PDA

View Full Version : Upgrade for PF, AMD 64 or Intel 3.0+ HPT



tmdgm
10-17-2004, 07:36 PM
I will probably be getting a new system for PF. Anyone have a feel for which is the better choice AMD 64, Intel 3.0+?

I will probably get a mom and pop store to build it and set it up (no time to do it myself and Dell is too expensive). I don't have a lot of spare time so I need whatever I get to be stable and low maintenance. I would also want to run BOB if it's ever released, but who knows what that will need.

Any upsides/downsides? I've heard you need XP Pro to enable the hyperthreading with the Intel. I've also heard that I would probably want/need more cooling with the AMD.

Any help appreciated.

Dell Dimension
P3 933
512 sdram pc133
geforce 4 ti 4200 128 mb
audigy
win me

Bearcat99
10-17-2004, 08:15 PM
AMD 64......

steve_v
10-17-2004, 08:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
AMD 64...... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

Mackane1
10-17-2004, 08:52 PM
I just ordered a hotrod gaming rig from Hunter and Joe over at MAGNUM PC and the AMD was recomended.

(...can't wait till it gets here! ohboyohboyohboy!!!)

TheGozr
10-18-2004, 12:43 AM
ANy 1 mb cache cpu above 3 GHZ

The190Flyer
10-18-2004, 11:53 AM
AMD's are good but I am a Intel guy, I'm getting a P4 3.2GHz which I am "planning" on building, lol depends on funds. I'd like to git a 3.2 P4 with the DDR2RAM and a hot video card.
although AMD does have the FX-53 CPU, and the new Athalon +3800's coming out, Intel has the 3.6GHz comin out this yr. too so take your pick, they are both good and reliable.

S!

Marek_Steele
10-18-2004, 12:48 PM
Just for those who don't know, current p4E prescott cpu's need 1mb cache not for a performance boost over the northwoods, but even longer pipelines and even less eficiency in branch prediction etc (for these reasons a p3 1.3 was faster than a p4 1.7, not to mention curren p M's 2.0 being faster than 3.0's at some stuff, btw 64's have a short pipeline arch, hence why they don't need so much mhz), in fact for them 1mb can be less than the previous 512 in a p4C.
On the other hand, for 64's 512kb to 1mh doesn't make a big difference, as an example when the first 3000+ came out (it was the same as the 2.0ghz clawhammer but with half cache - newer 3000+ are now made with 512 from start as other newcastle models)it performed on pair on most apps as the 1mb counterpart.
Even the sempron 3100+ performs almost on pair with a 2800+ 64 (256 vs 512, but here performance difference is a little higher).

Almost all current 64's are made with 512 from the 2800+ to the 3800+, the exceptions where early C0 and CG Clawhammers 3200+, 3400+ and current top end 3700+ 754 and 4000+ for socket 939 (plus fx's and opterons of course). Excepting the 2 top ends on each socket, the older 1mb models were replaced with 512kb version but wih 200mhz extra to make up for it (actually these IRL perform better than the older models when not on pair), this actually is another vantage, as large cache is a big issue for overcloking (1mb models start to lose cache at some very high fsb's), but for amd 200mhz extra is much cheaper than 512kb.

