• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

S754 Newcastle VS S939 Winchester

E

Edward Lee

Senior member
For those of you who say the 939 is "more upgradable".

Assume you buy either a socket 754 3000+ or a socket 939 3000+ AMD 64 CPU.
Disclaimer: I'm not arguing the S939 is a newer technology and will be upgraded by AMD in the future.

Those of you who say the 939 is more upgradable here's my question:

1) How many of you know you will upgrade the 939 CPU to a similiar but faster 939 chip? And how many of you will keep the same motherboard after you upgrade?

2) And in 2-3 years will you be able to use the same old motherboard for my new system and have all the new parts fit?

3) So what will be the advantage of having a socket 939 over the socket 754 in 2-3 years?

4) Do you agree or disagree chances are in 2-3 years all that would be usefull from a S939 system would be the case, fans, monitor, hard drive, and maybe the PSU? Don't you also think 2-3 years from now a S754 would look about the same as a socket 939 2-3 years from now?

Honestly, if you're thinking about upgrading "TODAYS" technology 2-3 years from now I would say the comment about upgradability would be closer to being correct. Todays S754 are as good as any S939 and the performance that won't change 2 even 3 years from now. But if you're planning to upgrade to tomorrows technology 2-3 years from now, it won't matter which one you choose.

 
i speak from experience, i have 2 of the exact same computers (basically) but one has the k8n neo (754) and the other has the k8n neo2 (939). I have bothe a 3200+ Newcastle at 2200mhz and the 3200+ Winchester at 2000mhz. The Winchester gets a better 3d mark 03 score by almost 1000. Also depending on what they're doing with 939 it could be around for several years. If 754 is going to be faded out like slot A(I'm not 100% thats the right slot but whatever the duron and old athlon slots were) and 939 is going to be kept around like socket A there is a very good chance ill upgrade in the future. I remember when i first bought a socket A i probably didnt have plans to upgrade it was a 1.4 Tbird top of the line, but the next year later i was on a forum and bought a used 1900+ (palimino i think) and jus plopped that in my same mobo worked great! so here are the answers to your questions

1. I don't know but if it is kept around for a few years there is a high chance ill upgrade my processor. Small chance ill upgrade this computers motherboard ever unless it breaks.
2. AMD might stop making 754 chips in 2-3 years
3. 939 over 754 will be more upgradable, dual channel memory, and probably still the main used socket by AMD
4. no, like i said it could be like looking at a slot a 800mhz or socket a 800mhz. like i said, i think AMD is still going to be making newer 939 chips that you can put on a 939 mobo stock or maybe with a bios update. however, the 754 will probably be phased out

Im just using a past example of AMD making the same processor on 2 interfaces of connecting to the motherboard i could be wrong but thats just my opinion
 
There are a bunch of rumors around about the life of each of the sockets. But it is known that socket 900 will replace socket 939 perhaps as early as this year. Some people think amd will move all support to just 900 and drop the socket 754, but others think that semprons will continue on and on on socket 754, while the high end amd cpus will be on 900.


My guess is both will be dropped around the same time, and replaced by socket 900, as it would not be too economically sound to use two seperate manufacturing processes to produce a pretty much identical chip.
 
Originally posted by: dguy6789
There are a bunch of rumors around about the life of each of the sockets. But it is known that socket 900 will replace socket 939 perhaps as early as this year. Some people think amd will move all support to just 900 and drop the socket 754, but others think that semprons will continue on and on on socket 754, while the high end amd cpus will be on 900.


My guess is both will be dropped around the same time, and replaced by socket 900, as it would not be too economically sound to use two seperate manufacturing processes to produce a pretty much identical chip.
Click to expand...


Hmm.. This new revelation adds a whole new twist to this debate. :Q
 
AMD footprints are well publicized and available which make these threads nothing but crying by guys who have the older technology.
We know that AMD is not making any proc higher than 3700+ for s754 while it has plans to go as high as 5700+ for 939.

