Considering A64, convince me to stick with Intel

S

SarCastro

Weaksauce
Joined
May 20, 2002
Messages
112
Well, my current rig has about run its course. I've got a P4 1.6A that used to be clocked at 2.66 GHz, but over the last year has been overheating and I've had to scale it back to its original speed. I think it'll be fine as a server soon enough.

But enough about my old one, I'm contemplating my new one. I'm trying to decide if I should go with a Northwood/865 combo, or an A64. I don't want to have to spend a lot of $$ on it. I'm not looking at overclocking, I want something that's fast and runs quiet.

Is there much of a slowdown with DDR333 on an 800MHz FSB? (cause I've got 1Gig of it, and would rather not spend the extra $$ for a percent or two increase) How loud/quiet is the 3.0C/3.2C stock fan? How hot do they usually run? Should I look into a quieter cooler? Should I bother getting one with socket 478 soon to bite the dust? Does HT make that much of a difference in multitasking?

Thanks in advance...
 
Forget about Intel and AMD camps. Look at the price, performance, and if necessary, the selection available. There's no reason you should try to stick with Intel. The low end Athlon 64 3000+ and a decent motherboard would cost you about the same as a stock speed Intel processor and motherboard with the same performance.

If you're really a die hard overclocker, then that's one thing that may tilt your choice in favor of an Intel processor. But you really have to judge for yourself what factors are important (overclockability, price, selection) as I mentioned above.
 
If you buy an Athlon 64 motherboard with Cool 'n Quiet technology, it'll be hard to beat in terms of quietness. At times, the fan gets shut off when Cool 'n Quiet is enabled. The whole Athlon 64 line is very competitive with the P4 "C" series, with each artitecture having its strengths and weaknesses. HyperThreading is pretty nice, but only useful for heavy multitasking that requires lots of CPU utilization. I run over a dozen applications at any given time, but CPU utilization on my logical processors (2) are very, very low because I don't run lots of CPU-gobbling applications. Internet browsers, word processors, and e-mail programs are a few examples. Nonetheless, HT can be very nice on the rare occasion.
 
Thanks for the advice. I've purchased nothing but Intel procs (except for one Athlon for a very short period of time) for the past 15 years. I'm just worried about potential stablilty (ie mobo related with AMD solutions). But the price/performance is hard to beat. As I said, not gonna overclock this one. :cool: Not looking to start a fan-boy war, just looking for reasons to stick with Intel ;)
 
Personally if I were in your posistion (i.e upgrading without overclocking) I would go with the A64, price VS performance is VERY appealing. I've always been Intel so this is hard for me to say but the numbers speak for themselves. Intel had the lead in video encoding and whatnot but now that the 64 bit operating systems are avaliable (trial 360+ days) AMD is going to have a substantial lead.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/downloads/upgrade.asp

Now im torn between prescot and an A64. I hope Tedinde steers me in the right direction.
 
i'd say since the k6 days you can really forget the stability issues with AMD's products. If we're talking about VIA chipsets running with AMD CPUs, that's a different story. But even them, they've improved a bit since the kt133 days. if you want a stable, fast A64 board at stock speeds, get the ECS 755-A2 board. that's more for the awesomeness of the sis 755 than the features of the board. right now that and the ALi offering are imo the only even acceptable Athlon 64 chipsets. nforce3 150 and k8t800 are ok, but they need a lot of work (for via, more so the south bridge than the north bridge). if 64bit linux is in your future, def go for the via solution - people tend to have the best results with it.

ecs board reviews:
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.html?i=1952
http://www.ocworkbench.com/2004/ecs/755a2/755a2-1.htm
EDIT: doh - recommending a board you can't even buy anywhere yet...grr

somebody more familiar with intel's dual channel chipsets can correct me, but i think the p4s would take a much larger hit from running ddr333 than the athlon 64 would.
 
Originally posted by pxc
Look at the price, performance, and if necessary, the selection available. There's no reason you should try to stick with Intel. The low end Athlon 64 3000+ and a decent motherboard would cost you about the same as a stock speed Intel processor and motherboard with the same performance.
Click to expand...

IF thats the case, then there is nothing not keeping you from using Intel, either.
 