Btw, for ddr2 please remember that current 533mhz cl3 (most is still cl4, and forget lower than cl3) is slower than 400mzh ddr1 cl2. 64's are much more efficient with memory acess, either by bandwidth (wich you simply dont need!)and most importantly latency (the best way to throw away cpu cycles), on 64's the memory controller is right on the cpu, on a intel system you must wait for the northbridge. The latency is something like .40ns vs .70 , even if you put cl2-2-2 (this refers to wait clocks for specific actions) and 3-4-4 on an amd, acess is still much faster, and this means MUCH less mhz trown away! For those who want bandwidth, you can see on your p4's that using dual ddr400 you get around 4700mbs, but in theory you should get 6400mb, on a 64 you get around 6000 and 3000 for single channel. For whatever mhz numbers, I reming you that when 3200+ came out, they were faster at almost everything than 3.2C, and on games they still were faster than 3.2EE's, and for a laugh, still faster than 3.4EE's on D3, just go to a anand review to check. With much more mature boards now for 754 and the same new chips on 939 with the very small (for a gammer) advantage of DC, much less heat and being that in a year with windows 64 almost everything will run at least 20% faster it's hard to go for an intel. For overclocking, just see about the new 3000+ .90's doing 290fsb at more than 2600mhz (over an fx53, nevermind 200vs290 bus!). Intel only has the 3.8 to come mind you, on amd you already have the 4000+ (just a 3800+ with double cache) shipping. Again, on my 1mb 2.0 (3200+) single channel 754 I can do 42s 1M superpi without any kind of overclock, take your intel p4's and see how much mhz you need to do that over the rated 3.2, both for mhz and memory effectiveness.
At this moment I can't see a single advantage on going for an intel. I really hope intel pulls some rabbit out of the hat, because if not, amd will fall asleep in self congratalion as excepting for mobiles, they ahead on everything, but forgeting to ramp on mhz with current architecture.
Never buy a processor or gpu because "brand x has the best", but do it because brand x has the best you can afford, renault was the best f1 engine manufacturer on the 90's, so go figure if your twingo is the fastest on your way home too.

Just to add, I'm not an amd fanboy, it just happens that at the last cpu upgrades I've done amd's were always the best choice for money AND top performance. Just remember what intel was still doing when the slot A 750mhz came out or the tbird 1333mhz, maybe at those times intel was even more behind that is today because amd didn't even use performance rate schemes.

EFG_beber
10-18-2004, 12:55 PM
athlon 64 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/496/page11.html

diabloblanco1
10-18-2004, 01:33 PM
AMD64 for gaming, can't beat it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

TheGozr
10-18-2004, 02:25 PM
AMD 64-3700 is an Overclocker king better CPU then the 3800 and FX-53 The 3700 kills them both

LeChuck59
10-18-2004, 06:00 PM
Athlon 64, but the 939 chipset, not the older 754. The 754 will top out at about 3800+ at which point it'll be dropped by AMD. The 939 should go well over 4000+. Personally, I'd wait for the 939 procs to drop in a price a bit more, though they're not outrageously expensive now, while waiting for a compatible motherboard that has PCI-Express. That way you won't be limited in a year or so when you decide to upgrade your video card and they're all PCI-E.

If you wait for PCIE or not, the 939 chipset's the way to go.

tmdgm
10-18-2004, 07:06 PM
LeChuck, what's this PCI Express motherboard? When are these expected to arrive? Do they still have AGP slots as well?

lbhskier37
10-18-2004, 08:19 PM
wait a few months until you can get PCI express on the AMD stuff, that way you will be able to upgrade for a while into the future. If you NEED to get a computer right now I would recommend a socket 754 AMD setup, because they are pretty close to the same speed as the 939 at a way better price, and although they are going to be phased out and not very futureproof on the CPU side, the AGP slot on the 393 board is getting phased out too limiting your videocard upgrade path.

TheGozr
10-19-2004, 03:10 AM
yep for now the socket 754 is faster.
the 3700 should be the last of the 754's

But if you can wait next year for futur 939's.

Dutch60
10-19-2004, 04:10 AM
I am going for the AMD 64 FX-55 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FI-finbar1
10-19-2004, 04:42 AM
Have on order AMD 64 3500 939 Socket,and GeForce 6800 GT. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

LEXX_Luthor
10-19-2004, 04:44 AM
Go with 754 motherboard...

(1) If you go 754, by the time you want to upgrade, the current availble 939 boards will have to be replaced too, so ignore 939.

(2) Even if the claims of 939 being more "upgradable" than 754 are true (and they are not unless you upgrade every 3 months), the cost of motherboard is Zero compared to your next CPU and grafix card upgrade. The only problem here is that to change motherboard you have to be comfortable with unhooking everything inside your computer and hooking everything up to new motherboard.

...go 754 if you wish to save money and not lose any performance. The CPUs and grafix are so much more expensive worry about them alone. PCI Express has no performance advantage at first, and when they do next year or two, current 939 boards will be obsolete. Just my thinking.

