which would be better

[ak_smallz]

i heard that other than the fx's, athlon 64's cant be overclocked by multiplier (which means its all ram i think). So i am wondering which would be better:
athlon 64 2800+
or my overclocked athlon xp mobile 2600+ (2.4 ghz)

(im a gamer)
thanks for the input

EDIT: the 2800 is in socket 754 if you needed to know
also, would this motherboad be good (overclocking wise, and performance wise) with the athlon 64 2800+, or is it wourth the extra cash to go with the neo platinum (what is the difference)?

 

[Nubius]

The 64's can simply have their multipliers turned down, whereas the FX's have a completely unlocked multiplier.

Basically turning down the multiplier is better though in some sense, because if you have good RAM you'd want the multi down and HTT up to really get a performance boost out of your system.

An XP mobile OC'd to 2.4GHz would beat out an AMD64 that was at....ballpark figure here, 2.1-2.2GHz or so, but a 64bit at 2.3GHz and up would more than likely beat the 2.4GHz

You just said 'would this motherboard be good for OCing' but you didn't reference a one besides the neo platinum.

I'd say you might want to hold off a little longer for socket 939 and get like a 3200+ if you can, those OC fairly nicely. Also dual cores of course will be coming out, but that could be towards the end of the year for all I know

 

[ak_smallz]

well what is going on is that one of my parents friends want me to build them a setup for around 500, so i got a good set together. I was going to get a2800 and a good motherboard for it, but then i saw that i could get the msi neo platinum board and an athlon 2800+ for only 20-30 bucks more. So i thought to myself "would it be worth just giving him my processor and mb and go with the 64 bit?" But i wasnt sure what the performance difference would be. I was thinking that the 64 bit would become much better as time moved along, but maybe im wrong.

for that msi board, i was referencing to the neo fisr (sorry lol). I se that there is that 150 gb for the fsr and the 250gb for the platinum. I dont know what to the difference is,

 

[foreverxyoung]

oh hey nubius really quik, lil differnet, what can a amd 64 2800+ compare to from intel. Like the same performance of a _____ .

 

[Nubius]

the 2800+ tells you that forever 2800+ = approx 2.8GHz Intel

Ak - That 250gb vs the 150gb is referring to the chipset and it's ability to transfer data to and fro I believe. I just read something on this the other day, so I can't give you an absolute definitive answer, but this was mainly talking about the Socket 754's so in that scenario you should get the 250gb because if I remember right, it has a more optimal 'bandwidth'

According to MSI's website though they have both the platinum and FSR with the Nforce3 250gb

Personally I think you're just somewhat eager to jump into AMD64 bit.

Give them the socket 754, save your money up so you can get like a 3200+ 90nm and good socket 939 board. It'll be worth it in the long run IMO

 

[ak_smallz]

well technically i wouldnt be spending any money to get to 64bit, because they would buy it and we would switch. I was just wondering performance wise if it would be something better for me right now because everyone says how "athlon 64's are great for games." But if there is no gain for me, im perfectly satisfied with a 2600-m because its goin pretty fast for me right now.