Looking to purchase a new gaming system

[Chiefnoalittle]

Hello , I am looking to purchase a new system but am unsure which (AMD or Intel) I've been told that the AMD system is a better choice but I cant see for the life of me why ,for one thing the AMD Xp 3200 does not clock at 3200 hrz it's around 2400hrz or so , is this true ? where as the Intel 3200 clocks at just that 3200hrz and the fastest FSB for the AMD is 400 where as the Intel is at 800. If all this is true how can a what seems to be a slower system be a better choice? Could it be because of price or maybe the AMD system is built solely for gaming .hmm can someone explain to me why this is ( in non-tech terms ) i know just a little more then the average computer person.
Maybe someone could suggest a great gaming system for me I am looking for a CPU, MOBO and memory.what combination would be a great choice for gaming. now I'm not really into OC'ing much especially when it starts getting into special hardware for cooling the CPU down. Any help would be very much appreciated.
I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas. Mike



Intel 2ghrz
Abit TH7-II Raid
1gig RDRAM
GeForce 4 Ti 4600
Audigy 2 zs
XP Pro (up to date)
all drivers up to date

 

[robcy]

Lets say you can dump 1 five gallon bucket of water every minute, you are an AMD chip. Now, if you can dump 5 one gallon buckets every minute you are an intel chip. Intel and AMD chips have different architectures. The AMD chips do more work per cycle thus they have slower (mhz wise) clocks. Intel CPU's do less work per cycle, but make up for this by being faster (mhz wise). AMD PR rates its chips because most consumers see the clock speed as the be all of a chip. In general guidelines a 3200+ (2200mhz) AMD chip is roughtly as fast as a 3200mhz P4. There are exceptions to this rule. When Intel went with the 200fsb that made its chips more efficient, and the C type P4 chips are a little faster than the AMD PR rated equivalents. Note that other parts of a system play important roles, and the feel like difference between them is really not noticeable, and can be more than made up with other higher performance parts. We geeks tend to pick sides in the AMD vs. Intel no mans land, but really if you are building your own system go with what you feel gives the best performance/price ratio for you. I of course am just a little bias .

 

[jdogg707]

The Intel chip basically has a lot more work to do in order to process information, due to the way it was built. It has a 20 Stage Pipeline where data can get lost and have to be retrieved, and the time it takes to get to its destination is a lot longer...this is why an Intel Pentium 4 chip clocked at the same speed as an Athlon chip will be beaten very badly, because the Athlon does not have that long pipeline or the latency issues that it causes. Why Intel implemented the longer pipeline is because it allows for them to ramp up the speed of their processors much further than AMD can. Intel also needs more Memory Bandwidth and FSB speed, to help makeup for the latency issues already discussed, because the faster those things operate, the less of an impact the latency has on system performance. Now, as far as a good gaming setup, you could go with something like this:

AMD Athlon64 3000+ Retail (Three Year Warranty and Heatsink/Fan Combo Included)
Asus K8V Deluxe motherboard
1GB Corsair XMS or Kingston Hyper X PC3200 DDR RAM

The above setup will give you great performance in games, a little bit more future upgradeability than an Intel setup, and a great gaming machine!

 

[CJP]

The way I understand it is that although the Athlon chips (XP and 64) have a lower clock speed and front side bus than the P4, they do more work per cpu clock than the P4. So in reality a 2.0ghz Athlon does the same (or more) work than a 3.2ghz P4. It has something to do with the length of the cpu pipeline I think though I don't fully understand that part of it (maybe someone else would chime in on that).

Also, don't forget that an Athon 64 will give you 64 bit performance so it's a bit more futureproof.

I'm going to be building myself a gaming system this summer as well and my plan is to look over recomended systems on sites like Sharky Extreme (they regularly suggest Enthusiast, Performance, and Budget rigs) and choose from that. I can't be bothered reading all the reviews on every component. All the components you need are listed and critiqued there.

 

[Matthias99]

Well, the "Mhz. vs. work done" thing seems to have been beaten to death already, so I'll try to throw my two cents in on gaming performance.

Intel chips clock very high, but because of the long pipelines discussed above, they're best suited for applications that involve lots of repetitive number-crunching. This means games are just not their strong suit. This makes them significantly more expensive than AMD chips in terms of gaming performance.

If you're on a budget, I'd suggest something like:

Athlon XP "Barton" 2500+ (cheap, pretty fast, overclocks very easily to 3200+ speeds)
An NForce2 Ultra 400Mhz motherboard (many choices; ranges from cheap to moderately expensive depending on features)
2x 256MB of PC3200 (400Mhz) DDR RAM (Mushkin, Crucial, Kingston, Buffalo, Geil are recommended)
RADEON 9600Pro (hard to beat on a budget; should have enough DX9 performance for HL2)

You can probably get all of that for under $500.

If you've got more cash, you might want to look more at the following:

AMD Athlon64 3000+ (very strong 32-bit performance at a decent price, plus 64-bit compatibility for later)
An NForce3 or KT800 motherboard (not too many choices right now)
1024MB of PC3200 DDR RAM
ATI RADEON 9800Pro (best card on the market, as far as I'm concerned)

This would be more like $1000 or so, but would be a killer gaming rig.

