New Machine

AreThoseMyFeet

I'm gonna be building a new machine in the next few weeks, but the choice of processor has me tearing my hair out. If I was going to go for a 64 bit chip I might as well go for an FX 51 or 53. But unfortunatley komplett only do 478/A/754. Of those, I'd prefer socket A, but are they too old and slow?? Would I be better off importing an FX chip? Any opinions?

Dave.

grimloch

here sell your fx 53- cpus but look at the price unless you have alot of money i woulndt go with them IMO.

socket A are still a very respectable processor theyre not slow at all id sooner go with socket A than p4

anyway id recommend a AMD 64 good for games(i presume you re gonna be gaming?) the price difference between AMD 64 and fx53 is too big i think, you can get a very respectable gaming machine for a grand(excluding tft monitor) that will play games for a good while hopefully

that being said with PCI-E and BTX on the horizon should you get a new computer now?

however go with 754 i say if you have to, check out around this place peoples sigs and the rest for some ideas loki has a big thread on this look at it let us know what you decide

BloodBath

Socket A is not compatable with the new chips, i.e. a64 and the fx xhips.

The fx range cost a small fortune and aren't worth it in my opinion. Get something like a a64 3200+ or a P4 3.2c.


Any intentions of overclocking?


No point waiting for btx or pci-e. They won't make any difference to the performance of your rig in the near future.


BloodBath

BKtje

recently bought a amd 64 3200+ with a gig of ram.

The difference this cpu makes over a socket A is unbelievable.

Before i had a 1.8ghz socket a and half a gig of cheap ram. Ran UT2K4 on everything low and had minimal fps on ons and mid fps on ctf.

New machine at stock speeds (2ghz) and a gig of expensive ram and im running 2k4 at all max settings and it aint moving off the 85hz vsync. Turned it off and i got about 200-300fps.

Amd 64 is well worth it.

(both machines have a 9700pro)

Mutant_Fruit

There cant have been that much of a difference! A 1.8ghz barton to 2ghz A64 wouldn't produce that much difference in UT2k4, that is HEAVILY GPU orientated.

Maybe i'm wrong, but i wouldn't have thought the CPU change would have that much of an effect

AreThoseMyFeet

I was going to go for an Athlon XP 3000+/3200+ with a good cooling solution and overclock. But would the switch to AMD 64 give too much of a performance jump to ignore? As always it comes down to the price/performance ratio :-/ I have an XP2500+ at the moment and UT2K4 runs smoothly on medium settings (with a GeForce4 MX, weird).

Dave.

Dempsey

Originally posted by grimloch
socket A are still a very respectable processor theyre not slow at all id sooner go with socket A than p4

Socket A are good chip for the money you pay but they are not near the performance of P4's Northwoods and upwards. Both overclock very well

I'd get a A64 if ya have the money to burn(same price as a P4 at the moment)

BloodBath

If your overclocking you should consider a 2.8e and use the money you save to get a good air cooler. The sp-94 with a good 92mm fan and as5 and overclock it to 3.6.

Some of the 2.8 Northwoods will reach 3.6 but practically every 2.8 Prescott will if you keep it cool. That's a 1000mhz fsb system. Some pc4000 RAM and you have 500mhz memory.

The Pentium chips are better for overclocking. I prefer the all round performance of Intel chips but I seriosly doubt you would notice any difference between the two. Maybe when running a lot of apps but that's about it.


BloodBath

Col_Loki

Some of the 2.8 Northwoods will reach 3.6 but practically every 2.8 Prescott will if you keep it cool. That's a 1000mhz fsb system. Some pc4000 RAM and you have 500mhz memory.

You make it sound like the Prescotts are the best overclockers and are guarenteed to hit 3.6ghz? There massivly hot , you need a huge heatsink and a noisey fan to cool it, the mosfets get extremely hot and this is on stock Vcore. The prescotts have been known to bring some phase coolers to there knee's. Ive seen people have trouble at stock, are you sure almost all will hit 3.6ghz? Seems like ive seen alot of 1 off cases then.

The Northwoods are just as good overclockers IMO with far less hassle, and can be cooler pretty quietly which is a big advantage.

Some of the newer stepping prescotts have improved but arent widely available.