I don't think you get it. What he was saying was that you shouldn't choose hardware with the attitude of "should I stay with Brand X, or should I choose another brand Y?" Instead, the mindset should be, "Okay, which processor, regardless of brand, is best for my needs?" Basically the idea is to eschew brand loyalty (or disloyalty) in favor of needs-based product selection.
 
Originally posted by Comte
IF thats the case, then there is nothing not keeping you from using Intel, either.
Click to expand...

The consideration for 64-bit is always there. If he wants to keep his system for a year to a year and a half he will definitely have the advantage of 64-bit support.
 
Originally posted by SarCastro
Well, my current rig has about run its course. I've got a P4 1.6A that used to be clocked at 2.66 GHz, but over the last year has been overheating and I've had to scale it back to its original speed. I think it'll be fine as a server soon enough.

But enough about my old one, I'm contemplating my new one. I'm trying to decide if I should go with a Northwood/865 combo, or an A64. I don't want to have to spend a lot of $$ on it. I'm not looking at overclocking, I want something that's fast and runs quiet.

Is there much of a slowdown with DDR333 on an 800MHz FSB? (cause I've got 1Gig of it, and would rather not spend the extra $$ for a percent or two increase) How loud/quiet is the 3.0C/3.2C stock fan? How hot do they usually run? Should I look into a quieter cooler? Should I bother getting one with socket 478 soon to bite the dust? Does HT make that much of a difference in multitasking?

Thanks in advance...
Click to expand...

Athlon 64's cost a bit more than say a 2.8c. For AMD I'm used to paying less than $100 for a super overclocker...lol.

DDR333, while not the best option, isn't going to drag you down a large amount, dare I say a 5-10% max performance hit. Intel stock fans are very quiet and procs run fairly cool. HT is awesome and it really feels like dual cpu's when you're doing a crapload of stuff.

Don't buy a Athlon 64 because you think 64-bit computing is coming soon.....it's not and I think I can safely say it won't for at least 2-3 years. Buy it (or don't) because of the price/performance in current 32-bit apps.

If I were you, which i'm obviously not, I'd buy a 2.8C Pentium 4 paired with an Intel 865PE board. This is the most stable board if you aren't going to be overclocking and don't want to spend a ton.

Just my two cents! :D
 
Originally posted by batotman

Don't buy a Athlon 64 because you think 64-bit computing is coming soon.....it's not and I think I can safely say it won't for at least 2-3 years. Buy it (or don't) because of the price/performance in current 32-bit apps.
Click to expand...
I'd pretty much disagree with you here. Now admitedly applications that take advantage of the 64 bit part may be more limited, but it looks like many application get a 20% speedup from going from 8 to 16 registers being available with the X86-64 instruction set. Given a 64 bit Windows beta is now widely available for download for free, I view it as highly probable that the Unreal Tournament 2003 patch with 64 bit support will be available and fully functional within 2 months from now. Since other games tend to be based on the Unreal Engines, this is a significant detail by itself. I its requested I can start listed all the applications that have already discussed having 64 bit support.

Here's an excerpt from an interview with Tim Sweeney of Epic software talking about how easy it was port their code to the X86-64 instruction set.
FiringSquad: Can you describe the process involved in migrating to AMD's 64-bit architecture? Has the transition been a difficult one?

Since our code is pure C++ and already ran on 32-bit Windows and Linux, the only work required was to make the code 64-bit safe. No Hammer-specific work was necessary to get the port up and running; what we did for Hammer is the same thing that would be needed to run on 64-bit PowerPC or 64-bit Itanium.

In the case of the Unreal codebase, about 99.9% of the code was already 64-bit safe and didn't need touching. Of course, with a million-line codebase, the remaining 0.1% left a hundred or so places in the code that needed updating because of assumptions we made years ago before we'd thought about 64-bit. It was a relatively straightforward process, and took Ryan Gordon about 10 days of hard work.
Click to expand...
http://www.firingsquad.com/features/sweeney_interview/default.asp
 
I disagree with batotman also. I think software supporting 64-bit will be widely available enough by the end of the year to justify making the switch. It shouldn't take 2-3 years. Those are just statements Intel makes to discourage people from buying the A64.

