Should I switch over to the A64 just yet?

[Linux23]

Originally posted by: Megatomic
I'd wait for the new motherboard chipsets to come out in force:

1. SiS 755FX built into a highend motherboard from a Tier 1 manufacturer (Abit, ASUS, MSI)
2. NForce3 250
3. K8T800 Pro built into a highend motherboard from a Tier 1 manufacturer (/broken record)

I'd also wait for Socket939 before jumping.

These are the things preventing me from getting an A64 system at this time.

#1 on your list is my main concern. I had very bad luck with an ECS board before.

 

[Megatomic]

I have had only one ECS branded board and it was a good board, dual PIII board. But I did say from a Tier 1 manufacturer, that pretty much precludes ECS/PC Chips/etc... When ASUS or Abit crank out a 755FX, it's going to be a hell of a board.

 

[Markfw]

Basically I would sell the mobo, processor, heatsink, PSU(?), and do I need new RAM(The stuff I have right now isn't dual channel)? What would be the average cost to upgrade?

Your memory is too slow, as you really need DDR400 (PC3200) or better. There is NO dual channel on the A64 platform. I upgraded exactly what you would need and it cost me $500 for the best mobo (IMO) very good ram and hsf and an A64 3000+ You may not notice anything like twice the speed, but is is quite a bit faster. If you want to go now, do it if you can afford it.

Edit: And ditto megatomic. I have two ESC boards, and they are fine. Just not fast. But from what I have read, even the ECS board would be fine. I may get it, just to see if it is faster than my K8V, and switch back if not. Its only $72 shipped to find out I think somebody said (NFS4?)

 

[EeyoreX]

I'm so sick of hearing the "there's no use for 64-bit processing in home" and "there's no 64-bit software out yet" arguments against the Athlon-64. Maybe you haven't noticed, but the Athlon-64 is backward compatible with ALL 32-bit software and it performs VERY well running 32-bit software. Damn... look at the benchmarks... people act as if the Athlon-64 is like the Itanium and if you buy it you MUST be buying it for it's 64-bit capabilities. Gawd!!!

I am so sick of people seeming to not bother reading replies carefully or missing out on things implied and then going off on a stupid rant. Maybe you didn't notice I did, in fact, mention 32-bit performance was better on 64-bit machines. Maybe you failed to notice I even mentioned benchmarks, which must mean I took your advice before your needless rant and did look at the benchmarks. Perhaps my implication was far too subtle for you to catch that if you needed a "benchmark-superior" machine, or you needed the extra FPS in Unreal (because, lord knows, 200 FPS is not nearly enough

) that you should get the Athlon 64. And regardless of the Athlon 64's ability to run 32-bit applications at very good speeds, that still does not make a 64-bit desktop a needed item. I didn't say it was an unwanted item. My take on this thread was that it was a "Is it worth it to upgrade" thread. Not a "I need the FASTEST machine possible because I need the HIGHEST FPS count ever!" thread. Sorry I wasn't implicit enough in my answer...

\Dan

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: EeyoreX

I'm so sick of hearing the "there's no use for 64-bit processing in home" and "there's no 64-bit software out yet" arguments against the Athlon-64. Maybe you haven't noticed, but the Athlon-64 is backward compatible with ALL 32-bit software and it performs VERY well running 32-bit software. Damn... look at the benchmarks... people act as if the Athlon-64 is like the Itanium and if you buy it you MUST be buying it for it's 64-bit capabilities. Gawd!!!

I am so sick of people seeming to not bother reading replies carefully or missing out on things implied and then going off on a stupid rant. Maybe you didn't notice I did, in fact, mention 32-bit performance was better on 64-bit machines. Maybe you failed to notice I even mentioned benchmarks, which must mean I took your advice before your needless rant and did look at the benchmarks. Perhaps my implication was far too subtle for you to catch that if you needed a "benchmark-superior" machine, or you needed the extra FPS in Unreal (because, lord knows, 200 FPS is not nearly enough

) that you should get the Athlon 64. And regardless of the Athlon 64's ability to run 32-bit applications at very good speeds, that still does not make a 64-bit desktop a needed item. I didn't say it was an unwanted item. My take on this thread was that it was a "Is it worth it to upgrade" thread. Not a "I need the FASTEST machine possible because I need the HIGHEST FPS count ever!" thread. Sorry I wasn't implicit enough in my answer...

\Dan

I think the point is: Whether 64bit is needed or not is not the issue, the Athlon 64(specifically the 3000+) is a contender. 64bit need/or not, or lack of 64 bit Windows/Apps is not a Con to buying the Athlon 64.

 

[mechBgon]

I routinely wait two days for my radiosity solutions to compute in trueSpace 4.3 (admitedly, the Ford Pinto of 3D modelling/animation software, at only ~$500 when it was released). Two days of pure maxed-out CPU time, and that's just to get ready to actually do some rendering, if the radiosity solution looks good. Otherwise, gotta make adjustments and start from the top. Simply saving the radiosity solution to the hard drive can take upwards of ten minutes. Oh yeah, computers are "powerful enough..." not!

