PIII or Atlon for first build

STB

Junior Member
Nov 14, 2000
15
0
0
I'm working on building my first pc and have a few questions. I have planned on using a Asus CUSL2 with PIII 1 gig. I don't plan on having it built until later next month so I can wait for newer hardware to be released. Which brings me to my questions. For a first time builder is it better to go with Intel or AMD? I will be using a Geforce2 card and have heard that Athlons have a few bugs working together with this card, this is just what I have heard. I like the idea of DDR memory and the lower prices of the AMD processors but worry that if there are some bugs that it will make my first build my last. Am I just worried for nothing and a Athlon would be fine for a first build or should I stick with Intel?

And who makes, or is in the process of making a MB for a Athlon 1 gig and up that supports DDR memory and Ultra ATA 100 HD? And are Athlons as easy to overclock as a Intel with a CUSL2? Thanks.
 

Packet

Senior member
Apr 24, 2000
557
0
0
imo - I think you should go with Intel if its your first build. Alot less of a chance of you running into any bugs or hassels dealing with VIA drivers or AGP problems.
 

MassMhz

Senior member
Nov 25, 2000
219
0
0
The Athlon is easier to overclock and will run circles around the P3.Be sure to get an Abit KT7 mobo.I have had CUSL2 with P3 750 o/c to 900 and was not impressed.I've also tried the MSI pro 2 a mobo with Athlon,it was a great board although not as good a performer as the KT7.There are good choices out there for Intel users in business related computing,but for a home PC, AMD is my choice.
 

Packet

Senior member
Apr 24, 2000
557
0
0
Just curious on how you figure that athlons are easier to overclock?

True PIII's have a multiplyer lock if thats what you are refering too, but I don't think that makes it harder to overclock, it just takes a different method. Not to mention many boards equiped with SoftBios which is plenty easy for me.

In my situation, I had a much harder time overclocking my brothers K7-700 to 800 than my P3-600 to 800. I had to buy a goldfinger and ripp of the casing, etc ,etc. Compaired to going into my bios and changing 2-3 settings.
 

dcdomain

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2000
5,158
0
71
I just finished building or more importantly debugging my first built computer. If you have the time, go with the AMD, it'll be cheaper and of better if not equal performance. But if you don't have the time, go with the Intel, less debugging. I've had to format Win2K three times in less than 12 days, but it wasn't really all AMD's fault. More associated with Microsoft. But I did have to waste some time experimenting with the Via drivers...
 

MassMhz

Senior member
Nov 25, 2000
219
0
0
I was refering to the multiplyer,Because if your processor will not reach high enough FSB you cannot get to the 1/4 PCI divisor and achieve acceptable PCI/AGP bus.I know Athlons won't go high in FSB with the KT133,but the multiplyer allows gains without pushing these bus speeds.Some people don't care about this and some do.It is all still a matter of preference,but Athlon is faster,cheaper,just as reliable.The 1 gig out of the box on KT7 ran a SETI WU in 1/3 the time my P3 at 940mhz on Asus CUSL2.I'm now under 4 hrs with no o/c!
 

Packet

Senior member
Apr 24, 2000
557
0
0
True, if you do not hit 133mhz the 1/4 divider will not give you 33mhz PCI and 66mhz AGP..

but as far as AGP goes you can keep it on 2/3 in the meantime and overclock the AGP bus, and I have yet to see an Intel coppermine based chip that will not hit 133 fsb. That does not mean they do not exist, but its not very common at all. Not to mention that overclocking via FSB not only increases CPU performance, but Chipset speed as well. Many benchmarks have shown a significant increase in going from 100fsb to 133.

As far as AMD being faster, it no doubt depends on what model you are talking about. The athlon classics are said to be a tad slower than coppermines.

All in all, from my experiments with both.. (having built 5-6 each processor) I would recommend intel for a first time builder because if its your first time, you want it to be an easy smooth ride. When you are building systems regularly (or semi regularly) running into a problem is no big deal because your experiance will hopefully lead you through to fixing it. And in my experiance I have only had two problems building an intel system, and countless building AMD. Most of them were due to VIA drivers, but not all of them were.
 