 

[Chiefnoalittle]

WOW thanks for the replies , you all had very similar answers ,I had no idea that there were different architectures involved between the two ,but since all of you had the same responce it must be a no brainer. as for the the new system to get you guys have been exactaly what i was loking for. as far as the Video Card I may stick with what i have right now (GeForce 4 Ti 4600) i dont think i want to spend $500 for not that much of an increase in video performance unless you guys think that there would be a great deal of performance increase.what are your thoughts
Also what else is the difference between the AMD 64 bit processor and the regular XP other then 64 bit

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Chiefnoalittle
WOW thanks for the replies , you all had very similar answers ,I had no idea that there were different architectures involved between the two ,but since all of you had the same responce it must be a no brainer. as for the the new system to get you guys have been exactaly what i was loking for. as far as the Video Card I may stick with what i have right now (GeForce 4 Ti 4600) i dont think i want to spend $500 for not that much of an increase in video performance unless you guys think that there would be a great deal of performance increase.what are your thoughts
Also what else is the difference between the AMD 64 bit processor and the regular XP other then 64 bit

Upgradeability. The XP line are almost out of speed (can't make them much faster), but the Athlon64 is just getting started. And if you keep your current video card (not that bad, wait until it doesn't work well any more for you), then the 3000/mobo/memory/hsf is only about $500 (if you have a case and drives). And your 4600 would work faster with that new CPU then it does now.

 

[jdogg707]

If you playu newer games, you might want to look at something like an ATI Radeon 9600 Pro, around $150.00, but you should see a nice increase in performance on newer games over your Ti4600, especially with the A64 Combo. The A64 is going to be a lot faster than the current AXP, due to an onchip Memory controller, SSE2 Implementation, among other things. I think that an A64 3000+ Combo, like I showed you in my earlier post, would be a great way to have an awesome gaming rig., throw in a 9600 Pro and you're all set!

 

[CJP]

Originally posted by: Chiefnoalittle i dont think i want to spend $500 for not that much of an increase in video performance unless you guys think that there would be a great deal of performance increase.what are your thoughts Also what else is the difference between the AMD 64 bit processor and the regular XP other then 64 bit

If you are at all considering a high end video card it might be worth it to wait a couple of months. The next generation of ATI and Nvidia cards are coming out soon and should be significantly faster than even the 9800XT.

One of the differences in the AMD 64 bit processor is an on chip memory controller that is supposed to be faster. Also the Athlon FX and Athlon 64 3200+ have extra cache memory. The Athlon 64 3000+ has just 512mb cache but is still a very good chip.

 

[Budmantom]

Your GF4 Ti4600 is a great card, but if your interested in great IQ upgrade to a 9700NP-9800XT. In most games you wont see much of a difference till you crank up the AA/AF and it's something that is hard to explain till you see it for yourself.

I didn't think too much of ATI till I got my 1st ATI card when AA/AF is turned off the fps are about the same but when you crank them ALL the way up the Nvidia card will be crawling and the ATI will be flexing it's muscle.

The best and easiest way to upgrade your system(for gaming) is not cpu/mobo/memory it's your videocard.

Tom

 

[Grminalac]

Well you want a new gaming machine right?

That means its best that you purchase what will allow you to play games the best. Yeah thats a stupid thing to say but let me elaborate. For the most part framerate is dependant on what type of video card you purchase, in other words you would see similar performance playing Battlefield 1942 on a computer running a P43200 an AMD 64FX or a AMD Barton 2500+ if they were all using that Geforce 4600ti.

So in your case i would recommend buying a less expensive processor. A AMD Barton 2500+ for instance, pair it with a decent nvidia chipset motherboard supporting 400DDR and then add 1 Gb of 3200 speed memory. You could overclock it easily if you wanted, but the point is you don't need to.

You could use the money you saved on the processor to invest in something that would make a huge difference in gaming: a better video card, a larger monitor, or even add a second hard drive and run a raid setup.
Take care

 

[Pudgygiant]

Yep. I can play steam on the highest resolution with my ti4600, while I was playing it on the lowest (playable), 640x480, with my gf256 ddr.

And a larger monitor won't do much if you're playing at a low resolution. That should be one of the LAST (performance-wise) upgrades you take. A videocard should be at the top of your list, and the more RAM the better these days. My sister's 128mb Dell crawls even just browsing / AIM. This may be due to the fact that it's a dell too. It's a celeron 2.2ghz, which should at LEAST perform with my tbird 1.1 but I blow by her in nearly everything (not including games, 3d stuff, whatnot. she's not a gamer). I even get a higher bench on dnet, which baffles me...

 

[Jeff7181]

Don't get a 9600 Pro to replace your Ti4600... half the time you'll see a performance increase, and half the time you'll see a decrease, so just stick with what you got until you're ready to upgrade to something designed to run tomorrow's games, not something that will maybe kinda sorta run them at an ok rate if you turn down IQ.

