Upgrading from Athlon 64 3000 - how significant?

[boren]

My current PC is based on an Athlon 64 3000 and 1.5 GB RAM. I'm considering upgrading to a more modern (yet still low budget) PC, e.g. one with Athlon II X2 245 and twice the RAM. I'd be happy if people here could estimate how much faster such a PC will be for the following tasks:

- RAW file conversion using RawTherapee
- Noise reduction using Noiseware
- Panorama creation using AutoStitch
- File viewing and resizing using Faststone
- FLAC and MP3 encoding
- xvid encoding
- h.264 playback (not even trying this one)

Thanks!
Oren

 

[shaftymcnasty]

You should see a huge improvement all around with an upgrade to a dual core. Single core CPU's are getting pretty obsolete these days

 

[Arkaign]

Absolutely gigantic. Although I'd go ahead and grab the Athlon II X4, the price difference isn't tremendous, and you sound the type to use a system for a long long time.

 

[Markfw]

Absolutely gigantic. Although I'd go ahead and grab the Athlon II X4, the price difference isn't tremendous, and you sound the type to use a system for a long long time.

Welcome to the forums !

And ^^^^^ The above idea is what you should do. If you could even get a Phemon II, the Cache may benefit you a lot.

 

[Denithor]

This Athlon II X4 combo for $160:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboD...t=Combo.304701

With this memory kit for $84:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820148262

 

[CurseTheSky]

Considering that you do a lot of encoding, which is very CPU-intensive, you'd benefit greatly from upgrading to a dual core (and still more from upgrading to a quad core).

If you can afford it, grab a quad core processor, 4GB of memory, and any motherboard that fits the bill.

 

[Zoomer]

If you game, the better IGP will be noticed.

 

[boren]

Thanks for all the comments guys.

I don't do any gaming (well, except for an occasional UT99). Image processing and some encoding are the main tasks where I'm looking for better performance. I'm sure the difference will be significant, but is there any way to quantify it? I can't seem to find benchmarks that compare current CPU's with my ancient Athlon 64.

 

[Arkaign]

Well, let's put it this way :

Your 1.8Ghz A64 3000+ (if 939, s754 3000+ was 2.0Ghz) is about 25-30% lower IPC than a single core from an Athlon II or midrange Core 2 series. So just on a core by core basis, a single core of the 2.6Ghz Athlon X4 620 will be about twice as fast as the CPU you have now. Combine that with the faster Sata, PCI-e w/NCQ, new HDD, DDR2 or DDR3, etc, and you have an upgrade so gigantic that comparing them directly can't be efficiently done.

For apps that don't have any MP awareness at all, look for 2-4x the performance, for apps that DO such as encoding .. the difference will be simply staggering.

To give you an idea : a long time ago I did a full DVD rip/encode of a movie so I could watch it on a 10" laptop (no cd/dvd drive on it) on a camping trip. I had an Athlon XP 2500+ that I used to do the rip, overclocked to 3200+ speeds (this is pretty close to your 3000+ btw). With the settings that I used, it took almost 6 hours from start to finished file. With my current Phenom II I can do the same thing in about 15-25 minutes, depending on settings, and with far better quality.

 

[boren]

Thanks Arkaign, this gives me some perspective about the potential gains. I think I'll go for a quad-core CPU then. Now it's time to read the reviews and see which one will give me the best bang for the buck.

 

[Billb2]

Motherboard?

 

[boren]

I think first I'll choose the CPU, then look for a motherboard.