Shu8

Senior member
Nov 28, 2000
278
0
0
in my experience, i built my first computer a few weeks ago with an athlon. it was pretty easy for me, but unfortunately my friend dcdomain had problems building his rig [similar to mine]. only thing that i had to do extra was get a driver for my ata/100 on my mobo. i have a geforce 2 and i've never heard anyone have problems w/ it that have athlon + geforce2. amd will definetely save you a load of money. ddr won't come for several months so if you want to wait go ahead. if you want it sooner, go w/ 256mb of ram because of price of ram is so cheap. it's predicted to go up again soon.
 

MassMhz

Senior member
Nov 25, 2000
219
0
0
To stay on a level Field,you can only compare T-birds to Coppermines and Classic to SECC2,because of design.And no doubt more FSB gives better bandwidth /memory scores,so i guess we are pretty much in agreement.Though i have seen many Coppermines that wont go 133 FSB even some 700 CcO won't.
 

Instigator

Senior member
Mar 31, 2000
375
0
0
STB,
I'm going to have to go with Packet on this one. If it is a first time build I'd go with Intel. They are easier to overclock for someone new to overclocking (i.e. you don't have to jack around with gold fingers or connecting L1 bridges like on the AMD processors). The ASUS CUV4X and CUSL2 boards are excellent motherboards. They are very stable boards and have soft menu that you can use to adjust the FSB for overclocking. I've built many systems both AMD and Intel. Generally when I build a machine for someone I don't know I build an Intel system, because they are less of a hassle to put together. To this day, I have not had 1 person call me on the Intel build machines, which means less of a headache for me. I personally have an AMD Athlon 500@700 Classic. It's very fast in Win 98, because of the 128k L1 cache and the 512k L2 cache. I only build AMD systems for me and my close friends, because AMD is a great system once it is built. Go with Intel for your first build. An Intel PIII 1ghz machine is a very fast setup. Also, here are a couple of tips, if you don't already know this. One, always buy good memory like Crucial, Mushkin, Micron, etc. Two, always buy a good power supply. I recommended at least a 300 watt power supply. Three, if you are getting the PIII 1ghz get the retail box. The Intel heat sink and fan are very good and you get a 3 year warranty. Anandtech gave the Intel heat sink and fan a very good rating. Good luck.
 

jpprod

Platinum Member
Nov 18, 1999
2,373
0
0
If you're aiming for P3 1GHz's price range you can safely forget about overclocking. 1.2GHz Athlon Tbird with a stable motherboard like MSI K7Tpro2A is the way to go. 1.2GHz Tbird is much cheaper than 1GHz P3 and significantly faster even if not overclocked. With a quality motherboard for the new system, Intel- or AMD-based alike, it's going to be easy to set up, stable and trouble free.
 

STB

Junior Member
Nov 14, 2000
15
0
0
Thanks for all the info and I'll look into all the hardware that was mentioned. Thanks again :)
 

amdskip

Lifer
Jan 6, 2001
22,530
13
81
Athlon for your first build because thats what I did. I taught myself how to do it without any outside help except for studying all the neato computer forums:)
 

Sir Fredrick

Guest
Oct 14, 1999
4,375
0
0
If you are experienced with adding your own computer hardware and troubleshooting computers (i.e. if several other people consider you to be their computer GURU), then building your own system should be a snap, no matter what processor you use. What motherboard you use may make a bigger difference.

I personally am a fan of Athlon processors, though I have a Dual PIII setup myself. I have played with several differnt motherboard brands and I have found ASUS boards to be the best all around. Stay away from Abit boards, they have a high failure rate. If you install Win2k (highly recommended), you won't have too many problems with VIA drivers and getting all the motherboard stuff to work. Windows 95 isn't too bad but as it is older, it is a little bit more of a hasstle.
 

dmw16

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 2000
7,608
0
0
Well, AMDs are great, but tricky. I think, for your first system, I'd get an intel, save yourself some headaches. Either way, I'd say go with an Asus board, I love them. The A7V is great after you get everything working. The MSI is a good way to go too. As for PIII boards, same, go with asus. Good luck.
-doug