Right time for a new Athlon64 3000+??

[wakedog102]

Currently, I am working with a P3 1GHz, 384MB RAM, computer I built back in August of 2000. I bought a MSI K8T800 board the other day because they had a $20 rebate on it, and I'm thinking about dropping in an Athlon64 3000+ with a Zalman cooler.

I know DDR2 is coming down the road, as is PCI-X however, I don't think that these technologies are going to take over ASAP. At the same time AMD is coming out with Socket 939 stuff down the road, but their continued support for Socket 754 sounds acceptable, although not as good as intel's cross support for the prescott.

What I'm worried about is the P4's upcoming price drop and their speed relative to the Athlon64 chips. I plan to do mostly web programming, general usage stuff, some gaming, and some media encoding (video editing). I plan to do almost no 3d rendering. I'm not a fan of either company in particular, and could choose either chip to work on. What I like about the Athlon64 is that it's real world performance is on par with the P4 3.0-3.2 chips not overclocked. I would rather have a chip running stock speed that fast then getting a P4 2.6 and overclock it. What I like about the P4 is that it tends to be slightly faster in applications like video editing with hyperthreading enabled, and most current P4C mobo's are capable of supporting the upcoming prescott.

Taking an unbiased approach, what would you recommend? P4 2.6C or 2.8C overclocked a bit, or an Athlon64 3000+ and why? OR, would you not buy right now, and get a prescott or socket939 and why? Please don't use 64bit support as a reason. Let's face it, 64bit home computing is a ways off until it recieves full support from major companies in the form of available software (ie available Microsoft product) (although I do a fair amount of linux work and am planning on messing with mandrake64 if I get the athlon).

 

[DAPUNISHER]

You just bought a A64 board but you're still not certain what or when to buy?

 

[wakedog102]

Yeah, I just remembered I forgot to put the fact that I can still return the board in my post. I got it so that I wouldn't miss the rebate deadline.

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: wakedog102
Yeah, I just remembered I forgot to put the fact that I can still return the board in my post. I got it so that I wouldn't miss the rebate deadline.

Not to turn this into a flame ware but there really isn't "speed relative to the other chips". At stock speed the 3000+ can beat Intel's chips that are at least $100 more expensive then it is. In my mind there really isn't any competition and I see the price drops as Intel is not doing so well with Prescott so they are trying to make current processors go down to the same price level. I see this as good for both companies because now faster processors will be a lot cheaper now that AMD has a major contestant on the market.

-Por

 

[txxxx]

Laptop wise it is- well for me anyway

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Well, since you don't mind eating a few bucks on return shipping, and if you won't pay a 15% restocking fee, and if you use win XP, here's my perspective. Don't wait for all the new standards or you'll never buy because something better is always around the corner. If this will be your only system for doing everything on I'd get the 2.6c for $169.99 from newegg today or wait till the Feb 1st and get the 2.8c when it's about the same price and base your build on that platform. The reason I say that is that HT will be better for multitasking and let you still do something while encoding, the 2.6c overclocks well, it's very strong for encoding and overclocked it's gaming performance will be pretty danged good.

I chose the 3000+ but I have multiple systems so multitasking wasn't a compelling need, wanted it's strong gaming performance, have wanted a Hammer generation CPU for about 2yrs now *wish fulfillment* and like supporting the underdog I may still build myself a P4c system in a couple months though :evil:

 

[Markfw]

I don't have time for a long reply (at work), but at $229, the Athlon 3000+ will beat a P4 3.2C in most things, and is so much cheaper, waiting for the prices on P4 to drop wouldn't matter anyway. Go for it.

 

[wakedog102]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Well, since you don't mind eating a few bucks on return shipping, and if you won't pay a 15% restocking fee, and if you use win XP, here's my perspective. Don't wait for all the new standards or you'll never buy because something better is always around the corner. If this will be your only system for doing everything on I'd get the 2.6c for $169.99 from newegg today or wait till the Feb 1st and get the 2.8c when it's about the same price and base your build on that platform. The reason I say that is that HT will be better for multitasking and let you still do something while encoding, the 2.6c overclocks well, it's very strong for encoding and overclocked it's gaming performance will be pretty danged good.

I chose the 3000+ but I have multiple systems so multitasking wasn't a compelling need, wanted it's strong gaming performance, have wanted a Hammer generation CPU for about 2yrs now *wish fulfillment* and like supporting the underdog I may still build myself a P4c system in a couple months though :evil:

Thanks for the idea... yeah I was stupid and didn't even look into newegg's return policy so I would have to eat the 5-10 buck shipping and 20 bucks (15% on $130) for restocking. Probably makes more sense to just keep it. I looked into media encoding times for the A643000+ vs. the P4 2.6 / 2.8 and there's not really a big difference until you get to the P4 3.0GHz chip which is already out of my price range. A64 3000+ encodes like 85fps whereas the p4 3.0 hits 90 and the 3.2 goes to 100 fps. Also, I don't really like the idea of having a system overclocked so much, so the arguement of getting the 2.6 and overclocking to 3.0 or 3.2 doesn't really hold water with me. If the A64 is much better in everything except video encoding and runs most stuff at stock speeds faster than a p4 3.2 I'll be satisfied. I mean, as long as it is SIGNIFICANTLY faster than my P3 setup and FEELS faster I'll be stoked.