Socket 754 will be around a while, but it's potential will be limited by single channel RAM, which will only be more apparent as clock speeds increase and more memory bandwidth isn't available. I don't think AMD ever intends to put a dual channel memory controller in the 754 pin variety of the A64. Socket 940 isn't a bad choice, cause I believe Opterons will continue to be made as 940 pin CPU's, so if an FX51 doesn't cut it for you in a year, you may be able to upgrade to a 3 Ghz Opteron if all FX processors are switched over to socket 939.

 

[Chiefnoalittle]

Well this is what i came up with i chose RETAIL for all items , now for the memory there were dozens to choose from so i decided to go toward the least inexpensive PC3200 (DDR400 200mhrz) . let me know what you guys think.

http://secure.newegg.com/app/shoppingcart.asp?submit=view

 

[Chiefnoalittle]

Incase the website does not work here it is in plain text.
________________________________________________
Memory (System Memory)

Kingston 184 Pin 512MB DDR PC-3200 - Retail
Specification
Manufacturer: Kingston
Speed: DDR400(PC3200)
Type: 184 Pin DDR SDRAM
Error Checking: Non-ECC
Registered/Unbuffered: Unbuffered
Cas Latency: 3-3-3
Support Voltage: 2.6V
Bandwidth: 3.2GB/s
Organization: 64M x 64 -Bit
Warranty: Lifetime more info>
N82E16820141424 $78.00
$156.00
___________________________
Motherboards - AMD

SOYO NVIDIA nForce3 150 Chipset Motherboard for AMD Socket 754 CPU, Model "SY-CK8 DRAGON Plus" -RETAIL
Specifications:
Supported CPU: Socket 754 AMD Athlon64 Processors
Chipset: NVIDIA nForce3 150
FSB: 400/800MHz
RAM: 3x DIMM support DDR400/333/266 Max 2GB
IDE: 3x UltraDMA 66/100/133 up to 6 Devices
Slots: 1x AGP 8X, 6x PCI
Ports: 2xPS2,1xLPT,1xCOM,6xUSB2.0(Rear 4),1xLAN,Audio Ports
Onboard Audio: CMI9739 6-Channels Audio
Onboard LAN: 10/100Mbps Fast Ethernet
Onboard SATA/RAID: 2x Serial ATA, RAID 0/1
Form Factor: ATX more info>
N82E16813139135 $133.00
$133.00
______________________________________
Processors

AMD Athlon 64 3000+, 512KB L2 Cache 64-bit Processor - Retail
Specification
Model: AMD Athlon 64 3000+
Core: ClawHammer
Operating Frequency: 2GHz
FSB: Integrated into Chip
Cache: L1/64K+64K; L2/512KB
Voltage: 1.5V
Process: 0.13Micron
Socket: Socket 754
Multimedia Instruction: MMX, SSE, SSE2, 3DNOW!, 3DNOW!+
Packaging: Retail Box (Heatsink and Fan included) more info>

 

[Markfw]

The only possible problem is the memory. You might want a little higher quality memory. After previous problems with memory, I now make sure I have "headroom" and spend the extra money. I got for my Athlon3000 some PC3500 Kingston Hyperx C2, and it works great.

 

[Chiefnoalittle]

How is this ?



Qty 2

Memory (System Memory)
Year End Blowout Sale
Kingston HyperX Series 184 Pin 512MB DDR PC-3500
Specification
Manufacturer: Kingston
Speed: DDR433(PC3500)
Type: 184 Pin DDR SDRAM
Error Checking: Non-ECC
Registered/Unbuffered: Unbuffered
Cas Latency: 2-3-3-7-1T
Support Voltage: 2.6V
Bandwidth: 3.5GB/s
Organization: 64M x 64 -Bit
Warranty: Lifetime more info>
N82E16820144102 $116.00

 

[Markfw]

Thats exactly what I got (and I got it since NFS4 had so much good luck with it on the same CPU)

BTW, for $4 more you could get an ASUS K8V (the one I have) and I love it, but if you like Nforce boards better, whatever, your choice. Oh, and cpu cooling, I got a Thermaltake Silent Boost K8 for $27.99 and about $6 shipping.

 

[Bovinicus]

The performance of a CPU is not determined by its clockspeed alone, which is measured in Hz. Performance is equal to (clockspeed x IPC). IPC is the number of instructions that a CPU can perform per clockcycle. AMD's CPU's perform more insturctions per clock cycle than Intel's P4s but operate at lower clockspeeds. That is why they use performance ratings (2800+, 3200+, etc.)

AMD CPUs are well known for being a better deal in terms of price/performance. Some applications do benefit heavily from Intel's P4 architecture, but games and general usage applications are executed very well with AMD's processors.

If you're looking for top of the line performance at a reasonable price, go with the Athlon 64 3000+ with 512K cache. It's a socket 754 processor. For $200, you are going to beat out the 3.2GHz P4 in many applications and give it the scare of its life in others. Media encoding is still dominated by the P4, but the A64 has improved upon the XP's performance greatly.