Marek_Steele
10-19-2004, 06:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TheGozr:
yep for now the socket 754 is _faster._
the 3700 should be the last of the 754's

But if you can wait next year for futur 939's. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

For similar price 754 WAS faster, when you could still buy 1mb 3400+ way cheaper than 939 3500+ (the 3500 is also a 2.2 but with 512, as you can see the plus rate because of the dual channel isn't that valid for games), and even more after when the 2.4 512 3400+ arrived, was 66% the price and overclocked much better. But now you have .09 cheap models that overclock really a lot on 939 (comparatively even more than barton mobiles! on the last anand they put a 1.8 at 2.6 with 290 fsb, and this on a very average cooler!). The older clawhammers with 1mb don't overclock that much (altough still capable of over 250), nevermind the picky memory controler on the early sh7-c0 series, altough these running should be faster than their 939 counterparts, only because either they have less mhz or cache (deppending on model) and their rate is due to DC, wich again, doesn't count that much on games.
Now that you can buy the same pr+ (talking until the 3400+ models only) on 939 for almost the same price as a 754, and with these models overclocking really a lot, making the 754 decision is getting much harder, but again again (lol) a similar rated will be slightly faster than a 939 on games (and more even with the old 1mb versions), but if you intend on overclock this small advantage might disappear very quickly, as probably you won't have the new .09's on 754. Back in february when I got my hammer 3200+ (2.0ghz 1mb) these were still at 365", 3400+ at over 470" and the cheaper mobos at 160", now you can buy a 3200+ and 939 mb for less than what a sole 3.2+ 1mb 754 was at that time, current 754 newcastles 3.2+ are 2.2 512kb (66% cheaper than old clawhammers), while 939's are 2.0 512. I'm not a fan of overclocking, so personally I'd prefer to pick an old (getting rare today) 3400+ 1mb, put it on a dfi nf3 250 (hands down the best 754 board) and enjoy a very capable machine out of the box, but that's just me, since all the above reasons are the one's I'd recommend a 939 for most users.
Fortunately the 3700 won't be the last 754 (it's just like the newer 3400+ 2.4 but with 1mb cache), by the last road map I've seen there were still more models to come, like the 2.6ghz model (1mb for 4000+ or something or maybe 3900+ with 512k, altough we all know how we can thrust on roadmaps...). Only then, with all 64 low end moved to 939, this socket will remain for semprons. The sempron 754 3100+ is very very cheap around $120 (altough some stores sold the 754 64 2800+ at the same price before price raise), and for those who don't know, it's just a 64 2800+ with half cache and no 64bit, couple this with a cheap asrock for $60 and you'll still have a very capable pc again, for very cheap! For very low budget upgrades I can see no better solution, couple this with a 9800 pro or a 5900xt (these are still very good for opengl) wich are also on the cheap way now too.
For pciE, 939 viak8t890 will be the way to go, and the new pro model will offer SLI in 2xpcie16x too for the lucky ones that can afford it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

tmdgm
10-19-2004, 08:20 PM
One more question. How much faster are the 754's over the 939's, assuming I am not going to overclock? Just in case prices aren't that much different.

I'd love to wait for the PCIE, but I just don't think I have the will power with PF coming out. Unless they are out by the end of Nov.

Thanks for all the help. Looks like I'm gonna look at an AMD 64. Just gotta decide which MOBO (939 or 754) and which video card, 6600GT (assuming AGP is out soon) or 6800 base.

SkyChimp
10-19-2004, 08:55 PM
You would actually buy a whole new computer to paly a $30 game?

I've done that before http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Marek_Steele
10-20-2004, 09:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tmdgm:
One more question. How much faster are the 754's over the 939's, assuming I am not going to overclock? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The speed difference isn't that noticeable, as dual channel gives a slight boost on some apps, they counte it as "200+", as a 3200+ 939 is 2.0 512 and a current 3200+ 754 is 2.2 512. In reality this might not happen since latency is more important than bandwidth in games, but take in account that 64's have moved to 939, so if you intend to upgrade cpu later they'll have a broader life if you intend to keep you graphics card for some 2 years, as only a couple more cpus are planned for 754. If I were you I'd hold until xmas to get a pciE 939 with a new .09 nm processor and put a 6600gt on top of it because is the only future proof solution (for a possible cpu/gpu upgrade in two years) plus wonderfull overclocking potential for when you need it.