 

[Maddscientist]

The clear choice is the 3000+........If you say you dont want to overclock and enjoy running stock im surprised one of you choices is overclocking a 2.6? 2.8? If you want to look at it that way get the 3000+ and overclock that and now its faster than any Intel you can campare it to.....Puzzled

I did not see your reply above.....Did not refresh the page....Good Choice!

 

[justly]

I can see the point that DAPUNISHER is trying to make, but I'm not convinced that the P4 would be the best solution for your needs without asking a few questions first. So here come a few questions.

1. how well does linux take advantage of hyperthreading (or does linux even recognize it) ?

2. you say you do video editing (encoding) how much of this do you do ? and how much of it can be done in the background (using HT) without you watching ?

3. considering the encoding speed increase you will recieve from either upgrade, over your current "P3 1GHz, 384MB RAM", exactly how important is the speed difference between the P4 and the Athlon 64.

You may also want to consider each CPUs performance in the specific programs you use to determine what is best. Heck, DAPUNISHER may be right but I think it was worth asking these questions to make sure.

I guess I was a bit to slow getting this reply posted, oh well

 

[wakedog102]

Originally posted by: justly
I can see the point that DAPUNISHER is trying to make, but I'm not convinced that the P4 would be the best solution for your needs without asking a few questions first. So here come a few questions.

1. how well does linux take advantage of hyperthreading (or does linux even recognize it) ?

2. you say you do video editing (encoding) how much of this do you do ? and how much of it can be done in the background (using HT) without you watching ?

3. considering the encoding speed increase you will recieve from either upgrade, over your current "P3 1GHz, 384MB RAM", exactly how important is the speed difference between the P4 and the Athlon 64.

You may also want to consider each CPUs performance in the specific programs you use to determine what is best. Heck, DAPUNISHER may be right but I think it was worth asking these questions to make sure.

I guess I was a bit to slow getting this reply posted, oh well

1. I don't know of linux taking advatage of HT much at all.

2. I don't do a ton of video editing (it's not like i'm a working editor), and yes none of it can be done in the 'background' ie when you are doing it, it's the only thing you are doing except for maybe IMing. HT does come into play on rendering though, which can be slow (and is very on my p3). With HT you get like 1 and a quarter effective processors, so you get a significant reduction in render times.

3. Not extremely, which is why i'm asking about the future of the platforms, and the general feel from the community here for either platform.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Yeah, you'll be happy with the 3000+ and given the circumstances surrounding the purchase of the board and your lack of desire to overclock it's the best move IMO as well.

 

[Stealth1024]

No, PCI-X is in server boards now. You probably mean to say PCI Express (Serial PCI) : http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=27&threadid=1230175

 

[wakedog102]

Originally posted by: Stealth1024
No, PCI-X is in server boards now. You probably mean to say PCI Express (Serial PCI) : <a href="http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=27&threadid=1230175">http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=27&threadid=1230175</a>

guess i haven't reached super geek status yet.

 

[Regs]

I say so. The technology is very new on the home Desktop and there is only room for improvement in the future. However, if you get a good stable, performing, and overclocking CPU and motherboard , I don't see a valid enough reason to wait. Socket 939's aren't going to offer much more in performance, but of course, it's to early to tell if that's a true statement.

240 dollars for a 3000 A64 with a retail HSF that can keep it at 45c during load with a 10x220 (2.2 Ghz) overclock is too good to pass down.

In all honesty, it has changed my gaming experience.

 

[nowayout99]

The chip is fine, I bought most of my PC parts already too. I'm waiting for the A64 3000 or 3200 to come down in price one more time. Intel has pending price cuts for Feb 1... AMD may respond, so I am waiting until then.

 

[dartworth]

Originally posted by: Regs
I say so. The technology is very new on the home Desktop and there is only room for improvement in the future. However, if you get a good stable, performing, and overclocking CPU and motherboard , I don't see a valid enough reason to wait. Socket 939's aren't going to offer much more in performance, but of course, it's to early to tell if that's a true statement.

240 dollars for a 3000 A64 with a retail HSF that can keep it at 45c during load with a 10x220 (2.2 Ghz) overclock is too good to pass down.

In all honesty, it has changed my gaming experience.

Regs, what system where you running before your A64 box? I am just curious to what you are comparing it too.

Thanks

 

[JRez]

I'm going to agree with those that said go for the A64. Granted, I'm currently locked into the Intel platform for the forseeable future (and not complaining in the least since my hardcore gaming days have left me), but the performance in a variety of applications cannot be overlooked at all. The biggest advantages will come when XP for the x86-64 bit platform is released along with more of the Linux community developing for it on that side of the fence. Either way, it's a very solid choice for the money right now and I'm actually looking to build a server around one come tax refund time....

 

[Regs]

Originally posted by: dartworth

Originally posted by: Regs
In all honesty, it has changed my gaming experience.

Regs, what system where you running before your A64 box? I am just curious to what you are comparing it too.

Thanks

A Soltek KT333 75DRV5 (333 Mhz FSB support) w/ 2500+ Barton 175 FSB x 12.5, 2.2 Ghz. My motherboard was most likely the limiter.

Benchmarks show a 35% increase in performance and I've yet to fully optimize my system.

Lets just say it made even a bigger improvement from when I went from a Ti4200 to a 9800 in frames per second. (seeing that my mobo/cpu was limiting)