[Grey Wolf]

I figured, considering all the questions we have been having recently, I'd give a nice overview of the complete computer market:

1. Processors
Determining who has the lead here really depends on your criteria. For gaming, the current leader is most likely the Athlon 64 3400+, considering it's just as fast as teh FX-51 and the Pentium 4 3.2EE, but about half the cost. For things like video and audio compression, the 3.2EE has the lead due to the Netburst architecture. For budget and overclocking purposes, however, the winner is definitely the Athlon XP 2500+.
For next-generation chips, it appears that AMD has the advantage. With both the FX and standard versions of the Athlon 64 switching to Socket 939, they'll get better memory performance thanks to the dual-channel setup which will not require registered memory. Intel, meanwhile, seems to have problems getting the Prescott-based chips out the door, and early benchmarks suggest that their performance is actually lower than a Northwood-based chip at the same speed.

2. Motherboards
On the Intel front, your best bet is an Intel chipset, probably Canterwood, on a board from a company such as Asus, Abit, or MSI. For Athlon XPs, your best bet is a KT600-based board if you're on a budget, or a nForce 2 Ultra 400 if you want to spend a bit more. If you're going for an Athlon 64, it's really up to you whether to get a K8T800 or a nForce 3 150.

3. Graphics cards
At the current moment, ATI has the advantage in both the high-end and mainstream markets, thanks to a flaw in nVidia's implementation of PS2.0 and the lower price of the ATI-based cards.
This may change in a few months, however, with both nVidia and ATI coming out with their next-generation chips, the NV40 and the R400, both of which will be compatible with PEG x16 (PCI Express Graphics), the replacement for the aging AGP standard.

[aldo_14]

Worth pointing out that the new 64-bit chips are totally useless without a 64-bit Os - which rules out windows till about 2005 (based on what I've heard of longhorns' release woes)

Also a good idea to keep an eye for a replacement case standard for ATX, known as BTX - which will mean new, expensive BTX mobos and a drop off in price for ATX as the new tech gets taken up.

[Grey Wolf]

They're not completely useless, just not living up to their full potential. My evaluations were based on current 32-bit benchmarks.

[aldo_14]

Well, you don't want to be paying £500+ for a chip that will be several years old by the time you can use it as intended......

[Grey Wolf]

I don't know the conversion rate, but I'm fairly sure 404 USD is less than 500 pounds, and 404 USD is the going rate for a 3400+.

[aldo_14]

UK prices are higher - for, well anything technological really.  I can only presume cos we're not American.

http://www.dabs.com/uk/search.htm?searchPhrase=athlon+64

Well, it's not quite as bad as I though, but still fecking pricey for what is basically not going to run as intended for a good while yet.  I'm waiting till i've been working full-time for a year or so, then i'm building from scratch.

[Taristin]

That bit about the processors. I bought a good mobo (Asus a7n8x-e Deluxe) with the nForce 2 chipset, but decided not to get a chip yet. I'm going to recycle my Duron for a while longer. I want to get an Athlon XP, but don't know which one. My board will support up to the 3200+ and a 400MHz FSB. What can I get that won't be as expensive, but still powerful?

[Grey Wolf]

Get a 2500+ or a 2800+. 2500+ is usually a better overclocker, but the 2800+ is faster. Both of them will get up to 200/400 FSB.

[CP5670]

Some good information there, as I'm going upgrade the processor, memory and video card on my machine in a few weeks. I changed the motherboard and HDD a few months ago, more out of necessity than anything else, but the mobo (nForce2 400S based) has given me some room for expansion and I want to be able to play some of the newly released games such as Deus Ex 2 that currently run too slowly. I am thinking about the Athlon XP3200+, which is the best thing this board supports, but I have heard some things about the cheaper 2600's overclocking nicely to reach the same speeds, although I don't know if they support the full 400mhz FSB. Do you guys know anything about this? The memory is fairly straightforward, as Samsung's 512mb DDR PC3200 modules are supposed to have solid reliability and run for about $70. As for the graphics component, the Radeon 9800 pro 256mb looks like a good choice (the XT doesn't seem to offer much for the price difference), but I have not really decided on that either.

I bought a good mobo (Asus a7n8x-e Deluxe) with the nForce 2 chipset

That's the one I was originally looking for, but CompUSA didn't have it in stock and with a competition deadline a week away, I had to get something immediately, so I settled on the normal A7N8X.

Actually if I get into the finalist stage for that project, I would get a free computer; if that happens to be good then I won't need to worry about this stuff, but I'm not going to be counting on that.

[Grey Wolf]

Get the 2500+ or 2800+, since they're Barton cores, as opposed to the 2600+, which is Thouroughbred B based.

[CP5670]

Okay, but those are preferable to the 3200? I have had a very good experience with overclocking in the past, but at the same time I've recently had a whole bunch of computer problems and it might be better to be on the safe side. What are the possible bus speeds for those two models?

[Liberator]

If you don't mind waiting a few days, have a credit card, and live in the US,  may I suggest Gigaparts.com It's where I get most of my stuff.  As an added plus, if you live in driving distance, like me:D , they'll give you web prices in store.

[Grey Wolf]

Originally posted by CP5670
Okay, but those are preferable to the 3200? I have had a very good experience with overclocking in the past, but at the same time I've recently had a whole bunch of computer problems and it might be better to be on the safe side. What are the possible bus speeds for those two models?

They both run at a bus speed of 166/333. If you want a 200/400 fsb at stock, then I suggest you get a 3000+ w/ 400 fsb (there's 2 models, 333 and 400). It's about 100 mhz slower than the 3200+, and a bit cheaper.

[Xelion]

Okay I think A64s have a much better benchmark then any current p4 processor on the market, after reading many reviews it does seem that way . One thing is clear though p4 chips can be overclocked quite a lot but do keep in mind you need very good cooling for that. The core temperature of AMD chips are better than Intels... I definitely know that

btw hyper-threading doesn't complement Intel benchmarks either, and in quite a few cases it does actually slow down the speed of using an application

Grey Wolf 2009

This may change in a few months, however, with both nVidia and ATI coming out with their next-generation chips, the NV40 and the R400, both of which will be compatible with PEG x16 (PCI Express Graphics), the replacement for the aging AGP standard.

For me this does not bold well as I just purchased a Asus Radeon 9600XT/TVD, lets just hope they take a while to sink into the market

[Taristin]

I'm looking forward to getting a R9600Xt aswell, just Saphire brand...


But back to what I wanted to ask...

Grey Wolf:  How good is the overclockability of a Duron600(all I have ATM. I'll take your advice for the 2500+ when I get cash)? And since I'm new to this, can the FSB speed be overclocked as well? Or is it automatically sped up with the CPU clock speed?

[Setekh]

I was looking at an Athlon 2800+ myself, but basically I'm dreaming, since I'm going to have to start a buttload of uni fees soon.

[vyper]

[q]without a 64-bit Os -[/q]

XP 64-bit exists, my mate from uni runs it on a 3200 64 bit chip...

[WMCoolmon]

I'm curious...how much will a 64-bit processor speed things up?

[Grey Wolf]

Raa Tor'h: You're using this on the Asus, right? I'm not sure how well the Duron 600 overclocks, but basically, every 1 mhz you raise the FSB (the base is 100, I believe), the processor frequency should go up 6. So it is rather that the fsb determines the clock speed, not vise versa.

WMCoolMan: It would really vary. The advantage of 64-bit is how well it adresses the ram and the size of the numbers it can handle.

[WMCoolmon]

Would it be a better investment to buy a 64-bit system now than a faster but 32-bit system?