But right now, 64-bit is definitely only future insurance. The Windows XP-64 beta for download has almost no 64-bit drivers. So even if UT2k3 and UT2k4 support 64-bit, there needs to be 64-bit video drivers from ATI or nVidia first. Basically, you can't even surf the internet right now.
 
I went from a Athlon XP 2500+ OCed to a P4C 2.8 @ 3.2 with Hyperthreading...

And Since I like to do everything all the time, at the same time, all at once etc etc, I enjoy the bennifits of Hyperthreading.

THat is all i can tell you, I beleive if the Athlon 64 had HyperThreading, I would have gotten that.
 
Originally posted by MTB2Live,Live4Comps
i'd say since the k6 days you can really forget the stability issues with AMD's products. If we're talking about VIA chipsets running with AMD CPUs, that's a different story. But even them, they've improved a bit since the kt133 days. if you want a stable, fast A64 board at stock speeds, get the ECS 755-A2 board. that's more for the awesomeness of the sis 755 than the features of the board. right now that and the ALi offering are imo the only even acceptable Athlon 64 chipsets. nforce3 150 and k8t800 are ok, but they need a lot of work (for via, more so the south bridge than the north bridge). if 64bit linux is in your future, def go for the via solution - people tend to have the best results with it.

ecs board reviews:
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.html?i=1952
http://www.ocworkbench.com/2004/ecs/755a2/755a2-1.htm
EDIT: doh - recommending a board you can't even buy anywhere yet...grr

somebody more familiar with intel's dual channel chipsets can correct me, but i think the p4s would take a much larger hit from running ddr333 than the athlon 64 would.
Click to expand...


Never thought id live long enough to hear someone recommending ECS, SIS, ALI!!!
 
I don't recommend SiS for high end, but for low end, I find them to be incredibly stale. 745 Ultra here Prime 95's 19 hours.
 
what exactly do you do with your computer ...with that in mind see what camp runs what you do the best and at what price ...then make you desicion
 
I recommend the A64 for folks who are hesitant to overclock, yet want power.

If you're an overclocker, there's simply no other than Intel.
 
Originally posted by Aegion
I'd pretty much disagree with you here. Now admitedly applications that take advantage of the 64 bit part may be more limited, but it looks like many application get a 20% speedup from going from 8 to 16 registers being available with the X86-64 instruction set. Given a 64 bit Windows beta is now widely available for download for free, I view it as highly probable that the Unreal Tournament 2003 patch with 64 bit support will be available and fully functional within 2 months from now. Since other games tend to be based on the Unreal Engines, this is a significant detail by itself. I its requested I can start listed all the applications that have already discussed having 64 bit support.

Here's an excerpt from an interview with Tim Sweeney of Epic software talking about how easy it was port their code to the X86-64 instruction set.

http://www.firingsquad.com/features/sweeney_interview/default.asp
Click to expand...

Riiiight. We'll see. :rolleyes:
 
I don't think that 64-bit apps will be available until 3rd or 4th Quarter 2005. It is gonna be a SLOW transition until Intel jumps on board with the 64-bit version of the Tejas core...
 
My big thing at the moment is if you get an Intel based sytem you will have no upgradability in a year or so. Sockert 487 is dead as Socket T is going be be just around the coorner in April. Now if you go with an Athlon64 you will have upgradability until atleast the end of 2005.

Just a thought.

O and I second the SiS solution, best performance chipset I have seen to date. I am thinking of a 3000+ and the ECS board here soon now that MS released Windows for AMD64.
 
Im also a big intel supporter :p But the A64 is looking pretty unbeatable at the moment and getting cheaper by the minute.
Yes 64Bit computing is quite awhile away yet but the a64 is no slouch in 32Bit either:eek: And im the same as another poster on here in that if A64 had Hyperthreading i would be jumping ship now:D
But still very happy with the legendary 2.4c here;)
 
Originally posted by CentronMe
My big thing at the moment is if you get an Intel based sytem you will have no upgradability in a year or so. Sockert 487 is dead as Socket T is going be be just around the coorner in April. Now if you go with an Athlon64 you will have upgradability until atleast the end of 2005.

Just a thought.

O and I second the SiS solution, best performance chipset I have seen to date. I am thinking of a 3000+ and the ECS board here soon now that MS released Windows for AMD64.
Click to expand...

