|
The Official PC building thread!
|
|
Moderator
|
16. July 2004 @ 12:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
The Intel Xeons and AMD Opterons have been around for quite some time and both are 64 bit. The only "new" or "better" aspect of the A64 is that it's the first 64 bit processors made explicitly for desktops. 64 bit processors haven't been worthwhile for the average desktop user until now.
So what are you going to say when Intel puts out the dual core processor it's working on and AMD has yet to release one?
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33 |
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. July 2004 @ 13:48 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
WindowsME vs Windows98
P4E vs P4EE
5800 vs 9800
X600 vs 9800
GF4MX vs GF3Ti
GFX5200 vs GF4
9000 vs 8500
exactly...i was going to say the exact same thing. you beat me lol
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
16. July 2004 @ 14:11 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The Intel Xeons and AMD Opterons have been around for quite some time and both are 64 bit.
Dont forget the Itaniums circa 2000 and the Alphas circa a-fucking-long-time-ago
Quote:
64 bit processors haven't been worthwhile for the average desktop user until now.
Even at that, 64bit for avg joe doesnt offter that much on its own -- it just so happens that the A64 line is faster than the A32 line but thats kinda coincidence.
Quote:
So what are you going to say when Intel puts out the dual core processor it's working on and AMD has yet to release one?
"It's sad that people still buy AMD... like c'mon, Dual Core is the wave of the future" -- but wait... no! We can install Ritek Power Tablets! heehee (ok back on topic again)
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. July 2004 @ 17:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
I like the numbers I guess. 32bit vs 64bit...Which one will be what's used 1-2 years from now? I see what is going on. Pentium is making excellent Processors, the best quality, Premium prices with the Xeon line and the P4EE. Forgive me for saying the AMD is more advanced, I didn't mean that literally, I should have said this. It will be used for more advanced programming, Windows-64 and programs that use 64-bit technology. But I doubt the actual chip is better quality or more advanced in anyway over Pentium, besides the simple fact it's 64-bit is all. I would be happy with anything better than what I got now.
Jason Rife
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
17. July 2004 @ 04:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
so you're saying the only thing AMD has got goin is the fact that its 64-bit??? and the rest of the chips are low quality? i dont think thats entirely true...but i think i see what you mean. The only resaon AMD is ahead of the game right now is the fact that it is 64-bit, and once Intel comes out it'll start moving ahead. i think by the time that comes AMD will already have a plan AGAIN and it wont be too long b4 they introduce yet again another chip that come out on top. but thats all a little way's away...here and now AMD is still the leader in almost all benchmarks and test comparisons. if you dont think so just go out on the internet lol...id say 85% of all tests are in favor of AMD...then you have like half of them being bogus or not througly tested.
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
17. July 2004 @ 04:43 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Pentium is making excellent Processors, the best quality, Premium prices with the Xeon line and the P4EE.
As far a "quality" goes, both AMD and Intel make excellent quality otherwise you'd hear people complaining left and right about failing chips all the time. The premium prices associated with the Xeon and EE chips arent exactly because of "quality" .... EE because it's a "limited edition" type of chip and the Xeon, well, obviously.
Quote:
It will be used for more advanced programming, Windows-64 and programs that use 64-bit technology.
You cant exactly compare the programming done with AMD against that used for Intel for well, obvious reasons. ASM is complicated enough as it is.
Quote:
But I doubt the actual chip is better quality or more advanced in anyway over Pentium, besides the simple fact it's 64-bit is all
Well it was the first to implement the NX feature, has a on chip memory controller and a crapload of other things. That's pretty damn advanced.
Quote:
I would be happy with anything better than what I got now.
Yep!
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
17. July 2004 @ 13:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
QUOTE:::::::::4W4K3 (Newbie) 17 July 2004 08:24
so you're saying the only thing AMD has got goin is the fact that its 64-bit??? and the rest of the chips are low quality? i dont think thats entirely true.
I never said the other chips were low quality. I said Pentium is the best quality processor out. AMD is excellent quality also, I have an AMD processor and it works very well. I am guessing Pentium and AMD are both comparable quality, I just think the Pentium might be a tad better, sometimes you do get what you pay for, and Pentium has always been more expensive than AMD. I am talking comparable processors that is from both companys. I'm not going to say a Pentium 3 will cost you more than and AMD 64, I'm just saying pound for pound Pentium is the more expensive chip. Not including the AMD 64 line and the upper AMD class 3000+, I would say AMD is comparable to an Intel Celeron far as performance goes. As far as quality goes I hear the Celeron line are about the same as a Pentium, it's just the Celeron line are toned down alot and don't got the Pentium performace for obvious reasons it's a Budget processor. I think any processor that is current is good performance and quality, they gotta be. I would take either a Pentium or AMD if the stats are their that is all that really matters. I was just saying I think I would rather have an AMD 64 over any current Pentium out, maybe excluding the Xeon, but I am not rich. AMD tend to be more bang for the buck I have noticed over Pentium, they are much cheaper. You gotta pay a little extra for the Pentium name ya know. Both companys have cards that out do one another, as they evolve they get better. I think Pentium has a few tricks up it's sleeve, they are holding out on the P64, because right now the average consumer doesn't need a 64-bit processor, and in the 32-bit world the Pentium EE is kicking @ss. Soon enough Pentium will be coming out with it's 64-bit chip to the public and it will be beating out the AMD 64.