Slot A is still around but I wouldn't advise anyone build a setup with that currently. Same for s754 unless they are not concerned with gaming or upgrading.

What nforce 4 and s939 offer has been well documented and no one should need to even ask such childish questions.

But as I did in the other thread I'll humor you and play along.

Take two standard setups.

s754 3000
dfi lanparty ut
2x512 corsair value
120 gig pata Seagate
nec 3520a
17 inch lcd
antec case with 400 watt psu
agp 6800 gt

s939 3000(90nm)
asus a8n sli
pci-express 6800 gt
2x512 corsair value ram dual channel kit
120 gig SATA II w/ NCQ Seagate
nec 3520a
17 inch lcd
500 watt atx 2.0 psu
antec case

If you look at the 2 it is clear the latter has more long term value. In 3 years the HD will still be a good drive. The memory will be good though you will likely need another 1 gig. The psu will also be good as it offers enough power, sata connectors and the 24 pin mobo connection. The vid card MAY still be good as well because you can add a 6800 GT with pci-express. These are JUST the items that will be BETTER than the s754 counterparts.

My upgrade path on a s939 board would be something like this:
in 6 months to 1 year add a 4000+ cpu.
in 12 to 18 months add a 2nd 6800 GT for SLI
in 18 to 24 months add another gig of ram.
in 24 to 30 months upgrade to fx-55 cpu.

And we know there will be next generation vid cards on the pci-express while agp is extremely doubtful. It is quite possible I could upgrade to soemthign beyond the 6800 ultra then move from a single version of that upgraded card to sli a few months later.

 
jterrell,
What's with calling members "Crying by guys?" Let's keep the thread clean.
If you have something smart to add thats fine. But don't thread crap.

Also what works for you doesn't work for 80% or more of us out there who won't upgrade for at least 2-3 years. (I believe that is the average time for upgrades for most of us) Most of us have better ways to spend our money than to put $200 into our system every six months when we can just buy an entirely new system for about the same $$ in 2-3 years.

QUOTE:

My upgrade path on a s939 board would be something like this:
in 6 months to 1 year add a 4000+ cpu.
in 12 to 18 months add a 2nd 6800 GT for SLI
in 18 to 24 months add another gig of ram.
in 24 to 30 months upgrade to fx-55 cpu.


Like I said. Looks like your path for upgrade is a good choice for you if you're using "TODAYS" technology to upgrade in the future. But do most of us really want to use "todays" technology 2-3 years from now? What about those of us who the newest and best 2-3 down the road?
 
Future Processors

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opteron 940Pin 130nm/90nm:
Big changes to the Opteron Line! (Source Inq) (Disclaimer: Don't blame me for Inq sources but I try) (Those are best guesses on which name is which comparing Inq to AMD Roadmap
Outdated
252 (1H 2005 Troy 90nm SOI)
254 (2H 2005 K9 Core Italy 90nm SOI)
266 (2H 2006 K9 Core Italy 90nm SOI)
268 (2H 2006 K9 Core Italy 90nm SOI)
270 (2H 2006 K9 Core Italy 90nm SOI)
272 (2H 2006 K9 Core Italy 90nm SOI)
274 (2H 2006 K9 Core Italy 90nm SOI)
852 (Q4 2004 Athens 90nm SOI)
854 (2H 2006 K9 Core Egypt 90nm SOI)
866 (2H 2006 K9 Core Egypt 90nm SOI)
868 (2H 2006 K9 Core Egypt 90nm SOI)
870 (2H 2006 K9 Core Egypt 90nm SOI)
872 (2H 2006 K9 Core Egypt 90nm SOI)
874 (2H 2006 K9 Core Egypt 90nm SOI)
Why are the opteron numbers keep going up?

