buy unless you buy a 64-bit system from an OEM like HP, or a MSDN subscription which is $700/year for just the Operating Systems level subscription.... If they do decide to release it for retail it will likely cost $700-1500??
And take a look at the features that WinXP 64-bit does *NOT* support:
(from http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tr...prodtechnol/winxppro/reskit/prka_fea_tfiu.asp )
Digital Media
The following digital media features are not included with Windows XP 64-Bit Edition:
Digital video disc (DVD) video playback
CD Recording
Kodak Imaging Accessory
Windows Media Player
A subset of Windows Media Technologies
DirectMusic®
Microsoft TV Technologies for Windows®
Video mixing renderer (VMR)
NetMeeting®
IEEE 1394 audio
Fax
Subsystems and Protocols
Windows XP 64-Bit Edition does not provide support for a number of older subsystems and transport protocols, including the following:
Microsoft® MS-DOS® subsystem
OS/2 subsystems
16-bit subsystems
Portable Operating System Interface for UNIX (POSIX) subsystem
Legacy transport protocols
Internetwork Packet Exchange/Sequenced Packet Exchange (IPX/SPX) LAN and WAN
AppleTalk Protocol LAN
Services for Macintosh
Data Link Control (DLC) LAN
NetBIOS Enhanced User Interface (NetBEUI) LAN
Service Advertising Protocol (SAP) Agent for Server
Internetwork Packet Exchange (IPX) router
Infrared Data Association (IrDA)
Open Shortest Path First (OSPF)
Network BIOS (NetBIOS) gateway
Mobile Computing
Windows XP 64-Bit Edition does not provide support for features aimed primarily at users of portable computers. The following features are not included:
Hot docking/undocking
PC Card
IrDA
Terminal Services client for Handheld PC
Power Management
System Restore
The System Restore feature is not supported in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition.
Networking and Communications
The following networking and communications features are not included in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition:
Internet Locator Service (ILS)
MSN Internet Access client
Message Queuing (MSMQ) Level 8 Listener
Windows Messenger Service
SharePoint Team Services from Microsoft
Database
The 64-bit versions of these database engines and features are not included in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition; 32-bit versions of Microsoft Database Engine (MSDE) and Jet RED are included.
Microsoft Database Engine (MSDE) 64-Bit
Jet RED 64-Bit
Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC) Oracle provider
MDAC Oracle driver
MDAC Data Access Objects (DAOs)
MDAC Visual FoxPro® Driver
Dynamic Data Exchange (DDE) Share
System Administration
These system administration and management features are not supported in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition:
Winrep (Windows Report Tool)
Security Dynamics Access Control Entry (ACE) Agent
Windows Installer
Fast User Switching
Remote Assistance
File and Settings Transfer Wizard
Windows Product Activation (WPA)
Installation of Recovery Console on the hard disk; Recovery Console can be run from the operating system CD
Search Companion
Speech recognition
The only people that need 64-bit are scientific/medial computing and maybe 3D animation/CAD users. With 64 bit (I don't know of the AMD but with Itanium) you can run dual processers again, and use more memory than 4GB (up to 16GB right now I believe).
Keep in mind you also need a 64-bit OS like Windows XP 64-bit, which I don't think you can even buy unless you buy a 64-bit system from an OEM like HP, or a MSDN subscription which is $700/year for just the Operating Systems level subscription.... If they do decide to release it for retail it will likely cost $700-1500??
And take a look at the features that WinXP 64-bit does *NOT* support:
(from http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tr...prodtechnol/winxppro/reskit/prka_fea_tfiu.asp )
Digital Media
The following digital media features are not included with Windows XP 64-Bit Edition:
Digital video disc (DVD) video playback
CD Recording
Kodak Imaging Accessory
Windows Media Player
A subset of Windows Media Technologies
DirectMusic®
Microsoft TV Technologies for Windows®
Video mixing renderer (VMR)
NetMeeting®
IEEE 1394 audio
Fax
Subsystems and Protocols
Windows XP 64-Bit Edition does not provide support for a number of older subsystems and transport protocols, including the following:
Microsoft® MS-DOS® subsystem
OS/2 subsystems
16-bit subsystems
Portable Operating System Interface for UNIX (POSIX) subsystem
Legacy transport protocols
Internetwork Packet Exchange/Sequenced Packet Exchange (IPX/SPX) LAN and WAN
AppleTalk Protocol LAN
Services for Macintosh
Data Link Control (DLC) LAN
NetBIOS Enhanced User Interface (NetBEUI) LAN
Service Advertising Protocol (SAP) Agent for Server
Internetwork Packet Exchange (IPX) router
Infrared Data Association (IrDA)
Open Shortest Path First (OSPF)
Network BIOS (NetBIOS) gateway
Mobile Computing
Windows XP 64-Bit Edition does not provide support for features aimed primarily at users of portable computers. The following features are not included:
Hot docking/undocking
PC Card
IrDA
Terminal Services client for Handheld PC
Power Management
System Restore
The System Restore feature is not supported in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition.