Isn't the A64 3400 the last of the socket A type 64bit CPUs or darn near too it. I thought I read somewhere that AMD is going to a different CPU packaging soon too. So basically the future upgradability is limited just a much as Intel.
 
I certainly wouldn't buy a processor based on 64bit, no more than I would make a decision based on SSE3. It's way overhyped, and even AMD is downplaying the availability of software.

Having said that, the A64 3000+ stands very well on its own. If not for the overclocking ability of the 2.4C, the A64 3000+ would have been my choice.
 
Originally posted by VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVI
I certainly wouldn't buy a processor based on 64bit, no more than I would make a decision based on SSE3. It's way overhyped, and even AMD is downplaying the availability of software.
(snip)
Click to expand...
The transition really won't take as long as you think. if you're a linux user, a solid 90% of the currently in active devolopment software out there compiles cleanly into 64bit. and the rest just needs a little grunt work to change a few things (and will run as 32bit software in a fully 64bit environment, as long as you have 32bit libraries installed - thanks to the backwards compatibility of opteron/a64)

As for windows users, you're dependent on the companies taking the time
to recompile their software and release it. There's a lot of room on a cdrom, it's really quite easy to make it autoplay and detect whether or not you have a 64bit machine. then, it just proceeds with installing whichever version benefits you the most. However, intel has money. clean and solid as that.

BUT, in the professional market, you've already seen multiple companies
release Opteron products who originally wouldn't even recognize the launch/existance of Opteron. Customer pressure can do a lot, especially when the company knows the customers are right and that switching over to opteron brings a healthy boost in performance.

however, all that said, since you don't have access to the code you can't be sure that the companies will be loyal to customers. --- basing your purchase on soley 64bits would be , erm, less than smart. If linux is in your future, then it might be a larger selling point. the only thing holding linux back imo is games (and ignorance of hardware companies, and the major OEMs other than IBM)
 
The transition really won't take as long as you think. if you're a linux user, a solid 90% of the currently in active devolopment software out there compiles cleanly into 64bit. and the rest just needs a little grunt work to change a few things (and will run as 32bit software in a fully 64bit environment, as long as you have 32bit libraries installed - thanks to the backwards compatibility of opteron/a64)
Click to expand...

this is Linux, there is no comparison to Windows, where all of the still supported windows versions that cater to other 64 bit processors? There aren't enough to say that windows programs will go cleanly into 64 bit every time as there is basically no precedent or experience with any companies and their programs
 
This is pulled directly from the HARD OCP article relating to the Brand new Prescott........
On the gaming side of things, if you go back and look at where our Athlon64 3000+ landed in the benchmarks, it is hard to argue against this $200 CPU. In fact repeatedly, the A64 3000+ simply makes the Prescott and the rest of the Pentium 4 bunch look bad, even the Extreme Editions. If you are looking at building a gaming system today, the Athlon64 is very attractive.
I would tend to agree since i own both a A64 3000, as well as a Intell setup and a FX Setup as well. And i gotta say that the A64 3000 dollar for dollar is a outstanding system
 
I would keep a 800fsb northwood p4 for now and wait ti'll the new pentium socket and the new 949 pin a64 socket (think thats right) with support for dual channel.

I would wait and see, to early to jump ship.

DaveM

My 4 cents

EDIT: Noticed you had a 1.6A, get a 2.4C off the forum decent price and a nice 865 board, your 333 will be fine, won't be that slow, clock up the 2.4C

My 2.4C does 3.2 @ 1.48 volts, runs cool and the cooler is quiet and efficent.

Wait on prescott or a64, they are going to do socket changes and improvments from it.
 
Originally posted by PClark99
Isn't the A64 3400 the last of the socket A type 64bit CPUs or darn near too it. I thought I read somewhere that AMD is going to a different CPU packaging soon too. So basically the future upgradability is limited just a much as Intel.
Click to expand...

Well yes Socket A is dead, but the Athlon64s use Socket 754 as Michaelius pointed out. The Socket A platform is for the Athlon XPs and down.
 
Technically both are dead ends! AMD will be going to 939 for the real performance sector and Intel will be going to 775 I think. (pins)

But I think the 478pin 3.2Ghz Prescott may kick butt once they get a few new revisions/steppings. So a few months/year from now maybe you could buy a 3.2 that OC's to 4.0Ghz+ (maybe even 4.8Ghz at 300FSB).