Well here's my observation and you're free to correct me with evidence.
With the 148 248 and 848... It is going to support DDR400 SDRAM unlike the previous early Opteron's.. Now from my humble observation it'll keep going up to support higher memory from DDR400 to DDR433 DDR466, you get the idea.. Also another factor is those Opteron's will be less buggy and more mature in designs and also faster in mhz speed.. My 2 cents in this part..

Also, these new Opterons will most likely at some point become Dual Core, which would probably also raise the number system.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 754Pin 0.13µ 512KB Cache (New Castle):
A64 2800+ (1.8ghz)
A64 3000+ (2.0ghz)
A64 3200+ (2.2ghz)
A64 3400+ (2.4ghz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 754Pin 0.13µ 1MB Cache (Clawhammer):
A64 3200+ (2.0ghz)
A64 3400+ (2.2ghz)
A64 3700+ (2.4ghz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 939Pin 0.13µ 512KB Cache Dual Channel Memory (New Castle)
A64 3500+ (2.2ghz)
A64 3800+ (2.4ghz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 939Pin 0.13µ 1MB Cache Dual Channel Memory (Sledgehammer?)
A64 FX-53 (2.4ghz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 940Pin 0.13µ 1MB Cache (Sledgehammer)
A64 FX-51 2.2ghz
A64 FX-53 2.4Ghz
A64 FX-55 2.6Ghz (Q4 2004)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 940Pin 90nm 1MB Cache (Venus)
A64 FX-57 2.8Ghz (2005)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 940Pin 90nm 2MB Cache (Denmark)
A64 FX-** 3.0Ghz (2005)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 939Pin 90nm 512KB Cache (Winchester):
A64 4000+ 2.5Ghz (Q4 2004)
A64 4200+ 2.625Ghz (Q4 2004)
A64 4400+ 2.75Ghz (2005)
A64 4600+ 2.875Ghz (2005)
A64 4800+ 3.0Ghz (2005)
A64 5000+ 3.125Ghz (2006)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
64-Bit 939Pin 90nm 1MB Cache (San Diego)
A64 FX-57 2.8Ghz (Q3 2004)
A64 FX-59 3.0Ghz (Q3 2004)
A64 FX-61 3.2Ghz (Q4 2004)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
754Pin 0.13µ & 0.90nm, 256KB Cache (Paris & Palermo)
Duron 2800+ 2.0Ghz (Q2 2004)
Duron 3000+ 2.2Ghz (Q2 2004)
Duron 3200+ 2.4Ghz (Q4 2004)
Duron 3400+ 2.6Ghz (Q4 2004)
Duron 3600+ 2.8Ghz (Q1 2005)
Duron 3800+ 3.0Ghz (2005)
Duron 4000+ 3.2Ghz (2005)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Releases:
Opteron 146 / 846
3 New Opteron (148, 248, & 848) and also DDR400 Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources
Well we got an update on releases.
Image Source
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Roadmap
Roadmap
 
The above is from the AMD FAQ at hardocp as to not steal someone else's hard work.


And Edward its not accusations when someone starts a new thread over a well documented topic that has been addressed no more than 5 minutes earlier.
I understand the desire to stay at a premium point for value. I also have a budget.
The problem is people read these threads for advice and bad advice can cost them a lot of money in the long run.
A minimal amount of common sense shows why there is huge differences in future proofing with s939.
If I were to buy a s754 system I'd still end up buying more expensive psus, more expensive HD and memoery then end up not using them to their fullest as a s939 would. Because I can't see buy9ing an entirely new pc in 3 years. Thats the main reason to DIY. If you want an entirely new box every 3 years then dell.com should be one stop shopping.

 
Originally posted by: jterrell
The problem is people read these threads for advice and bad advice can cost them a lot of money in the long run.
Click to expand...

You throw accusations and assumptions out like they were candy. What the real problem is, is when those of you blurt your opinions out on what is good and what is bad with individuals choices based on unproven or unsubstantiated fact and pure speculation.