I'm a little out of 939 boards, - but for either 939 or 754 buy no chipsets other than k8t800 pro or nf3 250 for pci/agp. The best 754 boards around for nf3 where the DFI nf3 250gb (best overclocking board, period!) and the msi k8n, for via the abit kv8-pro rev1.1 was also very good and cheap, altough the lack of features. I guess asus has now an nf3 250, but after what happened with the first k8v deluxe they just lost a costumer (mine was supposedly the one with newer caps but died too), these boards had faulty capacitors and where discontinued and replaced by the SE version to clean up the name so I replaced mine at that time with abit's (now discontinued and obsolete) top end kv8-max3.
For 939 look around the bleeding edge foruns where you'll find a lot of help - because lots of boards had issues with memory tight timmings as the asus, msi and gbyte nf3 based boards.

tmdgm
10-20-2004, 06:55 PM
Sky chimp, unfortunately, yes I am buying a new computer for a 30$ game. What's worse, I only get to play that 30$ game ~4 times/week (1hour) with wife/kids. I'm so ashamed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Lexx, so what you are saying is don't get a 939 AGP MOBO, go with the 939 PCI Express ?

Marek Steele, thanks for the good info.

My system of choice seems to be as follows:

AMD 64 939 socket
Ax8 8t890 MOBO PCI Express
geforce 6600 GT PCI Express
min. 1GB PC3200 RAM
Audigy

One more question. I see the AMD PCI Express MOBO's appear to be coming out this week. Okay, two questions:

1) Anybody have an idea what the price of these will be? I've looked everywhere and can't find it as it's just entering the market now.

2) Can I use any 939 chip for the new AMD PCIE MOBO's? Meaning, I don't want to spend 800$ for an AMD 4000+. I would much rather spend 300$ for an AMD 3500+ 939 chip, but not sure if they (older 939 chips) will work with the new PCI Express MOBO.

3) Okay, one more question. Does the 6600 GT support the new vertex shader cool water thingy for PF as the 6800 does? Or do I need to get a base 6800?

Marek_Steele
10-20-2004, 08:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tmdgm:
1) Anybody have an idea what the price of these will be? I've looked everywhere and can't find it as it's just entering the market now.

2) Can I use any 939 chip for the new AMD PCIE MOBO's? Meaning, I don't want to spend 800$ for an AMD 4000+. I would much rather spend 300$ for an AMD 3500+ 939 chip, but not sure if they (older 939 chips) will work with the new PCI Express MOBO.

3) Okay, one more question. Does the 6600 GT support the new vertex shader cool water thingy for PF as the 6800 does? Or do I need to get a base 6800? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1) No idea, but expect around $150 as always
2) Of course yes! pci/agp/pciE is only NorthBridge dependent
3) yes they do, but if you can wait a little more, nvidia is goind to launch the 6700, wich is a 12 pipeline card to replace the plain 6800, being cheaper (because it's made with 12pipelines from start), will have faster gdd3 and much higher clock 400/1000, production will start in november acording to latest news. Price should be between the plain 6800 and the 6600gt.

tmdgm
10-20-2004, 09:09 PM
Marek,

Thanks, You are a plethora (big nobel word) of info.

1) 150$ is good news. Now I just need to find one.

2) Also good news. While I would like a 939 with 1 MB cache, there just doesn't seem to be many available in my 300$ estimated limit. What's Northridge dependant mean?

3) I heard about the 6700. Is it that much faster/better than 6600 GT? I thought the 6600 GT had 500/1000 speeds if I remember correctly? What's 12 pipelines mean?

Shoot, I'm struggling now to wait. Although waiting might not be that bad as I'm going to a small computer store to buy this thing and I'm sure I'll have to wait till they can obtain an AMD PCI Express MOBO (hoping this IS the future of vid cards).