Networking and Communications
The following networking and communications features are not included in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition:
Internet Locator Service (ILS)
MSN Internet Access client
Message Queuing (MSMQ) Level 8 Listener
Windows Messenger Service
SharePoint Team Services from Microsoft
Database
The 64-bit versions of these database engines and features are not included in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition; 32-bit versions of Microsoft Database Engine (MSDE) and Jet RED are included.
Microsoft Database Engine (MSDE) 64-Bit
Jet RED 64-Bit
Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC) Oracle provider
MDAC Oracle driver
MDAC Data Access Objects (DAOs)
MDAC Visual FoxPro® Driver
Dynamic Data Exchange (DDE) Share
System Administration
These system administration and management features are not supported in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition:
Winrep (Windows Report Tool)
Security Dynamics Access Control Entry (ACE) Agent
Windows Installer
Fast User Switching
Remote Assistance
File and Settings Transfer Wizard
Windows Product Activation (WPA)
Installation of Recovery Console on the hard disk; Recovery Console can be run from the operating system CD
Search Companion
Speech recognition
- Oct 30, 1999
- 11,815
- 104
- 106
Come Q3 next year, an AMD64 processor is all you're going to be able to buy from AMD, and they're not just targeting "scientific/medial computing and maybe 3D animation/CAD users." They EXPECT 32-bit users to use AMD64 product, like the Athlon-64, just like 32-bit users are using Athlon XP's today.
As far as running dual processors, I'm surprised you've never heard of 2-way, 4-way or even 8-way Opteron processors. Albiet, the subject at hand is Athlon-64 and we really don't know if and how those will work in multi-processor systems, but if you "don't know of the AMD" (your words) then why did you even comment?
No offense, but do you live under a rock? Maybe under a bridge. Do you really think that to run an AMD64 CPU you need a 64-bit OS and that you have to have an OEM version of XP 64 for $700 a year to do it? The AMD64 processors do not "need" a 64-bit OS. That's like one of the biggest features of AMD's x86-64 architecture. AMD64 processors run 32-bit OS's and applications with very little handicap because there isn't an emulation overlay. Sure, there's an emulation layer in Windows XP 64 to run 32-bit applications within it, but the handicap isn't nearly what it is to run 32-bit on an Itanium processor.
I've had Opteron 1.4 GHz CPU's perform just as well as 1800+ Athlon MP processors and Pentium 4 2 GHz in several 32-bit applications using Windows XP... the 32-bit version (mainly because I don't have any effective benchmark tools that run under 64-bit SuSE 8.2).
And FYI, you can buy 64-bit OS's outside of the OEM channel and you can even DOWNLOAD some Linux distro's for free!
As far as the cost of XP-64, I highly doubt that it's going to cost "$700-$1500." I don't even see 2003 Server 64 costing that much. AMD is expecting Microsoft to make an OS that will allow current XP users to migrate to a 64-bit version of XP as seamlessly and painlessly as possible. Anything significantly more than what Microsoft is asking for Windows XP would be foolish of Microsoft AND AMD.
As far as the "features" that XP 64 does and does not support... I've got 2003 beta and XP 64 beta and they both have pretty much the same features, or lack of features, that Longhorn has. It's hard to say what an OS is going to have or not have once it's released to the public when the OS is currently still beta.
Umm...actually if you read this article "Opteron gaming performance @x-bit labs" I think your attitude towards the athlon64 gaming performance will change.
It is up to you. Do you overclock, how much money you got, and how much you wanna lay down on a new videocard. I have very few doubts the Athlon64 will perform above the fastest P4 upon its release. In certain benchmarks it will lose to the p4, but in the majority the athlon64 will reign champion
Initial athlon64 motherboards will be about equal to current p4 boards in prices ($200~125) + add $500 for the fastest Athlon64 on release or about $200 for the lower clocked Athlon 64 launch processor.