I have yet to hear a valid argument on why a socket 939 is better than socket 754.

Also, if you read above. I previously stated I acknowlege the fact AMD will come out with more chips for the S939. That issue has nothing to do with the current debate. Again I ask "WHY IS THE 939 BETTER THAN A 754?" and what does upgradability have to do with the issue? I've even heard speculation that the 939 will be phased out soon. So when BOTH chips are outdated in 2-3 years what will be the advantage to get a 939 now?

Originally posted by: jterrell
A minimal amount of common sense shows why there is huge differences in future proofing with s939.
Click to expand...

"Future Proof?" With computers? Common sense should tell you there is no such thing. How many out there agree with me this is an oxymoron? I've never hear those two words put in the same sentence when talking about computers and technology.
 
Originally posted by: Edward Lee
[Also, if you read above. I previously stated I acknowlege the fact AMD will come out with more chips for the S939. That issue has nothing to do with the current debate. Again I ask "WHY IS THE 939 BETTER THAN A 754?" and what does upgradability have to do with the issue? I've even heard speculation that the 939 will be phased out soon. So when BOTH chips will be outdated in 2-3 years what will be the advantage now?
Click to expand...

For starters, the 3000+ S754 and S939 are ~ the same price right now. The 939 offers better performance (as shown on many benchmark tests) using dual channel memory. Also, the Winchester core runs slightly cooler, which is always better, but espicially for OC'ing. Based on that alone, the S939 is the better buy.
Also, the S939 now allows for PCI-e graphics if wanted, where 754 does not.

As for BOTH chips being outdated in 2-3 years, I don't agree. In 2 years the FX 55, will still be a solid chip. With the 754, you don't even give yourself the opportunity for that upgrade. You may decide to buy another MB when you upgrade, but I would at least like to have the choice.
 
Edward,

Good topic, as this discussion came up in my thread from last week, and I have shifted back and forth between Newcastle and Winchester several times as I have heard compelling arguments for both, but no definitive answer on which is the better route.

I have never upgraded a system with a simple processor swap...when its upgrade time, it usually consists of a new motherboard, new CPU, new RAM and salvaging the rest...it is probably fair to say that with the exeption of the most rabid enthusiasts with an unlimited budget, most of us are limited to an upgrade cycle such that building a system that is upgradeable is not really a necessary factor.

That being said, this thread would be useful if people could articulate what are the respective advantages and disadvantages of each processor from a today's tech standpoint. It may be a valid argument that the 939 has more potential for future upgrades, assuming people intend to do a simple processor swap...I think there are different tiers, and for each one, a different processor is appropriate:

1. No intention of upgrading processor in near future...no intention of utilizing SLI or PCI-e.
2. Intention of upgrading processor in near future...no intention of utilizing SLI or PCI-e.
3. No intention of upgrading processor in future...but must have SLI and PCI-e capabilities.
4. Intention of upgrading processor in near future...must have SLI and PCI-e capabilities.

I think its also a question of.

1. Reasonable performance upgrade at a afforable price.
2. Incredible performance upgrade at a more significant price.

 
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Edward,

Good topic, as this discussion came up in my thread from last week, and I have shifted back and forth between Newcastle and Winchester several times as I have heard compelling arguments for both, but no definitive answer on which is the better route.

I have never upgraded a system with a simple processor swap...when its upgrade time, it usually consists of a new motherboard, new CPU, new RAM and salvaging the rest...it is probably fair to say that with the exeption of the most rabid enthusiasts with an unlimited budget, most of us are limited to an upgrade cycle such that building a system that is upgradeable is not really a necessary factor.