Jason Rife
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
17. July 2004 @ 19:04 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I would say AMD is comparable to an Intel Celeron far as performance goes.
So you're saying AMD chips are equal to Celeron chips...wow, i think i'm getting dumber. The celeron's were budget, piece of crap (in my opinion i've owned 2) computer. This 2.5ghz mobile processor would beat a Celeron chip in many benchmarks if not all. Sure Intel may "have a few tricks up its sleeve" but that doesnt mean there holding ALL the cards. AMD was faster at producing the 64-bit technology, released it first, and now have a head start on Intel developing the next new breakthrough. AMD is at a constant rate of releasing there products...while Intel seems to hold back, then JUMP forward, then hold back, then JUMP back in the game again. As far as comparing quality...i seriously doubt you tell chip quality by going home and sticking it in your desktop. You'd need a lab and alot of hard actual research to see any kind of descrepincy between the 2. something the average user (me ad you) can never do. We are all griping and complaining about such nit picky details...seriously, did you ever REGRET buying Intel over AMD or visa versa. what you ahve is what you have...it seems ALOT of people here seem to be saying " AMD. no Intel, well AMD is good too, but Intel is beter here, unless your using AMD here..." geez its such a pointless argument.
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 17. July 2004 @ 19:08
|
|
aXidburn
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
17. July 2004 @ 19:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
this was a dicision i had to make when buying my computer, to get a intel p4 3.06 (was the speed out) or to get the amd athlon 64 3200+ and whe i did all the pricing it was cheaper to get the A64 3200+ .....and in all the benchmarks the athlon 64 beat the intel....and i have not had one complaint about it yet, its fast and everything, and i am running windows xp pro so i am waiting for the windows 63 bit edition, so really anyone with the athlon 64 wont see its real power until they use the AMD 64 with the windows 64 bit edition,
as far a quality, im surr if i got the intel p4 3.06 it would be working just as good so for me it came down to price.
i do know so people whos computer run very slow and its not their hdd. my sister has a p4 3.06 laptop a dell, and it runs like shit. mine comp tho is a custom comp.
Edit- this argument will go on forever about which is better "Intel Vs. AMD"!!
AMD athlon 64 3200+
ATI 9800 pro all in wonder
Memorex dual x format
ps2 v10, Magic V 5K6
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 17. July 2004 @ 19:22
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
17. July 2004 @ 19:29 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I said Pentium is the best quality processor out
Well sorry to burst your bubble -- it isnt. And neither is the AMD one ... nor Apple chips but the venerable 8bit procs present in damn near every noncomputer device known to man ... they've been damn near perfected and virtually all the kinks have been ironed out. Of course this brings questions to an earlier post you made:
Quote:
The bottom line is the AMD 64 is the best chip out.
Quote:
I am guessing Pentium and AMD are both comparable quality
Then the Pentium isnt the #1 chip anymore since it shares the spot with AMD?
Quote:
I'm just saying pound for pound Pentium is the more expensive chip.
And god I hate them for that.
Quote:
I would say AMD is comparable to an Intel Celeron far as performance goes
Wow. *shock* WOW
Quote:
As far as quality goes I hear the Celeron line are about the same as a Pentium, it's just the Celeron line are toned down alot and don't got the Pentium performace for obvious reasons it's a Budget processor.
Where do you 'hear' these things?
Quote:
I would rather have an AMD 64 over any current Pentium out, maybe excluding the Xeon, but I am not rich
The Xeons cost bracket is the same as that of the A64 chips.
Quote:
AMD tend to be more bang for the buck I have noticed over Pentium, they are much cheaper. You gotta pay a little extra for the Pentium name ya know. Both companys have cards that out do one another, as they evolve they get better. I think Pentium has a few tricks up it's sleeve, they are holding out on the P64, because right now the average consumer doesn't need a 64-bit processor, and in the 32-bit world the Pentium EE is kicking @ss
Werent you just bashing intel a few posts back when you said something about Intel's poor judgement on lack of a 64bit platform? *searches*
Quote:
32-bit technology goes back 10 years ago or more. The new technology is 64-bit....Now go figure it out? In the Computer world new = better, if you haven't noticed it keeps getting better.