Add at least $250 for a Radeon 9700 Pro or nvidia equivalent.
This puts you at
165-motherboard (Asus Athlon64 board)
230-processor (Athlon64 3100+?)
235-videocard (Radeon 9700 Pro)
160-Ram (2x512 PC3200 Mushkin Blue)
020-heatsink/fan
-------------------------------
810 - for the above components.
OR if you upgraded NOW this is what you would be looking at:
085-motherboard (Epox 8RDA+ Nforce2)
090-Processor (Athlon 2500+ -Barton'Overclocks to 3200+ speeds)
235-videocard (Radeon 9700 Pro)
160-Ram (2x512 PC3200 Mushkin Blue)
020-heatsink/fan
-------------------------------
590 - for the above components
I hope this is some help. What you might consider doing is purchasing a 9700 Pro (or better) videocard + at least 256MB more ram. See how your performance goes with say half-life2 and then make further upgrade choices.
What 1.4Ghz chip is in your system? You might think of upgrading that first. Trust me, our family 500mhz k6-2+ family computer is in much worse spot than you are in
~Good Luck
-I just made the dive a month ago and bought the above ram, motherboard, and a 1700+ chip. I am very happy with my current system. I have a ti4400 for video.
[edit] walk2: The version of winXP 64-bit you linked to is for itanium only processors. This version of XP 64-bit WILL NOT run on the AMD Athlon64. Microsoft is developing a separate version for the AMD hammer family line of processors that will be as full featured, if not more, than the current 32bit version of windowsXP professional. [/edit]
Ok asshats, don't listen to me. Spend all your money on a 64bit system and 64bit OS that won't even run games as fast as the cheaper 32bit systems. Just don't come crying to me.
and I quote from Microsoft themselves:
"It's not for everyone," Marr said. "Technical workstation users that need advanced memory support and better floating point performance will be well served by Windows XP 64-bit Edition. It provides the highest performance and scalability for those customers that are pushing today's 32-bit capabilities. But we're recommending that most users stay on the 32-bit platform for the foreseeable future."
Doooobee dooobee dooo..
and I quote from Microsoft themselves:
"It's not for everyone," Marr said. "Technical workstation users that need advanced memory support and better floating point performance will be well served by Windows XP 64-bit Edition. It provides the highest performance and scalability for those customers that are pushing today's 32-bit capabilities. But we're recommending that most users stay on the 32-bit platform for the foreseeable future."
Doooobee dooobee dooo..
Ummm.. actually the Opteron beats the P4 by 2% in one of the tests, and the P4 wins out in the other 2. You were sayyyying?
And the Opteron costs how much more?
lol
I know I'm gonna regret posting this...but I'm not gonna let this sit idle.
According to the article here the Opteron 144 1.8GHz is $669 . The cheapest 3.2Ghz P4 is $669.89 according to pricewatch.
Now my point on this matter is the opteron is a server processor. Usually the fastest desktop cpus (athlon and P4) are a few speed grades above their server counterpart: xeon, MP. An example is the fastest xeon available right now is a 3Ghz w/533mhz fsb. The fastest pentium 4 runs at 3.2Ghz on an 800mhz bus.
Following this logic, right now if the Athlon64 were released, the fastest Athlon64 would reign king in the gaming arena outperforming the P4 3.2Ghz.
According to the article here the Opteron 144 1.8GHz is $669 . The cheapest 3.2Ghz P4 is $669.89 according to pricewatch.
Now my point on this matter is the opteron is a server processor. Usually the fastest desktop cpus (athlon and P4) are a few speed grades above their server counterpart: xeon, MP. An example is the fastest xeon available right now is a 3Ghz w/533mhz fsb. The fastest pentium 4 runs at 3.2Ghz on an 800mhz bus.
Following this logic, right now if the Athlon64 were released, the fastest Athlon64 would reign king in the gaming arena outperforming the P4 3.2Ghz.
MDE
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 13,199
- 1
- 81
First of all, it isn't polite to call people asshats... especially when you're wrong. You linked to the Itanium Windows XP...not the x86-64\AMD64 version, and as someone said earlier the AMD64 version will essentially be a port of the regular x86 version of XP Pro.
EDIT: spelling
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter