Post by: Top Gun on May 27, 2002, 03:15:26 pm
Here are the Specs:
* CPU:
* Supports Intel Pentium 4 in 478 socket
* Up to 2.4 GHz
* Chipset:
* SiS 645 and SiS 650 chipset
* Memory:
* DDR-DIMM type PC1600, PC2100 or PC2700
* 3 DDR-DIMM sockets
* Supports up to 3 GB memory (2GB with PC2700)
* Does not support ECC and REG memory
* IDE:
* 2 x IDE socketes that support UDMA 33/ 66 / 100
* Support up to 4 disks
* Connections:
* 1 AGP 4x port
* 6 PCI ports
* 1 ACR port
* 1 parallel port
* 2 serial ports
* 2 USB ports
If anyone could suggest a better one with simmilar soecs that it would be appreciated.
Post by: Redfang on May 27, 2002, 03:26:46 pm
But Pentium 4 has quite a lot better performance with RDRAM. :nod:
Post by: CP5670 on May 27, 2002, 03:44:21 pm
Post by: Top Gun on May 27, 2002, 03:44:26 pm
Post by: Thorn on May 27, 2002, 04:15:14 pm
Post by: Ryx on May 28, 2002, 12:55:07 am
Found this pic of my mobo (http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/motherboards/abit_at7/img/board.jpg), which is working out pretty great.
Post by: CP5670 on May 28, 2002, 01:08:17 am
Quote
Is RDRAM worth it though. I've heard that the extra performance that RDRAM gives isn't really worth it for the cost.
That's what they say from the specifications and theoretical output, but then again, the Pentium 4 has not been tested extensively with DDR, as the processor and Intel's reference chipset was originally designed to work only with RAMBUS. The DDR compatibility is fairly new, so I would wait for some internet articles regarding its performacne and stability.
Post by: Blitz_Lightning on May 28, 2002, 02:12:32 am
Post by: Bobboau on May 28, 2002, 02:39:48 am
Athlon
don't they have anything faster yet, I mean, Athlon is like 3 years old now, isn't it
Post by: Ryx on May 28, 2002, 03:06:47 am
thunderbird - socket a <1.4GHz
palomino - socket a < 1.73 GHz? XP line
Thoroughbred - socket a < ? GHz
something along those lines. Anyway Hammer's due Q4, iirc
Post by: Razor on May 28, 2002, 03:41:39 am
Please help me out.
Thanks in advance
Post by: Ryx on May 28, 2002, 04:11:57 am
Post by: Razor on May 28, 2002, 04:45:21 am
Post by: Ryx on May 28, 2002, 04:59:48 am
Quote
Originally posted by Razor
But that's impossible. Right now, I have an AMD K6-3 450MHz on my board. There must be something better that I can stick into it. :(
start saving for a new one.
Upgrade mobo, cpu, ram and most likely case (or power supply). not too expensive. The rest can be upgraded along the way with little difficulty (except for financial ones). Less work to replace a gfx card than replacing the mobo.
Post by: Razor on May 28, 2002, 08:52:42 am
Post by: wEvil on May 28, 2002, 09:25:30 am
Inferior product
Inferior Fabrication
Inferior Price
Inferior Performance
a P4 requires DRDram, it won't work nearly as well on SDRAM (DDR or otherwise). So if you want a P4 you'll be stuck with rambus.
If I were you i'd wait a few months for Athlon64/Hammer/Opteron to hit us - just whatever you do don't get a P4.
The thoughourbred/Barton core should go up to 2.5ghz i think, then Hammer takes over. they're both .13u chips.
CPS - the P4 is not faster under any circumstances unless you run specifically compiled SSE2 code AND you have a 'Prestonia' P4. Wilamette and Northwood cores both suck as 256k of L2 cache isn't enough to feed such a low IPC/high clock chip.
DRDRAM (rambus) does perform better than DDR. Under certain curcumstances. Since its' a serial-linked memory type and not a row/column type the latency is huge. This means for 3D, gaming and anything else that relies on "asychronous" memory access, DDR is better.
DRDRAM takes the lead in streaming tests (think of a DAT tape or something like that) because it has a massive bandwidth and doesnt need to waste cycles for the memory controller to seek for the data it needs.
They both have price parity now (more or less) but just think of this - Rambus are one of the nastiest companies you will EVER meet. Do you really want to support what they try to ram down your throat?
The technology might be fairly "innocent" but the way they tried to push it into the market (by stealing everyone elses' ideas and then making them pay royalties on them) more than anything else has convinced me never to buy anything remotely linked to them. ever.
Post by: Kazashi on May 28, 2002, 10:00:10 am
Comments about the P4 being slower than an Athlon in everything are somewhat exaggerated. Take Lightwave for example, the performance boost whilst using a P3/P4 system is quite substantual (and before someone mentions SSE, remember that Athlons also have SSE instructions). For professional work i.e. not games the P4 is quite a good performer.
Now for the downsides. P4's are somewhat more expensive than equivalent AMD solutions, however there have been times where P4's have retailed cheaper than Athlons Mhz-Mhz. Their lack of performance Mhz-Mhz compared to other CPU's is legendary, partly due to a hyper-extended (not official terminology) pipeline which hasn't worked as well as in theory
With that P5A, chances are that it will support up to K6/II/III-550, which is still a far cry from a decent system nowadays. Turn it into a server of some description and go buy a Duron+DDR system
Post by: wEvil on May 28, 2002, 10:13:24 am
Post by: CP5670 on May 28, 2002, 10:25:15 am
Post by: Redfang on May 28, 2002, 01:25:15 pm
Also, there was price cut today, and RDRAM isn't that much more expensive anymore. But I don't know, read some reviews. :nod:
Both are good.
Post by: Top Gun on May 28, 2002, 02:24:02 pm
Post by: wEvil on May 29, 2002, 09:27:05 am
Either way, the Athlon still beats the pants off it from almost every point of view.