That being said, this thread would be useful if people could articulate what are the respective advantages and disadvantages of each processor from a today's tech standpoint. It may be a valid argument that the 939 has more potential for future upgrades, assuming people intend to do a simple processor swap...I think there are different tiers, and for each one, a different processor is appropriate:

1. No intention of upgrading processor in near future...no intention of utilizing SLI or PCI-e.
2. Intention of upgrading processor in near future...no intention of utilizing SLI or PCI-e.
3. No intention of upgrading processor in future...but must have SLI and PCI-e capabilities.
4. Intention of upgrading processor in near future...must have SLI and PCI-e capabilities.

I think its also a question of.

1. Reasonable performance upgrade at a afforable price.
2. Incredible performance upgrade at a more significant price.
Click to expand...


:thumbsup: Nice take on the situation.
 
Originally posted by: Ike0069
As for BOTH chips being outdated in 2-3 years, I don't agree. In 2 years the FX 55, will still be a solid chip. With the 754, you don't even give yourself the opportunity for that upgrade. You may decide to buy another MB when you upgrade, but I would at least like to have the choice.
Click to expand...

That scenerio may work out better if one buys an FX 55 today but how many of us can afford it today? And in 2-3 years who knows how good the FX-55 will be compared to the newer CPU and sockets that will be introduced to say it would be as good would be pure speculation. Also if one does upgrade to the FX-55 from a S939 who's to say you won't want to upgrade the motherboard too. Essentially that would be the same as changing the S754 CPU and MOBO for a new one. Where is the advantage there?


Also regarding pricing. Prices change every day, but last I've seen the 939 is priced slightly higher you're looking at about a $50.00 difference between the S939 and S754.

Regarding performance, if you say the S939 has better performance (I haven't seen anything like that) that may be a better arguement than to simply say that the S939 is better because it has "better upgradability" Also I agree with you PCI-e is a possible advantage if you plan to buy a PCI-e card. HOWEVER... there is zero advantage in buying a PCI-e card today as statistics have shown AGP 8x and PCI-e run at virtually the same speed. And again the future of PCI-e is all speculation just like the future of S939 and S754 CPUs.
 
hmmm, i got my 3000+ s-754 to 2.55 ghz with stock cooling/voltage and from looking at benchmarks that makes it just a single fps or 2 slower or faster than a comparably specced 939 cpu.

Not bad if i do say so myself, and besides how many people really do keep thier mobo when they upgrade to a new cpu ? Not to many.

Is there still alot of AXP users using a kt-400 board [or 333/266] with thier XP3200's/Xp-m's ?
Again, not to many.
 
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Edward,

Good topic, as this discussion came up in my thread from last week, and I have shifted back and forth between Newcastle and Winchester several times as I have heard compelling arguments for both, but no definitive answer on which is the better route.

I have never upgraded a system with a simple processor swap...when its upgrade time, it usually consists of a new motherboard, new CPU, new RAM and salvaging the rest...it is probably fair to say that with the exeption of the most rabid enthusiasts with an unlimited budget, most of us are limited to an upgrade cycle such that building a system that is upgradeable is not really a necessary factor.

That being said, this thread would be useful if people could articulate what are the respective advantages and disadvantages of each processor from a today's tech standpoint. It may be a valid argument that the 939 has more potential for future upgrades, assuming people intend to do a simple processor swap...I think there are different tiers, and for each one, a different processor is appropriate:

1. No intention of upgrading processor in near future...no intention of utilizing SLI or PCI-e.
2. Intention of upgrading processor in near future...no intention of utilizing SLI or PCI-e.
3. No intention of upgrading processor in future...but must have SLI and PCI-e capabilities.
4. Intention of upgrading processor in near future...must have SLI and PCI-e capabilities.

I think its also a question of.

1. Reasonable performance upgrade at a afforable price.
2. Incredible performance upgrade at a more significant price.
Click to expand...

You have outlined it excellently and in cases 2 through 4 s939 is the better value.
In case 1 you should buy a Dell and take advantage of their low OEM prices and tested technology.

