New System Advice 20 replies

Please wait...

Shintsu

For the glory of Helghan

50 XP

10th April 2005

0 Uploads

12,926 Posts

0 Threads

#1 11 years ago

Alright, since my somewhat irritated statement in the AGP 8 thread, I actually priced the cost to buy an AMD and all the essentials to get me PCI-Express. I was quite pleased with the results, but that is AMD's claim to fame: Cheap! I'll list the current system I have with the components being replaced in bold and underlined.

Processor: Intel Pentium 4 3.0 GHz (I love this thing but it's Socket 478 and there are literally no PCI Express mobos for it, and definitely no good ones) Motherboard: Intel D865GBF Memory: 2 x 512 MB PC3200 memory (New Mobo will be DDR2) Power Supply: 350 watt (I'd like to upgrade it but this adds $100, I may do it anyway though.) Video Card: MSI Nvidia 6600 GT 128 mb AGP (This is my main reason, I want PCI Express so I can get the good cards I see great deals for on Newegg all the time.) Hard Drives: 100 GB Western Digital and an 80 GB Seagate Barracuda (Both your standard 7200 rpm HDs, non-SATA. I'd upgrade but it's an extra cost, not needed, and I don't feel like hassling with transferring data and reinstalling all my games and stuff)

I already feel horrible for thinking about buying an AMD but this would be a temporary thing. I'd use it for at most a year and then upgrade to the Intel Core 2 Duo series, more than likely the E6600 and a $240+ Motherboard with the 680 Nvidia chipset. I would keep the memory, power supply, and video card however, so I want to try and get pretty decent of those. I might skimp on the video card however until the Nvidia 8k series drops more, but I don't need a DX10 card.

Ok, now this is what I hate so much about AMD, there are like 4 processors that look the same but have different names but almost identical specs and similar prices. Firstly, are the 64 X2s any good? I figure that is my most likely choice, being dual core is better than single. Remember, I need this processor to be decent, not a rocket. I will not spend more than $100 on it since it is AMD and a temp processor at that.

Here are three processors that look the same, and are about what I'd spend. Is one better than the other or is there a better/close to the same for less? Will these actually perform close to my P4 3 GHz, and I don't want that smoke and mirrors crap, if possible I'd like benchmark results. The processors are 3800+ Windsors: #1, #2, and #3. Oh, something to note, I will NOT be overclocking, so just take that in consideration as well.

Now, the motherboard I just need to be decent enough to support DDR2 memory, and a PCI Express card, SLI not needed. I will not buy cheapo mickey mouse brand though, I'd spend up to about $80 on a mobo. For the most part, I don't care what it has on it, as long as it will do that. OH and I remember seeing a lot of boards with almost no IDE cables or something like that for the non-SATA drives and I want to make sure that is something it has, since everything I have is non-SATA.

The memory, I'm not sure about. I am thinking of just getting 1 GB of DDR2 800, the one stick of course. However, I saw that Corsair is selling 2 x 1 GB sticks for $160 with a $30 rebate, and that isn't bad for 2 GB. I really want to get DDR2 800 though, and I prefer to again, stick with mostly more heard of brands and not the cheap no-name memory. Prefer 1 stick of 1 GB or 2 x 1 GBs, but 2 x 512s is ok if it's cheaper. Also, I've forgotten, is it better to have lower CAS latencies or higher ones? IIRC, I thought it was the prior, but I'm just making sure. What is the average CAS latency on DDR2, and where would decent memory fit in?

Lastly, the video card. If I get a decent one like a 7950 GT I'll pay about $200 to $280 for it (I've seen good ones for $200 sometimes), but Newegg has an EVGA 8800 GTS for about $300 IIRC. These all make my price a bit higher, but I might be able to convince myself to do it. However, these video cards will require the bigger PSU, so that is something I was considering as well. I was thinking of just upgrading to maybe a 6800 like this one. I'd go as high as $140 or so on budget video cards. I'm really unsure what is good aside from 7900s and 8800s.

Anyways, thanks in advance for the help. This time, I'm pretty sure I can manage this upgrade as it's very low cost to me and makes plenty of sense to get the components I'll need when I go Core 2 Duo. Btw, does anyone know how much cheaper the E6600 is going to be at the price drop this month? I know its $310 on Newegg so I'm hoping it'll hit more around the $250 mark, but that's just what I'd hope.

EDIT: Oh, and yeah I changed my user title because of a stupid ad in a magazine I saw where AMD said Smarter Choice. Sorry guys, I'm die-hard Intel, always have been and will be :D Just bargain shopping for now.




Hellknight1993

I don't spend enough time here

50 XP

11th May 2009

0 Uploads

4,137 Posts

0 Threads

#2 11 years ago

Your Avatar reeks 'Pro AMD' Good one! ;)




C38368

...burning angel wings to dust

50 XP

14th February 2004

0 Uploads

5,013 Posts

0 Threads

#3 11 years ago

E6600 is slated to drop to $224 on the 22nd. The E4300 will be down to $113, and Intel plans to launch a pair of sub-$100 parts (E2140 and 2160, both with 1MB L2 cache and an 800MHz FSB) on that date as well.

If you're hellbent on upgrading and hate AMD, this is only two weeks out...

As for the CPUs you listed, they're all the same AMD part numbers. In short, identical products.




Shintsu

For the glory of Helghan

50 XP

10th April 2005

0 Uploads

12,926 Posts

0 Threads

#4 11 years ago

Well, that is a much more reasonable price, I didn't expect it to be that much lower, but it'll still cost me quite a bit to upgrade to the ideal Intel system, unless I can buy one of the cheap ones and have a mobo that would support the Core 2 Duos. The only problem then would be that the mobo would be about $250 or more because I want one with the 680 Nvidia chipset and to have full X16 SLI. Would those AMD processors be as good as my Intel though?




*The.Doctor

Trust me, I'm a Doctor

102,440 XP

25th November 2003

0 Uploads

9,964 Posts

0 Threads

#5 11 years ago
Shintsu Here are three processors that look the same, and are about what I'd spend. Is one better than the other or is there a better/close to the same for less? Will these actually perform close to my P4 3 GHz, and I don't want that smoke and mirrors crap, if possible I'd like benchmark results. The processors are 3800+ Windsors: #1, #2, and #3. Oh, something to note, I will NOT be overclocking, so just take that in consideration as well..

A AMD X2 3800+ will outperform a Pentium 4 3.0Ghz by quite a bit in gaming, and most other things as well. A single core Athlon 64 3000+ is faster than a P4 3.0Ghz in gaming (other stuff its about 50/50), And by those clock speeds of the X2, that would be like two 3200+ single cores.

EDIT: Oh, and yeah I changed my user title because of a stupid ad in a magazine I saw where AMD said Smarter Choice. Sorry guys, I'm die-hard Intel, always have been and will be :D Just bargain shopping for now.

Well, if you die hard intel, just save up for a Core 2 Duo setup, which will outperform any AMD out at the moment. There's no denying though, anything below a Core 2, AMD is the best. Athlon 64's generally crushed the P4's in gaming, despite having a much slower clock speed. But comparing clock speeds between Intel and AMD is useless anyways.




Shintsu

For the glory of Helghan

50 XP

10th April 2005

0 Uploads

12,926 Posts

0 Threads

#6 11 years ago

So wouldn't that make those 5600+ or 5000+ whichever I saw, there is no way that is equal to a 5 GHz processor. I buy into it but only around the 3k mark, no higher. Besides, what is it in their chips that makes them claim they're so much greater and better than their real clock speed?




*The.Doctor

Trust me, I'm a Doctor

102,440 XP

25th November 2003

0 Uploads

9,964 Posts

0 Threads

#7 11 years ago
ShintsuBesides, what is it in their chips that makes them claim they're so much greater and better than their real clock speed?

Its there core architecture, its much more efficient than anything Intel has made until the Core 2. Also there HyperTransport bus (like FSB in Intels) is capable of higher bandwidth and clock speeds.

A Athlon 64 3700+ (2.2 or 2.4Ghz, can't remember exactly) will outperform a P4 3.8Ghz. But i think, not entirely sure, that there ratings are actually based against the original Athlon core.




Bs|Archaon

I would die without GF

50 XP

15th March 2006

0 Uploads

5,910 Posts

0 Threads

#8 11 years ago

Why are you so hellbent on an nForce 680 board? That is what is pricing you out of Core 2 Duo. Having a 680 at the core of your system is a luxury, not a right. If you can't afford it, go for something else. There's nothing wrong with things like Intel's 965 boards, and they're cheap.




Shintsu

For the glory of Helghan

50 XP

10th April 2005

0 Uploads

12,926 Posts

0 Threads

#9 11 years ago

Well, I like the other Nvidia base (590 I think?), but I plan on having this motherboard for as long as I can, and I thought having a more powerful onboard graphic core made it a very high performance board versus the 590s. I suppose a 590 would be fine but I definately want full x16 SLI. What does the onboard graphic core really do anyway?




*The.Doctor

Trust me, I'm a Doctor

102,440 XP

25th November 2003

0 Uploads

9,964 Posts

0 Threads

#10 11 years ago
ShintsuWhat does the onboard graphic core really do anyway?

Provides basic graphics capabilities if you don't have a actual graphics card installed. For gaming, onboard is just about as bad as you can get. It doesn't make the board any higher performance, it just means it has a onboard graphics chipset, which is going to be useless if you put a real card in it anyways.

But honestly, if you not going to be overclocking or anything like that, a cheaper mobo will do you just fine.