CDRLabs.com

Trying to figure out what to get:
Athlon64 3000+(on Asus A8V Deluxe) or Pentium 4 2.8C (on Asus P4C800-E Deluxe).

I've used both Intel and AMD systems in the past and both have had their up&downs. My main point of concern is stability.I don't really mind losing a few %-points in performance if that get's me a more stable system. Low noise is a plus too.

I think I like the (64-bits) architecture of the Athlon64 the best, but I have my doubts about the reliability of the used VIA chipset (based on bad experiences with the KT266). The Intel combo on the other hand has a reputation of being rock-solid.

Any constructive idea's?

I have the P4C800-E Dlx. running with my P4 2.6C and it runs rock solid, put on my Thermalright SP-94 and a Panaflo fan, and I can overclock the bloody thing to at least a good 2.9 while still retaining the best stability I have ever seen on a computer.

I have ASUS's K8V SE Deluxe and I love it. The thing has been rock solid so far. The only issue I've had so far is compatibility with some SATA devices. Some (especially optical drives) require Intel.

I'm also thinking of picking up a P4C800-E to replace that motherboard I was complaining about in another thread.

ok, 2 days ago at the HP/Intel traning event in denver

my co-worker won a P4 3.0Ghz cpu and intel mobo, if you want i can talk to him maybe he'll sell it to you

seeing as he already bought the AMD retail bundle for $179, which includes amd 64 3200+ cpu, asus k8v se mobo

he said he plans on using the amd and selling the intel bundle

MikeTR wrote:Athlon64 3000+(on Asus A8V Deluxe) or Pentium 4 2.8C (on Asus P4C800-E Deluxe)?

From my experience, I would go to AnnandTech and post in the hardware forum. May have already been answered. You'll get ~100 responses in a week. They love this sort of question.

21st Hermit wrote:They love this sort of question.

I know, I checked out their thread(s)..................Information overload.
Thought I'd post it here for some real life feedback.

Ian wrote: have ASUS's K8V SE Deluxe and I love it. The thing has been rock solid so far. The only issue I've had so far is compatibility with some SATA devices. Some (especially optical drives) require Intel.

What kind of problems exactly Ian? Were you able to resolve them eventually? I'd hate to run into compatability problems with optical and other storage devices.

I'd wait a bit if you can. Big transition point coming up with the new Intel chipsets, cores and new AMD cores. Worst case, if they don't look worth buying, it'll drive prices down.

A64/FX is typically faster in games. P4 does better encoding (but we're talking by an insignificant amount). If you like to multitask, P4 with Hyperthreading is a very nice thing to have.

64 bit at this point is academic and shouldn't be the basis of your decision.

I've got a 2.6C, had it about to 3.6GHZ, fairly stable, cranked it down to 3.4 now. Not a bad deal when you get down to it. Next rig might very well be AMD, they're doing a great job.

tazdevl wrote:64 bit at this point is academic and shouldn't be the basis of your decision.

True only if you are one of those people constantly upgrading computer hardware. Otherwise, it's considerbly a safe and a good choice to go 64bit now.

tazdevl wrote:If you like to multitask, P4 with Hyperthreading is a very nice thing to have.

Hyperthreading is just icing on a cake. Its usefulness varies alot depending the applications. In most cases, it doesn't do anything. SMP setup with two processors or more is better and true solution to multitasking.

Shredder wrote:

tazdevl wrote:64 bit at this point is academic and shouldn't be the basis of your decision.

True only if you are one of those people constantly upgrading computer hardware. Otherwise, it's considerbly a safe and a good choice to go 64bit now.

tazdevl wrote:If you like to multitask, P4 with Hyperthreading is a very nice thing to have.

Hyperthreading is just icing on a cake. Its usefulness varies alot depending the applications. In most cases, it doesn't do anything. SMP setup with two processors or more is better and true solution to multitasking.

1) It is academic because no one has an idea how well a full out A64/64bit system will run. Don't bother bringing up Linux. When MS does grelease its 64bit OS, there's no guarantee there won't be a host of problems. Not to mention, 64bit performance is pretty much on par or under with 32bit based on all the tests I've seen. No one really knows what kind of a lift shifting to 64bit will provide, if any at all. Figure app, driver support and optimizations will take about 9-12 months after release before things are totally stable.

If you want to run 64bit, wait until its been out for a while before you buy into the platform. Same issue with PS3.0 and the 6800U. Even though it may support it, there's no guarantee it won't run like crap when it's finally implemented in games.

You buy hardware for what it can do today because it generally falls short in terms of promised future performance, stability and compatibility.

2) Ummm SMP wasn't listed as a possibility. Let's try to stay on track. HT is taken care of at the OS level. There is a benefit even if the app isn't tweaked for it.



Mike Via has come a long way since the KT266. They produce solid chipsets. You could also go nForce3 which has solid performance and stability. There are a ton of reviews floating around the web.

tazdevl wrote:1) It is academic because no one has an idea how well a full out A64/64bit system will run. Don't bother bringing up Linux. When MS does grelease its 64bit OS, there's no guarantee there won't be a host of problems.

Everyone has an idea how 64bit systems will run. It will run like how 386 ran compare to 286. Real question everyone wonders is how long before the effective full potential usage of 64bitness.

tazdevl wrote:Not to mention, 64bit performance is pretty much on par or under with 32bit based on all the tests I've seen. No one really knows what kind of a lift shifting to 64bit will provide, if any at all. Figure app, driver support and optimizations will take about 9-12 months after release before things are totally stable

I don't know where you got that information from, but Athlon 64 running in 32bit mode runs like Athlon XP with similar performance rating number. Athlon 64 3200+ runs like Athlon XP 3200+. As for softwares, just like back in days of 386/486 when there were greater number of 16bit softwares than 32bit, it will take time to realize full potential of 64bit.

tazdevl wrote:You buy hardware for what it can do today because it generally falls short in terms of promised future performance, stability and compatibility.

True, but if you were to buy or build a new computer that has to last you more than one year, given that new hardware comes out every six months and you are not one of those people that buys brand new computer parts to upgrade whenever new hardware comes out, wouldn't you buy 64bit now so it has some possibility of ability to run softwares that will come out in the future?

tazdevl wrote:2) Ummm SMP wasn't listed as a possibility. Let's try to stay on track. HT is taken care of at the OS level. There is a benefit even if the app isn't tweaked for it.

I retract my statement about HT being not so useful after my own tests using P4 computers at work. Threaded applications seem to gain some performance, but not signicantly at least according to some programs I used/wrote to test.

I have seen that when HT is enabled,the perforance increment is about 1.5 times by average.

To run the 64 bit processor you need an OS like Linux.There is a 64 bit Windows XP Editon,which is still in beta stage.So whats the point in buying a 64 bit processor and run a 32 bit OS on it?


::Pranav::

pranav81 wrote:I have seen that when HT is enabled,the perforance increment is about 1.5 times by average.

Where and how did you get that signicant number? If HT gives such significant number, why doesn't Intel come up with HT2 or double HT? concentrate on HT to provide needed performance/price instead of its Xeon SMP?

pranav81 wrote:So whats the point in buying a 64 bit processor and run a 32 bit OS on it?

What's the point of buying P4 or Athlon? When there are 386, 486, Pentium, Pentium II, Pentium III, K5, K6, K6-II, K6-III and other older processors that offer 32bit? This should answer your question.

Shredder,I think that we think differently.As you MAY be knowing that the processors 386, 486, Pentium, Pentium II, Pentium III, K5, K6, K6-II, K6-III are now old.You try and run Windows XP on some of those.
What I mean to say is that,why should anyone go for a 64 bit processor and run a 32 bit OS on it,if there is no specific point there.Instead go for a 32 bit processor like P 4 or Athlon and run 32 bit OS on them.If you would see in economical point of view,you will see that you get a Athlon cheaper than Athlon 64.

Where and how did you get that signicant number?

Well,I can say that HT works for some applications and for others it does not seem to.I have seen some big images opening a bit faster in Photoshop,the video encoding finishes a little bit earlier when HT is enabled.

If HT gives such significant number, why doesn't Intel come up with HT2 or double HT?

You will have to contact Intel for more details.

concentrate on HT to provide needed performance/price instead of its Xeon SMP?

The Xeon line of processors have thier architecture different,as you may already be knowing.There is no point to compare Xeon with the desktop processors.



::Pranav::

ohh shit you guys its been done, 8,908 in 3dmark 03

using the new AMD 64 3700+ CPU:

http://www.amdreview.com/reviews.php?rev=3700

pranav81 wrote:Shredder,I think that we think differently.As you MAY be knowing that the processors 386, 486, Pentium, Pentium II, Pentium III, K5, K6, K6-II, K6-III are now old.You try and run Windows XP on some of those.

You answered your own question.

pranav81 wrote:What I mean to say is that,why should anyone go for a 64 bit processor and run a 32 bit OS on it,if there is no specific point there.Instead go for a 32 bit processor like P 4 or Athlon and run 32 bit OS on them.If you would see in economical point of view,you will see that you get a Athlon cheaper than Athlon 64.

Unless the person is willing to spend money to upgrade very often to keep hardware up to date, getting something that will last longer and be future-proof is probably the most economical at this point of time which hardwares are in transition, from 32bit X86 CPU to 64bit X86, PCI to 1x/2x PCI Express, AGP to 16x PCI Express, PATA to SATA, SCSI to Serial Attached SCSI, etc. Windows LongHorn for example, it is planned to be released in a few years. It is said to require considerbly higher powered computer compare to todays' available hardware. Current P4 and Athlon will probably run it like how old processors run Windows XP.

pranav81 wrote:You will have to contact Intel for more details.

You see Intel doesn't advertise with such significant number as you said because P4 HT doesn't improve performance that greatly. If they did advertise and software/hardware developers and end users find out it doesn't actually offer that much of performance gain, Intel will either be recalling CPU's or writing checks. This has happened in the past with early batch of Pentium 60/66Mhz and recently with their new chipsets.

To make my statements clearer and see what's ahead for the world of X86 processors...

http://news.com.com/Intel%27s+Opteron+competitor+comes+out+Monday/2100-1006_3-5247954.html?tag=nefd.top

I already have an Athlon 64 motherboard so I'd better buy an Athlon 64 processor soon!

It seems to me like you will buy a 23 room bungalow and use only 3 rooms,keeping all the other rooms locked.

It will be dead investment if you dont use the 64-bit functionality of the processor.You can buy the same advanced processor for less when 64 bit OS's like MS Windows will be released next year.I know that there are Linux distributions that support 64 bit platforms,but I doubt how many 64 bit desktop users have it installed.Meanwhile you can buy a 32 bit processor like Athlon and save a lot of money until 64 bit truly comes to desktop computing.


::Pranav::

Buy Athlon XP Barton 2500+ or 2800+ instead. Or Pentium 4 800MHz Prescott 775 combined with 915/925 motherboards. I now run an Athlon 64 system but as pranav81 says it is a dead investment though I don't care much about it anyway.

I wasn't going to buy another Athlon Socket A processor after all.

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=noconaopteron&page=1&cookie%5Ftest=1

Comparison between the new 64-bit Xeon 3.4Ghz, and Opteron 250 2Ghz, 2.2Ghz and 2.4Ghz. Although Opteron has dual channel memory controller and Athlon64 has single channel memory controller, they both have fairly similar performance in most applications many people use everyday.

According to gamepc.com the OS used was 64-bit Windows XP, however the softwares used in benchmarking are 32-bit, except for SiSoft Sandra. As shown on that website, 32-bit softwares run/performs very well on 64-bit processors. So people with assumption of current 64-bit processors running 32-bit softwares with any less performance than current 32-bit proccesors, and/or getting 64-bit proccessor is a dead investment should re-think and re-educate themselves.

This thread is developing very nicely with the absence of over zealous fans from both sides. Well, if you are not not sure whether to go 32 or 64 bit with AMD, why not do a price/performance analysis. I have to make this decision soon myself, but considering the Mobo options for AMD 64 with it's 32bit counterparts, the addons / functions look attractive indeed.

(Chaintech has become my Mobo of choice for AMD. Performance is on par with the popular brands and for a little premium the extra stuff you get is great.)

well if you want super cheap, super high performace:

find a friend who works retail, have them do AMD and Intel Training

AMD Bundle:

AMD 3200+ 64 CPU
Asus K8V SE Deluxe Motherboard
---------------------------------------
$279 w/ $100 MIR (might be over with already)

Intel Bundle will be releasing in october
top of the line mobo, cpu, win xp pro

was $179 last year

intel link: www.intel.com/retailedge

Well......It seems to that I am correct.I am not a guy to buy a 64 bit processor and run 32 bit applications on it.It simply doesnt suit me.As I said you will buy a house with 23 rooms and use only 3 of them,keeping the other closed.That simply doesnt make sense.
I would say that,better stick to 32 bit systems and go 64 bit when it's raging.Till then save money and/or invest somewhere intelligently.You may say that the difference is not big enough,but the fact is that you dont need a 64,bit processor which is costly than 32 bit one,to run 32 bit applications.Why buy a 23 room house if you are only going to use 3 rooms?


::Pranav::

pranav81 wrote:You may say that the difference is not big enough,but the fact is that you dont need a 64,bit processor which is costly than 32 bit one,to run 32 bit applications.

Have you checked the price lately? Athlon 64 is similarly priced as P4. Considering performance/cost ratio with features, Athlon 64 is cheaper. Also in that respect, Opteron is easily comparable to Xeon or P4 EE, and cheaper if you consider the features such as builtin dual channel memory controller and being 64-bit processor. 64-bit softwares are coming very soon whether you want to believe or not. Do you think you can run 64-bit software on 32-bit processor? You can run 32-bit softwares on 64-bit processor.

pranav81 wrote:Why buy a 23 room house if you are only going to use 3 rooms?

I must say you are using a really bad analogy. What if you have lots of guests, friends and family coming over to your house? It's much better to have extra rooms than have just three rooms so you can have home office, guest rooms, etc. I live alone, but I have three room apartment which I use one room as home office and one as guest room (Yes I do have friends and family come visit and/or stay for a few days time to time) and the other one as my bedroom.

Well.....well......why dont you compare the prices of Athlon 64 with Athlon.Why do you compare them intel counterparts which you know are always priced highly?


Also about the 23 room house,the guests and friends come occasionally and you can create room for them for some time.They dont come to stay at your place infinitely.If they come,you can safely buy a bigger house.

If 64 bit computing is not blazing,and the prices of the processors will fall in current days,then why opt for a 64 bit processor and run 32 bit applications on it.Better go for 64 bit processor when you get 64 bit applications.And yes,I very well know that 64 bit applications cannot run on a 32 bit processor.

You and I think differently.This discussion will never take new course.



::Pranav::