Its not just the cpu upgrade either.
Most gamers upgrade their vid cards at least every 2 years. In 2 years will there be a decent agp card? A midlevel one? A high end one? All indications are there will not be anything above this generation made for AGP. AMD didn't switch nforce4 to pci-express for giggles.
Another upgrade is the hard drive. Nforce4 offers sata II and ncq.

The truth is people on a budget can more easily afford 200 bucks every 6 to 9 months than 1200-1500 every 3 years for a high end system to last 3 years. You may spend the same ultimately but you will have kept your system running quite well for all 3 years and will have experience in tweaking and getting the most out of your box. You will also be able to sell those items you remove while they actually have value. Take an AGP 6800 right now and you have a nice market for it at 85% of the cost you paid. Try selling a 5700 tho and its much more limited.

I have a PIII that is worhtless byond web surfing and an Athlon XP box as my secondary rig. Both are at least 3 years old. The XP box could be upgraded even today to make a solid gaming rig if I chose to go that route. It has a 9600 pro in it currently and ran games fine last time I tried.

This entire topic is frustrating because it is quite simply common sense.
You want to get pci-express if at all possible.
Vid cards are going to go use the extra bandwidth as that is the next generation plan. When that happens AGP is dead. Single channel memory is also soon to be dead.

You can not get a dated mobo. It simply limits you entirely too much. Unless as you state, the desire is simply a stable box that will not get upgraded.

If you look in the for sale forum you'll see many people selling parts of their s754 system to upgrade to s939.
 
Originally posted by: peonyu
hmmm, i got my 3000+ s-754 to 2.55 ghz with stock cooling/voltage and from looking at benchmarks that makes it just a single fps or 2 slower or faster than a comparably specced 939 cpu.

Not bad if i do say so myself, and besides how many people really do keep thier mobo when they upgrade to a new cpu ? Not to many.

Is there still alot of AXP users using a kt-400 board [or 333/266] with thier XP3200's/Xp-m's ?
Again, not to many.
Click to expand...

And when those guys went from xp to a64 they could move their vid cards, memory in most cases, and psu.

Now we are at the end of the line for the vid cards and the psu's are at a breaking point.

It is not just moving to a new mobo/cpu. Its upgrading all the other parts because your mobo supported only older technology.

Why not just buy an athlon xp 3200+ with slot a mobo? You can get it for a good price and OC it. Its certianly tested technology and tweaks are known that boost it above 2800+ a64's. It has AGP. The mobo's can run pc2700/pc3200 ram.
 
Originally posted by: dguy6789
There are a bunch of rumors around about the life of each of the sockets. But it is known that socket 900 will replace socket 939 perhaps as early as this year. Some people think amd will move all support to just 900 and drop the socket 754, but others think that semprons will continue on and on on socket 754, while the high end amd cpus will be on 900.


My guess is both will be dropped around the same time, and replaced by socket 900, as it would not be too economically sound to use two seperate manufacturing processes to produce a pretty much identical chip.
Click to expand...

Do you have a link available about a Socket 900? I'm pretty curious as to why AMD would already want to introduce another socket, especially with less pins (couldn't they just not use some pins on S939?).

Also, Starbuck1975 has a good point: What socket you get depends on what you want now and how you intend to upgrade later on. Some people do upgrade CPUs or want PCIe and SLI so Socket 939 would be good for them. People who will just buy a whole new setup later on could do well with Socket 754, assuming there is a difference in price of the two sockets (S754 motherboards seem to be cheaper right now).
 
Originally posted by: The J
Originally posted by: dguy6789
There are a bunch of rumors around about the life of each of the sockets. But it is known that socket 900 will replace socket 939 perhaps as early as this year. Some people think amd will move all support to just 900 and drop the socket 754, but others think that semprons will continue on and on on socket 754, while the high end amd cpus will be on 900.


My guess is both will be dropped around the same time, and replaced by socket 900, as it would not be too economically sound to use two seperate manufacturing processes to produce a pretty much identical chip.
Click to expand...