Igor... fetch me brains! :evil:

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: sandorski
I think the point is: Whether 64bit is needed or not is not the issue, the Athlon 64(specifically the 3000+) is a contender. 64bit need/or not, or lack of 64 bit Windows/Apps is not a Con to buying the Athlon 64.

Thank you. My sentiments exactly. The AMD haters love to tout the "there is no 64bit OS/apps" arguement when they flop around for any negative to throw at the A64. There may not be YET but you know they are coming. As soon as M$ releases the WinXP-64 for AMD the developers will go to town.

 

[beenlurkingforyears]

... and all this worry, confusion, and negative stuff about going to A64 now. AMD is to blame for all this!

Intel tried to save us from these kinds of problems! They know the best way to get to 64bit is to re-write and recompile tons of 32bit software for their 64bit CPUs; not have a CPU that runs both very well.

And Microsoft didn't do this to us! They didn't have their 64bit Windows ready in time for the launch of AMD's A64's and won't have it ready until 2004.

Why oh why did AMD create all these problems and worry for us? They gave us a 64bit processor that smokes running 32bit apps. on a 32bit OS and will run 64 bit in the future. They should be ashamed of their engineering and delivering a superior product that causes us all these problems!

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: Megatomic
NFS4:

Patience is a virtue. Look before you leap. The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.



Moral of the story? Good things come to those who wait.

/Aesop

Good one, I like that quote.

Besides, he can have faith knowing that his processor has HT and most probably x86-64 built in so it's already a very good processor.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Megatomic

Originally posted by: sandorski
I think the point is: Whether 64bit is needed or not is not the issue, the Athlon 64(specifically the 3000+) is a contender. 64bit need/or not, or lack of 64 bit Windows/Apps is not a Con to buying the Athlon 64.

Thank you. My sentiments exactly. The AMD haters love to tout the "there is no 64bit OS/apps" arguement when they flop around for any negative to throw at the A64. There may not be YET but you know they are coming. As soon as M$ releases the WinXP-64 for AMD the developers will go to town.

Ditto. I also liked beenlurkingforyears's comments...funny but true..

 

[drag]

Bah. Why wait for MS to get around to making a AMD64 computer?


If you want 64bit OS, it's only a FTP-install away.

Get it.

Right now.

Sorry if you actually have to learn something.


Oh ya if you do the FTP install then be sure to use a close mirrorfor fastest install speed.


Or to get support and extra goodies buy the 119 dollar version.

 

[XBoxLPU]

Originally posted by: beenlurkingforyears
... and all this worry, confusion, and negative stuff about going to A64 now. AMD is to blame for all this!

Intel tried to save us from these kinds of problems! They know the best way to get to 64bit is to re-write and recompile tons of 32bit software for their 64bit CPUs; not have a CPU that runs both very well.

And Microsoft didn't do this to us! They didn't have their 64bit Windows ready in time for the launch of AMD's A64's and won't have it ready until 2004.

Why oh why did AMD create all these problems and worry for us? They gave us a 64bit processor that smokes running 32bit apps. on a 32bit OS and will run 64 bit in the future. They should be ashamed of their engineering and delivering a superior product that causes us all these problems!

WTF

 

[XBoxLPU]

I think I will be upgrading to the AMD 64 but when Win64 and PCI Express boards are out....

 

[us3rnotfound]

sure y noy

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: shminu
sure y noy

Been into the Christmas Eggnog already? :beer:

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Megatomic
I'd wait for the new motherboard chipsets to come out in force:

1. SiS 755FX built into a highend motherboard from a Tier 1 manufacturer (Abit, ASUS, MSI)
2. NForce3 250
3. K8T800 Pro built into a highend motherboard from a Tier 1 manufacturer (/broken record)

I'd also wait for Socket939 before jumping.

These are the things preventing me from getting an A64 system at this time.

WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT. Why do I hear that so many times on these boards? If you wait, you'll be waiting forever.

For the HERE AND NOW, the 3000+ is a value that is hard to beat coupled with the low motherboard prices. Besides, AMD has plans to support Socket 754 thoughout 2004 so what's the problem?

So youd reccomend getting an A64 now on dead upgrade path with registered memory, than wait 2 months and get a 939 A64 with PCI-Ex from a tier 1 manufacturer mobo maker, with a 2nd gen DX9 class card? (all february)

 

[Regs]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Megatomic
I'd wait for the new motherboard chipsets to come out in force:

1. SiS 755FX built into a highend motherboard from a Tier 1 manufacturer (Abit, ASUS, MSI)
2. NForce3 250
3. K8T800 Pro built into a highend motherboard from a Tier 1 manufacturer (/broken record)

I'd also wait for Socket939 before jumping.

These are the things preventing me from getting an A64 system at this time.

WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT. Why do I hear that so many times on these boards? If you wait, you'll be waiting forever.

For the HERE AND NOW, the 3000+ is a value that is hard to beat coupled with the low motherboard prices. Besides, AMD has plans to support Socket 754 thoughout 2004 so what's the problem?

What is SiS755FX?

And secondly, why wait for socket 939 when the CPUs will likely be twice as expensive?