Marek_Steele
10-21-2004, 05:53 AM
Thanks, altough I'm just giving the info any hardware addict should know much better than me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. On the same way I feel humble for learning so much about ww2 aviation everyday with these forums http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

1-Probably the very first pciE boards to hit the market will have all the extras you can imagine to make them expensive. As an example, my kv8-max3 near a year ago was sold at $180 (but take in account that there was only one processor available at over $300), but a few later you could have the standard kv8 for $100, the same with the asus k8v dx and k8v. With the arrival of the new 3000+ and 3200+ in .02, there is no reason for them to maintain such high prices, plus the ax8 doesn't seem to me as souped as the max3 (otes, active cooling on nb too, 3 fwires, 8 usbs, SIL raid controller for 4 extra satas over the NB etc) models to justify being sold at much over $150. Sorry if I prove wrong when prices arrive.

2-If a motherborbord has a socket 939, it must support any 939 processor (recognized by it's bios), it's simple as that. The northbrigde and southbridge are responsible for supporting buses as agp or pciE and making paths between them, never the cpu.
Again, 1mb cache is now a feature only for top ends, it's cheaper for amd to raise 200 mhz and keep with only 512kb, as they use far less silicon. In the end the performance will be the same for you, short pipeline cpu's don't benefit that much from cache. Per example, the opterons (that really need it) are still 1mb.

3-You can almost directly compare the number of pipelines to mhz effectiveness or pixels per clock. Standard 6800 (12 pipelines) are clocked 350/700 yet you see them performing faster than 500/1000 6600gt's (happened the same with 5700ultra vs 5900xt). Other thing is memory bandwidth, 6600 are only 128bit while 6800s are 256 altough clocked at less speed. You'll need the double mhz on a 128bit bus to achieve the same performance of a 256bit, nevermind memory latency that I presume that should be faster with gddr3 but shouldn't be enough to make up for it. 6700 should be 128 bit, but if then they'll have the same memory as a 6600gt, but still 12 pipelines and clocked higher and cheaper than a 6800, so it should be a winner.

For the wait, meanwhile PF will take care of it, plus you'll surelly even enjoy more the change http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

The190Flyer
10-21-2004, 09:51 AM
Actually with AMD in the future they are coming out with dual core processors, hehe, AMD already has the 940 which are dual CPU's but for commercial server use, not available to the public yet. With Intel they are forced to come out with dual CPU's b/c AMD has them out. They trashed the whole line of possible P5's which were codenamed trehas at least thats how it sounds. So in the next couple of years look to have some SCREAMIN CPU's. But back to your question, Intel's hyperthreading technology simulates another CPU, enabling you to have a much faster gaming CPU.

S! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

a.k.a. BIFF P-51 PILOT in ubi.com lobbies

Marek_Steele
10-21-2004, 10:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Intel's hyperthreading technology simulates another CPU, enabling you to have a much faster gaming CPU. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can buy any opteron 940 for your desktop, they aren't that expensive, you have the 1xx series (single processor), 2xx series (2 way) and 8xx (up to 8 processors), altough any can be run single. Disavantages for desktop use are the need for ecc memory and slower memory bus (altough the new x46 and plus supports 400 ecc), but if you are using software for multiprocessor systems, that's another story!
Actually fx53 almost the same as the Opteron 150, unlocked and without need for ecc in 939. Not to mention the fx51 in s940 is exactly the same as an opteron 148 (I don't remember if plus unlocked).
And btw, the best of 64 dual cores, is that they'll run in the same mobos, sockets and will only need bios updates do to so if amd keeps current plans, but for now there are only still s940 samples as multiprocessor apps are still common only in workstation/server market.

For quote: Well, unfortunately not completelty true, for any software to be able to use 2 cpus it must be compiled for that, using 2 threads etc, for desktop this is quite rare, hopefully with the advent of true dual cores things will change. Today when you use HT as when playing IL2, it will one use a single thread as it would only use one cpu in a true multi-processor system. Until a certain extent, windows can toggle background programs to run in the other thread at the same time, but as you don't have two cache sets or cpu units, single heavy threads (as IL2) will suffer a bit due to extra cache flush (0-3% usually), but still making the OS more responsive.

swiych
10-21-2004, 03:27 PM
Socket 939 mobo and the new 90 nm AMD 64 3000+ Winchester.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2242&p=5

The ability to clock up to FX-55 speed on air makes this chip the bargain of the century http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif