Is my computer obsolete?

[zveruga]

Hi All,

I was quite proud of myself about 10 months ago, when I upgraded my system mobo to Asus A7A and an Athlon 900Mhz chip with 128 megs DDR. I kept my GeForce MX 32MSDRAM from before. Frankly this system does the job for me -- light gaming, programming, web surfing. But I checked out the prices for systems today, and noticed how low they have fallen! I also noticed scary Intel clock speeds of over 2ghz. So i have questions:

2) In terms of functionality what is the "bottleneck" in my setup? Should I upgrade my CPU, my Video card or my mobo?
3) In relation to #2 -- is there anything my computer wouldnt perform well on? I mean in actuality, can i buy software today that will not run comfortably on it? When should I worry about obsolescence?


####Questions already answered:
####1) Is AMD dead? Will they be coming out with faster processors than 1.4Ghz? Or am I better off trading in my AMD board for an intel one while I can still get some money for it?


thanks very much!

-- zveruga

 

[jcmkk]

AMD is not even close to dead. The Athlon XP 2000+ and the new P4 2.2GHz are about on par with each other. The only difference between the two is the fact that to get the most out of the P4, you have to get a motherboard based off the ancient i850 chipset from Intel, and the P4 is much more expensive.

 

[zveruga]

Sorry about the 1.4 Athlon thing, I knew XP was out -- was atypo. Is XP actually a new chip, or just a higher clocked Athlon? In other words is performance gap between Athlon 1.4 and XP 1.5 much different from Athlon 1.3 and 1.4? Also will my mobo support XP? Thanks.

jcm -- Yes, id rather stick with AMD... unless there are compelling reasons to switch.


So what about my obsolescence question?

 

[BeauJangles]

An XP is a turbocharged Athlon basically, it uses better heat dissapation and can scale higher then the Athlon, but there are no really new architectural designs. The Throughobreds should be out by the summer which will feature .13 micron process (runs cooler, can scale higher) and by Q4 2002 the ClawHammer, the succesor to the Athlon will be out.

 

[zveruga]

Main Question Edit bump

 

[ScrapSilicon]

<< was quite proud of myself about 10 months ago, when I upgraded my system mobo to Asus A7A and an Athlon 900Mhz chip with 128 megs DDR. I kept my GeForce MX 32MSDRAM from before. Frankly this system does the job for me -- light gaming, programming, web surfing. >>

you are fine with your current setup for what you are doing but if you can setup someone with your current machine and upgrade to newer and faster for not much more out of the pocket than say about $200 to $300 then why not upgrade?

 

[oldfart]

It depends. Are we talking "normal population" obsolete, or "Anandtech Geek" obsolete? If its the former, your system is better than what the average person has. If its the latter, you are way behind.

But to be serious,


<< Frankly this system does the job for me >>


I think you answered your own question. If it does what you need it to, don't sweat it. Or, you can upgrade to the latest and greatest and be obsolete again in another 10 months.

 

[Daovonnaex]

The bottlenecks are the CPU, memory and video card--but only if you're doing graphics intensive apps, memory intensive apps, or processor intensive apps (gaming stresses all of the above).

 

[Insane3D]

"An XP is a turbocharged Athlon basically, it uses better heat dissapation and can scale higher then the Athlon, but there are no really new architectural designs. "

Wrong. They made the following improvements:


- Full support for Intel's SSE instructions
- An improved hardware data prefetch mechanism
- Enhancements to the Athlon's Translation Look-aside Buffers
- Lower power consumption & on-die thermal diode

 

[zveruga]

Hey guys thanks for all your suggestions. I wont sweat it. Considering that XP is a better chip, i might consider putting it into my MOBO, but i am scared i wont be able to do it (Getting the fan on top of my current processor took a LOT of muscle, a really clumsy architecture if you ask me!!!)

ok, enough b*tching from me, I will save my wrath for Samsung tech support (see my other post for more info).

-- zveruga

 

[staticfly]

nope.. i wouldn't do that if i were you.

your going to need a 266hmz fsb if you want an XP

 

[zveruga]

with all due respect, my mobo supports 266FSB It was the only one that did so at the time of purchase.

 

[Geekbabe]

<< with all due respect, my mobo supports 266FSB It was the only one that did so at the time of purchase. >>




I tell my customers that they need to upgrade really only when they are finding that their computer is performing sluggishly with new software that they've decided to install, 900 mhz is perfectly fine, in fact the only suggestion I would make based on what you've said here is to increase your ram to 256mb.

 

[Schola]

If you think that your system is out of date then What the heck is mine... complete trash

Athlon 700 w/ G400

 

[Insidious]

I don't think you are anywhere close to obsolete.

If you are feeling the urge to splurge, maybe a video card.. (best bang for the buck upgrade from where you are now.....IMO)

 

[amgkid]

As long as you don't konw how fast a 2Ghz feels, you won't miss it =) I have a duron 800 and i run lots of apps like DV editors and photoshop/illustrator and everything runs fine. sure, when i render a video it takes a while but you do that when you're not at your comp anyway. 2ghz is really overkill unless you're a hardcore gamer or need the speed to be that immediate. 900mhz is not sluggish by most people's standards.

 

[RanDum72]

I second the suggestion to increase his RAM to at least 256mb.

 

[Goosemaster]

I agree..


Last Fall when my Asus 700mhz PIII system gave out(home built) ..actually it went out in flames ...literally....killed the mobo vid card...etc.


Anyways, I am running on the system in my signiture, "Fat Tony," and I can only tell the difference in WindowsXP and other new Programs. WIndows 2000 preformance remains static..until I upgraded.
In games, however, the difference is immense with the addition of the XP cpu, and the radeon which replaced a Diamond stealth s540extreme....an "extremely" crappy vid card. I probably get twice the framrate now, and many games that would not play are spectacular.

Check these titles out for yourself:

-Return to Castle WOlfenstein
-Medal of Honor Allied Assault
-Max Payne
-MDK2
-Hitman

Anyways, if you aren't going to be doing any serious gameplay at resolutions of 800x600 or 1024x768 or above, and aren't partaking in Video editing or professional CAD/CAM/Photoshop/Rendersing activites...I recommend you do this...

...
Get more RAM...


EDITED FOR: I'll get back to you...

*still thinking of a reason that he can come up with to hide the ironic fact that he is an idiot when it comes to typing but is a computer whiz*

 

[Elledan]

Obsolete? As long as this system works for what you want to do with it, don't upgrade (although adding some RAM never hurts ).

Just for reference, I'm running a Duron 600, 384 MB RAM, 50 GB HD space && Voodoo III 3000.

 

[zveruga]

Thanks for the advice! I think ill stick to my current system then, add another stick of ram, and use the rest of the cash on a bigger HD to store my recreational materials

 

[jonmcc33]

"An XP is a turbocharged Athlon basically, it uses better heat dissapation and can scale higher then the Athlon, but there are no really new architectural designs. The Throughobreds should be out by the summer which will feature .13 micron process (runs cooler, can scale higher) and by Q4 2002 the ClawHammer, the succesor to the Athlon will be out."

The Athlon XP 2000+ has reached Thunderbird heat levels. The limit of the Athlon XP is nearly reached. I can't wait for the Thoroughbred as well, .13 micron and 80mm² die (compared to the Athlon XP Palomino's 129mm² die). Less surface area and much, much cooler.