Quote:
Soon enough Pentium will be coming out with it's 64-bit chip to the public and it will be beating out the AMD 64.
Soon? Does Itanium ring a bell? :)
Quote:
it seems ALOT of people here seem to be saying " AMD. no Intel, well AMD is good too, but Intel is beter here, unless your using AMD here..." geez its such a pointless argument.
What's wrong with you 4W4K3??? LOL Count again ... a "lot" of people doing that? :P Heehee I dont see "a lot" heehee
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
18. July 2004 @ 04:06 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
What's wrong with you 4W4K3??? LOL Count again ... a "lot" of people doing that? :P Heehee I dont see "a lot" heehee
lol my bad. more of like a very selective few say it alot...hows that sound? :)
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
|
|
EYEShurt
Member
|
18. July 2004 @ 04:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
what is a Athlon64 3000+ with HT Soc 754 Retail Box in INTEL PENTIUM 4 terms
p4 lga775 540 (3.2ghz)
512mb ddr400 ram dual channel
gigabyte x600 xt pci-e
gigabyte ga 8i915p pro
200gb segate barrumundi hdd
16x DL -/+RW LITEON sohw-1633s
tsunami dream case (400w PSU)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2004 @ 04:42
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
18. July 2004 @ 13:57 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
what is a Athlon64 3000+ with HT Soc 754 Retail Box in INTEL PENTIUM 4 terms
A non-intel chip that cant be "translated" (no sarcasm intended)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2004 @ 13:57
|
|
EYEShurt
Member
|
18. July 2004 @ 16:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
i just want a rough estimate performance wise PLEASE
p4 lga775 540 (3.2ghz)
512mb ddr400 ram dual channel
gigabyte x600 xt pci-e
gigabyte ga 8i915p pro
200gb segate barrumundi hdd
16x DL -/+RW LITEON sohw-1633s
tsunami dream case (400w PSU)
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
19. July 2004 @ 10:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
For a rough estimate, they are roughly equal
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. July 2004 @ 07:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ya what Praetor said..LOL
Jason Rife
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
24. July 2004 @ 20:45 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
i just want a rough estimate performance wise PLEASE
As long as you know the rough estimate is really not that useful: I'd say something like the P4C-3.0Ghz give and take a bit. I hope it helps but you're comparison/translation there is kinda like trying to tranlsate a A-10 in terms of F15s ...cant really be done :S
|
|
Veeznutz
Newbie
|
26. July 2004 @ 18:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
Wow I am a Noob and this thread is the shit. I was thinking bout building a computer and have around $750 to spend. And if possible with a P4 either 2.8 gHz or 3.0. I am just not sure about what motherboard,ram, and other things I need are.
|
|
Hamboner
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
26. July 2004 @ 18:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hi, Praetor and the rest. I just read this entire thread. For the last week I have been trying to research pc parts so I can build my own computer for the first time. I thought I knew enough about the specifications, components needed and compatibility, but I dont. I am so glad to have found this forum.
I plan on using my new pc for everything, like most people. I spend a lot of time on Adobe and Macromedia software's (Photoshop, Illustrator, flash etc.) I also play Halo, Fifa etc. My sister does a lot of video and audio editing. I spend most of my day on the internet for work. I usually have everything running simultaneously. I am sick of slow machines and would like to concentrate on speed as much as possible. I have saved about $1500 but am willing to go up to $2000 (not including monitor, printer etc). Ofcourse if its cheaper I would be happier. I agree with you and think a step below the fastest products out there is almost just as good and much cheaper.
I think I would like to stick with Intel on this machine. I would appreciate your help in finding components I should make my machine with. I would use your advice to build my research on. Thanx.
Jack of all traits, master of none.
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
26. July 2004 @ 21:10 |
Link to this message
|
Veeznutz
Have a look at http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/93097 ... got a couple systems in the lower price brackets for ya ... I'll say this though: you can and an Intel chip for that budget range but you'll be skimping out on a lot of stuff.
Hamboner
Quote:
I am so glad to have found this forum.
