AMD Athlon 64 bit Processors + New system building advice - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > System Upgrades
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 10-17-2005, 05:27 PM   #1 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 109
Default AMD Athlon 64 bit Processors + New system building advice

I did a search for this, but couldn't quite find what I needed. So what is the difference between these AMD Athlon 64 3000+, 3200+ etc. compared to Pentium 4 Hyperthreading processors? I notice most you guys have the AMD's, are they really better? How so? Are they more reliable?

I'm asking because I want to build a new system with dual video card and monitor setup. Will the AMD support a dual video card and monitor? I find your suggestions with Newegg helpful, can you guys give me more suggestions as to what parts I can buy for less than $1000? . That's just for the PC, not the monitors, I'll be getting 19" Dell Ultrasharps. For a video card for example, I don't need one that's top of the line, not crappy either, just decent I guess. Basically, what's the best I can get for less than $1000?
__________________

Shocker is offline  
Old 10-17-2005, 10:24 PM   #2 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,453
Send a message via AIM to FghtinIrshNvrDi Send a message via Yahoo to FghtinIrshNvrDi
Default

Dual video cards aren't always necessary for dual monitors. Some video cards have two outputs. AMD processors tend to benchmark higher in gaming, intels in applications. I'll let the guys with the opinions sell you the parts. My setup is in my sig and cost like 500 bucks. I'd get my system, but a better video card.

Ryan
__________________

__________________

<b>I'm an unhyphenated American.</b>
System Specs:
Intel Q6600 @ 3200 1.4v
Abit IP35 Pro "The Snake"
2x2gb A-Data @ 800
Diamond HD 3870 512mb


Great FORD TRUCK resource: http://www.fordtruckfanatics.com
FghtinIrshNvrDi is offline  
Old 10-17-2005, 10:51 PM   #3 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,327
Send a message via AIM to Flanker
Default

I have to go. Amds are better for gaming despite their lower clock speeds. The 3000+ is a 1.8GHz processor and is equal to a 3.0GHz Pentium 4. the 3200+ is a 2.0GHz processor and is equal to a 3.2GHZ Pentium 4.
Flanker is offline  
Old 10-17-2005, 10:56 PM   #4 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 769
Default

yeah, i really regret gettin an intel 3.2Ghz, i was noob when i did tho.

^^ and thats ment to say 2.18Ghz not 21.8Ghz.
__________________
Sprooty is offline  
Old 10-17-2005, 11:45 PM   #5 (permalink)
Memberbot
 
Elbatrop1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,057
Default

Quote:
^^ and thats ment to say 2.18Ghz not 21.8Ghz.
Actually it's meant to say 1.8GHz

As said before, AMDs tend to benchmark a little higher in games. Personally, I dont see that big of a difference. I went with AMD to see what all the fuss is about. Dont get me wrong, I am very happy with the performance of my system. My point is that if you go with either AMD or Intel, and you build it right, you wont be disappointed with it's performance.

Also, most newer vid cards have a version available that has 2 outputs (one usually VGA, and the other DVI) that you can use to run dual monitors. For example, this video card will be able to play games decently, and be able to support dual monitors nicely for a good price. An upgrade of that card would be the 6600GT. It is a good card that supports dual monitors, and plays most any new game with good settings.

You will be able to find some other AMD $1000 builds around here If you have any more questions, post back or PM me.
__________________

Intel E6750...........PSN: ELBATROP
XFX nForce 650i Ultra
Patriot PC2-6400 8GB (4x2GB)
eVGA 9800GT
36GB WD Raptor
120GB SG
1TB SG
Logitech X-530
Samsung SyncMaster 931c
Samsung SyncMaster 750s
Windows 7 Home Premium 64
Elbatrop1 is offline  
Old 10-18-2005, 12:49 AM   #6 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,327
Send a message via AIM to Flanker
Default

Haha, yea sorry guys, I meant 1.8GHz not 21.8GHz, sorry if I gave someone a heart attack, I was in a hurry and on my way out somewhere, lol.

AMD CPUs perform better at lower clock speeds (MHz) than Pentium 4 CPUs do at higher clock speeds. I could explain why but it gets a little complicated (It has to do with the architecture and processor pipelines). Basically, a 2.0GHz AMD Athlon 64 is equal to a 3.2GHz Pentium 4. HOWEVER, this is only true for regular proecsses. For gaming, AMD gains an even greater lead. My belief is that a 2.0GHz Athlon 64 is more like a 3.5GHz Pentium 4 in gaming. Games benefit from the shorter pipelines of the Athlon 64s.

Like Elbatrop1 said, if you can find a Pentium 4 of equal performance, then you won't have any problems, but to answer your question about why most of us have AMD processors, its because most of us are gamers and built our own machines. Yes, AMD processors are really better, and are often more reliable.

Right now, AMD is outperforming Intel in every area except video encoding/multimedia. AMD's best CPUs are by and far better than Intel's best CPUs. In the Dual Core Arena, AMD completely dominates Intel, even with video encoding. Its again, because of the architecture of the Athlon 64s; AMD Dual Core CPUs (X2s) communicate to eachother and the rest of the system faster than Intel Dual Cores (Pentium-Ds).

AMD isn't like Apple either, their processors are completely compatible with any hardware or software (with the exception of motherboards). Hopefully, that explained AMD for you.

As for the video card; I believe Elbatrop1 said it all. If you still need help with a $1000 build, we will be happy to help you.
Flanker is offline  
Old 10-18-2005, 04:55 AM   #7 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 109
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Elbatrop1
Actually it's meant to say 1.8GHz

As said before, AMDs tend to benchmark a little higher in games. Personally, I dont see that big of a difference. I went with AMD to see what all the fuss is about. Dont get me wrong, I am very happy with the performance of my system. My point is that if you go with either AMD or Intel, and you build it right, you wont be disappointed with it's performance.

Also, most newer vid cards have a version available that has 2 outputs (one usually VGA, and the other DVI) that you can use to run dual monitors. For example, this video card will be able to play games decently, and be able to support dual monitors nicely for a good price. An upgrade of that card would be the 6600GT. It is a good card that supports dual monitors, and plays most any new game with good settings.

You will be able to find some other AMD $1000 builds around here If you have any more questions, post back or PM me.
Yea I meant to say a single video card with two VGA outputs. Now what's the deal with the DVI port? Is that better than VGA? The one you suggested got a pretty bad review, so I guess I'll keep looking. Also if I get a AMD CPU, motherboard and case from Newegg will it come with the heatsink fan/cooling device and all the power and SATA cables for a SATA HDD, and power supply? How do I know what to get for which CPU motherboard combo and the fit?
Another question, what do you guys think of the Dell 19" Ultrasharp flat panels. They got pretty good reviews. I'm probably not gonna do any kind of serious gaming, just online poker. It's response time is 20ms, is that too slow?
Shocker is offline  
Old 10-18-2005, 06:31 AM   #8 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
PZEROFGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,553
Send a message via AIM to PZEROFGH
Default

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130214

if you got the retail versoin of the cpu it will come with a heatsink/fan. and your mobo will come with all the sata cables and stuff like that. so get the OEM version of your hdd. all you need to know is what socket goes to what socket if you get a socket939 mobo, you need a s939 cpu.

20ms is pretty slow, people want 8or slower, 12 if you have to.
i just got a free envision LCD, its 25ms, i cant even play my games its so blurry
__________________
Hmmm?
AIM/Xfire - pzerofgh
PZEROFGH is offline  
Old 10-18-2005, 07:52 AM   #9 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Elbatrop1
Actually it's meant to say 1.8GHz

As said before, AMDs tend to benchmark a little higher in games. Personally, I dont see that big of a difference. I went with AMD to see what all the fuss is about. Dont get me wrong, I am very happy with the performance of my system. My point is that if you go with either AMD or Intel, and you build it right, you wont be disappointed with it's performance.

Some people also may use AMD because their cheaper, and we may have moral reasons why not to buy intel.
DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 10-18-2005, 08:40 AM   #10 (permalink)
Memberbot
 
Elbatrop1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,057
Default

That 6600GT is actually the one I have, and I would personally give it a good review.

As for DVI, its just a different interface to plug monitors, but more specifically flatscreen TVs or monitors into. The 6600GT I linked for you actually comes with a DVI to VGA adapter. THat means that you can throw on that adapter, and it's like you now have 2 VGA ports on the card.
__________________

__________________

Intel E6750...........PSN: ELBATROP
XFX nForce 650i Ultra
Patriot PC2-6400 8GB (4x2GB)
eVGA 9800GT
36GB WD Raptor
120GB SG
1TB SG
Logitech X-530
Samsung SyncMaster 931c
Samsung SyncMaster 750s
Windows 7 Home Premium 64
Elbatrop1 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.