 

[XBoxLPU]

So youd reccomend getting an A64 now on dead upgrade path with registered memory, than wait 2 months and get a 939 A64 with PCI-Ex from a tier 1 manufacturer mobo maker, with a 2nd gen DX9 class card? (all february)

umm A64 doesn't use registered memory

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Megatomic
I'd wait for the new motherboard chipsets to come out in force:

1. SiS 755FX built into a highend motherboard from a Tier 1 manufacturer (Abit, ASUS, MSI)
2. NForce3 250
3. K8T800 Pro built into a highend motherboard from a Tier 1 manufacturer (/broken record)

I'd also wait for Socket939 before jumping.

These are the things preventing me from getting an A64 system at this time.

WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT. Why do I hear that so many times on these boards? If you wait, you'll be waiting forever.

For the HERE AND NOW, the 3000+ is a value that is hard to beat coupled with the low motherboard prices. Besides, AMD has plans to support Socket 754 thoughout 2004 so what's the problem?

So youd reccomend getting an A64 now on dead upgrade path with registered memory, than wait 2 months and get a 939 A64 with PCI-Ex from a tier 1 manufacturer mobo maker, with a 2nd gen DX9 class card? (all february)

What are you talking about ? He said socket 754, which will NOT be dead and does NOT require registered memory. Please read before typing. And I DO know what I am talking about since I am typing on one now with NON-registered memory.

 

[Megatomic]

1. The Socket 940 AthlonFX chips require registered memory.

2. The SiS 755FX will be the next chipset from SiS to support A64. The SiS 755 looks really good, but I am waiting for it's successor before I decide to go that route.

3. I personally don't like any of the current generation of A64 motherboards, whether they be Socket 940 or Socket 754. The available chipsets are all anemic in my opinion and I am waiting on their successors to shore up their deficiencies before I throw my money down on an A64 system.

My current rig is more than sufficient for all my computing needs (aside from needing beefier graphics power), I do not NEED to upgrade at this time. A year from now I may find myself in a vastly different situation but for now I have the luxury of being able to be objective.

 

[Markfw]

Megatomic, all you have said is true (except I really do like the K8V). My previous comment about "what are you talking about?" was directed to Acanthus
who appeared to be directing comments about unaffordable registered memory on a quote referencing a socket 754 motherboard. Very few people will be getting an Athlon FX on socket 940. Most all of this thread appears to be talking about the affordable socket 754 Athlon64.

And on the subject of "deficient" motherboards, the K8V seems to work just fine even without AGP lock. I have had far fewer problems with this motherboard than I did my A7N8X, which is highly regarded on this forum. NFS4 has the same board, and several others. I personally like the K8V, although the new 755 chipset does appear to be better, I couldn't find one try try when I got my motherboard.

 

[SuPrEIVIE]

its pretty simple if u have the money it won't hurt getting a a64, just remember there are alot of new technology for mobo,cpu,ram etc that will be out this year so becareful...I do agree with an above post tho, about if u have over a 1GHZ cpu u are fine if u game and do some other not overly demanding apps becase the cpu if its over 1GHZ mst likely will not be the bottleneck it would be the graphics card and or memory thats where ur money should go for upgrading.
In my opinion i would not buy a64 right now cause that power is overkill from ur previous system(depending on the previous system) and it will eventually get better in time...if u have atleast a aXP it would be good to upgrade around late 2005 or early 2006 and then jump on even better components...its always better to upgrade from less cost components to a better, probably more expensive components than expensive components upgrading to a more expensive component(S)
However if u have the money anyway it won't matter...

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Megatomic, all you have said is true (except I really do like the K8V). My previous comment about "what are you talking about?" was directed to Acanthus
who appeared to be directing comments about unaffordable registered memory on a quote referencing a socket 754 motherboard. Very few people will be getting an Athlon FX on socket 940. Most all of this thread appears to be talking about the affordable socket 754 Athlon64.

And on the subject of "deficient" motherboards, the K8V seems to work just fine even without AGP lock. I have had far fewer problems with this motherboard than I did my A7N8X, which is highly regarded on this forum. NFS4 has the same board, and several others. I personally like the K8V, although the new 755 chipset does appear to be better, I couldn't find one try try when I got my motherboard.

I knew what what you were referring to Mark, I just wanted to clarify myself to avoid confusion. I don't begrudge you your system, I wouldn't mind playing with an A64 myself. Especially when WinXP-64 for AMD hits the streets.

 

[Megatomic]

Oh and from what I've read about Socket 939, you will be able to run future A64 FX chips with standard DDR. That ought to make it a more affordable platform for the rest of us.

 

[andreasl]

Those who jumped on the Socket 754 bandwagon early might be sorely dissapointed soon. AMD is transitioning the A64 to socket 939 next year (along with AFX). Though there will likely be a few more speedgrades released for Socket 754, it is likely that future upgrades will only exist of budget CPUs (K8 with 256KB L2) with possibly even 64-bit disabled. This is not for certain yet but we will find out soon enough. Of course if you only spent $80 on a S754 motherboard the loss isn't that big since you can still use the memory for a S939 motherboard.