AMD or Intel

pkeno

I have a 2 year old computer and its about time for an upgrade.
At the mo i have a P4 3.06Ghz(socket 478), 512mb PC2100 RAM,128mb Geforce 4 ti4200 all running off a gigabyte GA-8SIMLH-P mobo.
I know that the RAM and graphics are poor by todays standards so they are definitely going. The choice i have is whether to switch the processor.
Everywhere i look people are praising the AMD processors so they seem to be the way to go. I realise Iwill need a new mobo if i switch to AMD so i was looking at an SLI one(for futureproofing) from komplett.I have no knowledge of AMD's processor line-up now.I want one that will play the latest games for at least a year and a half(alongside a good graphics card like a 6800Gs or 7800GT). Any suggestions? Are the X2 chips a big improvement over the run of the mill athlon 64s? Thanks for any feedback.

Ginger

I did a massive upgrade recently from an AthlonXP 2400+ system (similar specs to yours) to a 4400+ with 2*7800GT in SLI and 4GB RAM

The dual core systems are handy but you need an OS that supports them. Also you will find certain games react adversly to them because they are not designed for multiproc systems. Serious Sam is one for example.

I personally prefer the AMD chips.. lower power consumption, but each chip has advantages and disadvantages.

If you plan to go 64bit then AMD looks like your way to go..

Col_Loki

The motherboard and chip would also have to be changed on your system in order to upgrade your Ram. IE The Chip runs at 133x4 FSB (which runs the ram at Pc2100) and chances are the board wont support newer chips.

Best idea would be to sell that system and build a new one.

AMD wise, if you plan on multitasking alot then the X2 is a big advantage as it has 2 cores and one can be running one process while the other lets you play games etc. But if you want the best single application performance then getting the normal AMD64 is the best option (plus a little cheaper).

Realistically 2gb should be the max ammount of Ram to put in your system. It might be a better option to start with 1gb and then pop in another should you need it. The extra ram is useless unless you have programs that require alot of it (ie if your using 800mb than wheather u have 1gb or 4gb performance will be the same).

Id personally go with AMD and a DFI motherboard, fantastic combo....
I moved from AMD to intel and back again, never looked back the AMD64 rocks.

Cy_Revenant

I had an Intel P4 and am now running on an AMD Sempron and I have to say that I don't find as much of a difference between them as I thought I might.

What I have heard from many sources is that if you have an nVidia graphics card, go for the Intel. If you have an ATI graphics card go for the AMD.

DemonOfTheFall

What Cy_Revenant just said about ATI/Intel and nVidia/AMD has no basis at all, no offence revenant. It's just because the companies are cosy with each other, there's no actual performance benefit at all. AMD works just as well with ATI and nVidia works just as well with Intel.

To the OP, if you only want to play games then an X2 is pretty big overkill. They use a lot more juice, make a lot more heat and don't have a benefit in games, compared to the standard single core A64.

If you're not afraid of a bit of tinkering, get a decent SLI board, an A64 3200+ and a gig or 2 of whatever ram looks like an alright price, eg. TwinMOS value. The 3200+ will almost always without exception overclock up to the 4000+ with so little effort it's not even funny.

Setting up a 3000+ for my mate, all I did was turn the FSB from 200 mhz to 300 mhz, turn the voltage up by 0.05v and turn the chipset voltage up by 0.05v. Then ran Prime95 for a few hours to check temperatures and stability. Instantly turned a €150 3000+ into a near match for the FX-55 / 57. Can't go wrong with a 3000+ or 3200+

pkeno

Thanks for all the replies. OC'ing isnt really an option as i have no idea whatsoever how to do it. This is going to be my first time putting a pc together so im fairly inexeprienced as you'd imagine!!
I think i'll go for the single core chip then. Opteron processors seem cheap enough too, are they just server processors like the Xeon or are they mainstream desktop processors?

jor el

Cy_Revenant wrote:

I had an Intel P4 and am now running on an AMD Sempron and I have to say that I don't find as much of a difference between them as I thought I might.

Well the Sempron is the bottom of the line budget AMD, like a Celeron only not crap. A Sempron would only be about par with an old P4. If you picked an S939 Athlon64 then you'd have seen a huge boost.

pkeno, pick a mid range single-core Athlon64 and you should be fine.

DemonOfTheFall

The opteron chips are the exact same as the Athlon 64s, except with 1MB of cache instead of 512kb. They're supposed to be fantastic overclockers though.