Do you have a link available about a Socket 900? I'm pretty curious as to why AMD would already want to introduce another socket, especially with less pins (couldn't they just not use some pins on S939?).

Also, Starbuck1975 has a good point: What socket you get depends on what you want now and how you intend to upgrade later on. Some people do upgrade CPUs or want PCIe and SLI so Socket 939 would be good for them. People who will just buy a whole new setup later on could do well with Socket 754, assuming there is a difference in price of the two sockets (S754 motherboards seem to be cheaper right now).
Click to expand...


Please search forums.anandtech.com. I have aready debunked this rumor, Socket 900 is a myth created by the enquirer.net

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...eyword1=socket+AND+900
 
I have been pricing out systems for the past week or two, and the price difference between going 939 or 754 is actually quite negligible for comperable processors if you choose to go AGP on the video card and do not go with a SATA drive...that is what is making this upgrade so difficult as I define the need to upgrade as having a system that can no longer play the latest games...I am pushing that point now on a system I have had for two years...and that upgrade cost me around $800...was $800 a smart investment for a system that I am looking to spend about the same to upgrade today...who knows.

If you want to go PCI-e and SATA, the price difference does increase in the realm of around $300 to $400.

The gaming industry has traditionally lagged behind the technology, such that if you were to build a high end system today, at what point would software catch up such that it pushes the boundaries of your hardware? If you go 754 and AGP, will your system last as long from a performance perspective as say a 939 PCI-e...given the tech roadmaps we know at this point, would you simply be able to swap out components on a 939 PCI-e system, or will you be stuck doing the whole motherboard, CPU, RAM swap again in two years regardless of whether you choose a 754 or 939 today.

If you believe your next system upgrade will require an entirely new set of components regardless of the processor you choose today, then 754 and a solid AGP card is the affordable and smart solution.

If you believe that in two years you will be able to upgrade a 939 PCI-e system built today with minimal effort or investment, then that is the most logical route.

In case 1 you should buy a Dell and take advantage of their low OEM prices and tested technology
Click to expand...

Probably the most cost effective solution, but it is such an addiction and more fun to build your own system even if Dell can do it cheaper for a low end system. I swore I would never purchase from Dell again. That and their XPS game line of PCs starts at $1700.
 
True, big problem with S939 right now is the general lack of AGP. I know im not going to be upgrading my $400 AGP Geforce 6800 gt any time soon, especially not for just a interface swap [pci-e from agp].
 
Originally posted by: peonyu
True, big problem with S939 right now is the general lack of AGP. I know im not going to be upgrading my $400 AGP Geforce 6800 gt any time soon, especially not for just a interface swap [pci-e from agp].
Click to expand...



HUH? What are you talking about! All mother boards made untill the release of nForce4 were all AGP. The probelm is the opposite; there is a general Lack of PCI-Express motherboards since only nVIDIA at this point has a chipset soloution.
 
Originally posted by: peonyu
True, big problem with S939 right now is the general lack of AGP. I know im not going to be upgrading my $400 AGP Geforce 6800 gt any time soon, especially not for just a interface swap [pci-e from agp].
Click to expand...

Nevermind. Googer stole my thunder.
 
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
If you believe your next system upgrade will require an entirely new set of components regardless of the processor you choose today, then 754 and a solid AGP card is the affordable and smart solution.

If you believe that in two years you will be able to upgrade a 939 PCI-e system built today with minimal effort or investment, then that is the most logical route.
Click to expand...

Speaking from experience I agree with what you said. I had a Pentium 4 1.8 GHZ for about 3 years and had looked to upgrade it but I couldn't because the newer Pentium 4 chips used hyperthreading and had a faster front side bus, so even if I got a CPU that fit my MOBO it would have done nothing for me. I was better off buying an entirely new system.

Looking 2-3 years forward I have no doubt I will run into similiar issues regardless if I choose a S754 or A S939 CPU

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top