I'm glad the thread was of use :) As for a spec, have a look at this:
MOBO
- ASUS P4P800SE (http://usa.asus.com/products/mb/socket478/p4p800se/overview.htm)
- $100USD
CPU
- P4C-2.80
- Your basic NorthwoodC chip with a lot of OC headroom and solid performance if you dont want o OC
- $175USD
RAM
- 1GB Corsair TwinX1024 -4400 (http://www.corsairmicro.com/corsair...nx1024-4400.pdf )
- You give up on timings 3-4-4-8 but timings arent really important for what 99% of consumers use their memory for anyways.... the raw Mhz is much more benificial when it comes to making the most of burst mode access to memory. These sticks are matched beforehand for Dual Channel applications and I'm sure you can push the memory much further than 3-4-4-8 if you wanted to
- $340USD
HDD
- Segate Barracuda 7200.7 SATA (http://www.seagate.com/cda/products...081,599,00.html)
- A very solid performer and shockingly "cheap" for what i'd thought it to be. Use this drive for installing stuff to and keeping stuff that likes good solid transfer rates
- $150USD
OPTICAL1
- LiteOn 52x32x52
- Argueably the best (affordable) CDRW drive available (although I'd tend to argue for the ASUS 523252 but those are harder to come across).
- $35USD
OPTICAL2
- Pioneer 107
- Since you've got a "2-sheep" CD burner theres no need for the Plextor burner (which is expensive as hell)... this is the next best thing
- $90USD
CASE
- Cheming 601AE (http://www.chenming.com/)
- A very solid case, used a lot -- for good reason. Comes with 400W Enermax PSU
- $65USD
HSF
- Thermaltake Polo735 (http://www.thermaltake.com/coolers/...735/polo735.htm )
- An excellent HSF complete with fan controller
- $40USD
VIDEO
- eVGA 6800GT 256MB ( http://www.evga.com/products/morein...=256-A8-N344-AX )
- This is the midrange card for the new nVidia's 6800 line of chips. Lots of people will compare the 6800GT to the X800 and argue (when) the X800 beats this card, that the X800 is better. Sure it's better: but the X800 is the top end card and this is a medium end card. Personally I'm kinda surprised this is a 1-slot deal but yeah, enjoy the card and dont get involved in pissing contests. From a technical point the reason I chose this card was because (a) the card is clocked fast enough regardless of what people will tell you and (b) the inclusion of Pixel Shader 3.0, while not horribly a big deal, does add some life to the card
- $400USD
- Course if this is a tad rich for your blood, you can grab the 9800Pro for something in the ballpark of $200USD
SOUND
- Soundblaster Audigy 2
- Your basic run of the mill soundcard
- $60USD
NET COST: $1455USD
That should give you something to work with :)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. July 2004 @ 21:11
|
|
Hamboner
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. July 2004 @ 06:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
Thanx Praetor, I appreciate your quick responce. I will look at all these parts and am sure will have a few questions. Thanx again.
Jack of all traits, master of none.
|
|
Hamboner
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. July 2004 @ 12:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ok, for the past 6 hours I have probably read over 100 review sites. I used Praetor's recommendations as my reference point and made my own list of components for my computer. Please give me your input if these are not compatible or not cost affective or just not a good idea. Your advice will be very much appreciated.
Lian Li Silver, Model "PC-6077" $110.00
Antec 430W Power TRUE430 $68.00
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe $170.00
Pentium 4 3.0GHz Prescott 800FSB $219.00
GeIL 1GB 4200DC PC4200 533MHZ DDR $288.00
Thermaltake Polo735 $40.00
ATI All-in-Wonder 9800 Pro $272.00
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS $70.00
Western Digital 74 Gb 10000rpm $161.00
Seagate 200GB 7200RPM Barracuda $140.00
ASUS CD-RW CRW-5232AS $39.00
Pioneer DVD-RW DVR-107 $84.00
Total $1661.00
I liked the Lian Li cases a lot, some can get very expensive. I am not sure which power supply is suppose to be good for my system. The other motherboard I was looking at was the Abit IC7 Max 3, basically it was a tossup between that and the Asus P4C800-E Deluxe. Difference between the 1GB Corsair TwinX1024 -4400 and GeIL 1GB4200DC PC4200 533MHZ is about $90, is it worth getting the Corsair still? Heatsinks are difficult to pick as well, is water cooling worth it? Is it a good idea to use a fast 10000rpm drive as your C drive so the OS and other softwares can load faster? (just my logic, which means nothing really)
Jack of all traits, master of none.
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
27. July 2004 @ 16:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
- I'd stay away from the Prescotts. Not worth the price/trouble
- If you want the Abit board, get the IC7 Max 2... the OTES feature from the Max3 can be a pain for some cases. The Max2 is the same board just without the OTES
- As for Corsair/Geil.... do you intend to run them at those speeds? They wont run at those speeds without OC :)
- Watercooling isnt all THAT effective. If you want to do exotic cooling you might as well and grab a vapor-phase unit
|
|
Veeznutz
Newbie
|
27. July 2004 @ 17:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
Praetor, thanks for the advice. This is my first time building and it helped alot. I just wasnt really sure on the Mobo. Everything else I have figured out.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
27. July 2004 @ 18:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
Glad I could help
|