Ohh and just to nit pick, at 1000mhz FSB the prescott would run at 3.5ghz

BadCharlie

Thats a good over clock you got there Col_Loki a Xp2000+ @ 2505mhz. I cant even hit 2200mhz on my chip but i think its down to my PSU and it kind of gets hot in my machine "only one fan blowing out and thats the PSU fan"

AreThoseMyFeet
I would also go for an AMD64bit cpu if i was upgrading my self right now that is what i would be getting.

BloodBath

Never said Prescotts are the best overclockers but they probably are. Have you seen how high people are getting the 533mhz fsb 2.4a and 2.8a's. I've seen most 2.4a's go to 3.2 and higher. I saw a 2.8 at 3.9. All on air.

You make it sound like the Prescotts are the best overclockers and are guarenteed to hit 3.6ghz?

Nothings guarenteed in overclocking but it's more likely than with a Northwood providing you have decent cooling, like I said earlier.

Some of the 2.8 Northwoods will reach 3.6 but practically every 2.8 Prescott will if you keep it cool

Ive seen people have trouble at stock, are you sure almost all will hit 3.6ghz? Seems like ive seen alot of 1 off cases then.

They must have been using a crap cooler. An sp-94 with a good 92mm fan (doesn't have to be a tornado) and artic silver 5 and your looking at about 45c under load at stock. This is 30c below intel's recomended and 20c below what most people would recomend.

The Northwoods are just as good overclockers IMO with far less hassle, and can be cooler pretty quietly which is a big advantage

Not true. The Northwoods were not designed to go above 3.4ghz. Intel were lucky to get them that far. The longer pipelines on the Prescott allow for higher clock speeds. I've seen so many 2.8 Northwoods cap at 3.4-3.6 but the Prescott's will always go higher if you cool them enough. I had a 3.2 northwood that would not go above 3.52. It wouldn't even load into windows above that no matter what voltage I put into it.. My Prescott is stable 24/7 at 3.6 and will go to 3.8 but is a tad too hot at that speed reaching 70c. This is because my fan is a crap 80mm case fan with about 29cfm rating and I'm using the thermal compound I got with it. If I got a 92mm tornado with 119cfm and some artic silver 5 I know I could push 3.8ghz and maybe higher but they are noisy bitches.

Ohh and just to nit pick, at 1000mhz FSB the prescott would run at 3.5ghz

Aye my mistake. You would need 257mhz fsb to reach 3.6ghz. That's even better then as it will reach 3.5 if you get that cooler. Depending on the fan it will go higher.


It's just a consideration. Too many people write off the Prescotts without having owned one. They are a good processor except for the heat but there are ways of taming that.


BloodBath

Col_Loki

Never said Prescotts are the best overclockers but they probably are. Have you seen how high people are getting the 533mhz fsb 2.4a and 2.8a's. I've seen most 2.4a's go to 3.2 and higher. I saw a 2.8 at 3.9. All on air.

That compares to the 2.4C except the 2.4C will have a much higher FSB and thus better memory performance, and the addition of HT. The 2.4 Prescott is a decent chip, and since the 2.4C isint on the market its a good choice.

Nothings guarenteed in overclocking but it's more likely than with a Northwood providing you have decent cooling, like I said earlier.

Northwoods tend to depend far less on cooling than the prescotts, people are getting 3.6ghz and over with a Zalman cooler. When comparing overclocks its best to compare like with like, ie a Northwood with high end air cooling V Prescott with high end air cooling. You have to bear in mind all the overclocks you are seeing with the prescotts have very good cooling, with the northwoods its far more mixed.

They must have been using a crap cooler. An sp-94 with a good 92mm fan (doesn't have to be a tornado) and artic silver 5 and your looking at about 45c under load at stock

Nope these have very good coolers, nearly all thermalrights if i remember correctly. Doesent jesus_thats_gre have a prescott @3.5ghz with a thermalright? Is it just a fluke bad chip that it didnt hit 3.6ghz? Even your chip an Engineering sample isint breaking 3.6ghz stable.

Have a look at some of the northwoods arround, Sir Random @ 3.9ghz, unkel @ 3.8ghz , 3.6ghz silent....... with a Zalman.

These are just 4 examples that i think of here on the boards.........

I've seen so many 2.8 Northwoods cap at 3.4-3.6 but the Prescott's will always go higher if you cool them enough

Well doesent that put your overclock and jesus_thats_gre into that catagory as having a cap between 3.4-3.6ghz??

Theres nothing wrong with that , getting over 3.4ghz from a 2.8E/C is a decent result.

Ive seen no reason at all to suggest that current prescotts will go further than northwoods, they might cap out for different reasons and heat might be the only thing holding back the prescotts but still to the majority who dont have pommies / vapochill will find it very hard to break or even hit 3.6ghz stable.

It's just a consideration. Too many people write off the Prescotts without having owned one. They are a good processor except for the heat but there are ways of taming that.

I think for the average person who's new to buying hardware and might want to overclock the northwood is a far better option. For more experienced people who want to chance there luck its fine and they should be considered atleast.

With performance / noise in mind the northwood is a far better choice, who wants a PC thats roaring like a plane? Your not going to have it on that setting for long , mabye only benching.

BKtje

There cant have been that much of a difference! A 1.8ghz barton to 2ghz A64 wouldn't produce that much difference in UT2k4

The UT series has always been heavier on the CPU than the GPU. Ut2004 is more towards the middle but a good cpu is still needed. Im telling ya the dfifference is immense.

Also consider that i went from a xp2000+ (256k l2 cache) to a 64bit 1mb cache ( and are generally 10% faster like for like speeds at 32bit programs).

Of course the extra 512mb ram helped as well...

BloodBath

Northwoods tend to depend far less on cooling than the prescotts, people are getting 3.6ghz and over with a Zalman cooler. When comparing overclocks its best to compare like with like, ie a Northwood with high end air cooling V Prescott with high end air cooling. You have to bear in mind all the overclocks you are seeing with the prescotts have very good cooling, with the northwoods its far more mixed.

I agree completely but what i'm saying is it's not temp that limits most Northwoods. They just tend to cap at a certain level and will not go higher no matter what you do, just like my old one. If you manage to get a good one then yes you can push it high but you have to get lucky.

Nope these have very good coolers, nearly all thermalrights if i remember correctly. Doesent jesus_thats_gre have a prescott @3.5ghz with a thermalright? Is it just a fluke bad chip that it didnt hit 3.6ghz? Even your chip an Engineering sample isint breaking 3.6ghz stable.

I can't speak for Jesus but maybe he doesn't want to go past 3.5ghz. Maybe it's his
RAM limiting him. My 3.2 will break 3.6ghz. I have booted at 3.8 and ran cpu-z but my temps were right on the edge so I clocked back down to 3.6. Atm I go to 60c under full load. Bear in mind my fan is rubbish and I don't have as5. I'm not worrying about the chip reaching it's limit as I am still well under the 1.55 max vcore for the chip. I still have .15 volts to play around with to push it higher.

With performance / noise in mind the northwood is a far better choice, who wants a PC thats roaring like a plane? Your not going to have it on that setting for long , mabye only benching.

I agree if you can get one that clocks well but i'd say only about 50% of the high end ones do. You don't need a tornado either. I'd say I could push near to 4ghz with a 92mm tornado. A good 92mm stealth fan with a decent cfm rating of 50 or so will be pretty quiet.

I'm ordering a 92mm tornado and as5 next week so I'll post my results when I get them. I will probably still run 3.6 for 24/7 use and turn the fan right down but I just want to see how high I can get it on air.


BloodBath

Col_Loki

I have booted at 3.8 and ran cpu-z but my temps were right on the edge so I clocked back down to 3.6. Atm I go to 60c under full load. Bear in mind my fan is rubbish and I don't have as5. I'm not worrying about the chip reaching it's limit as I am still well under the 1.55 max vcore for the chip. I still have .15 volts to play around with to push it higher.

For a safe level of temps your right to keep it at 3.6ghz, most motherboards actually under estimate the temp of the CPU.

Personally i think the real overclock is the one thats stable, and within a decent temp range. Ive had my Xp2500+ up to 2.65ghz but it was running too hot and needed too much Vcore so i left it at 2.48ghz.

I agree if you can get one that clocks well but i'd say only about 50% of the high end ones do. You don't need a tornado either. I'd say I could push near to 4ghz with a 92mm tornado. A good 92mm stealth fan with a decent cfm rating of 50 or so will be pretty quiet.

The tornado fans are great for a once off screen shot or benchmarking, there just not realistic for 24/7 use or you'd be deaf. Would like to see how the prescott does with a slightly better fan .

Let us know anyway!!