Im wondering if all of those pins are going to allow some more bandwidth or new FSB standard. Or partial dual FSB access for dual cores/improved HT with each thread getting its own direct memory access. :) to better utilize dual channel DDR

P.S. if you did get a Northwood, the 333 wouldn't really be that bad. Granted 3200 would be better, but not that much better.
If you OC'd a 2.6 to 3.25Ghz at 250 FSB and 3:2 ratio your ram would be perfectly with in spec. And your rig would be REALLY fast.
 
Originally posted by chrisf6969
Technically both are dead ends! AMD will be going to 939 for the real performance sector and Intel will be going to 775 I think. (pins)
Click to expand...
There is no difference between having processors released for one and not for the other? Both are the same?
 
If you are interested in cool and quite, a friend of mine bought an Athlon64 3000 at stock speeds and a nice case with good air flow. That thing was so quite it was difficult to hear over the stacks of magazines and the pictures hanging from the wall. It was that quiet.

Mine isn't so quiet because I overclock the bejebus out of it
 
Originally posted by trudude
I don't think that 64-bit apps will be available until 3rd or 4th Quarter 2005. It is gonna be a SLOW transition until Intel jumps on board with the 64-bit version of the Tejas core...
Click to expand...

With a lot of people spouting stuff like this and convincing people not to buy a 64 bit setup, it will take forever to transition software to 64 bit because there will not be a lot of demand for it.

Get the hardware out there and the software will follow. People will have the hardware and demand the software to run on it.

It's a simple little thing called supply and demand.
 
I don't know who said wrong things about the A64 but let me clarify them: Current A64s are Socket 754, not Socket A. The A64s will go up to 3700+ @ 2.4gHz until the full transition to Socket 939 as Newcastle, with only 512k L2 cache. Then the Athlon XP will transition to 754-pin with 64-bit disabled, codenamed Paris.

You never know when the full transition to 64-bit will happen. Intel fanboys think it won't happen until Intel plays its cards. I just think there will be enough 64-bit software by the end of the year to make the transition to 64-bit worthwhile.
 
Thanks for all the replies. My priorities are gaming, development (.NET), and DVD burning. Here's more about my situation, I've got an IS7 motherboard, but the northbridge fell off. I replaced it with a 486 cooler and thermal tape :D It's a referb, so I can't return it. RMAing I think is out of the question, would Abit do that at this point? I don't know if I trust Abit to give me a MB with proper soldering after many reports I've heard. I'm not happy with it, so I was thinking of replacing it.

However, I might be willing to get a 2.8 or 3.0C and try it with the existing IS7. But I'm concerned about the NB overheating. It's okay at 400MHz, but I wonder if it could take 800MHz with my "custom" solution. It's certainly the cheaper option.

So here's my options:

- 2.8C, 3.0C, or 3.2C with existing MB (and taking a chance in stability)

- 2.8C or 3.0C with new MB (and playing it safe)

- A64 3000+ and some sort of MB


If I have to do either of the last two, I think I'd take a chance on the A64. However I'm temped to try the first option, since it's cheaper. Your thoughts?
 
And the 'enough 64-bit software to justify' is just SO objective that you can't possibly be a fanboy. :rolleyes:

I don't think there will be major support for 64-bit extensions until MS jumps on the bandwagon...which I doubt will be anytime soon. Say what you will, but Intel controls almost 83% of the cpu market. MS will jump on the bandwagon [seriously] when Intel does. And that isn't fanboyism, that's the ability to recognize 83/100 as a pretty big number and not be delusional about it's antithesis.
 
Originally posted by Vagrant Zero
And the 'enough 64-bit software to justify' is just SO objective that you can't possibly be a fanboy. :rolleyes:

I don't think there will be major support for 64-bit extensions until MS jumps on the bandwagon...which I doubt will be anytime soon. Say what you will, but Intel controls almost 83% of the cpu market. MS will jump on the bandwagon [seriously] when Intel does. And that isn't fanboyism, that's the ability to recognize 83/100 as a pretty big number and not be delusional about it's antithesis.
Click to expand...

Unless you've been living in a box for the past year, you'd have known Microsoft has already jumped on the bandwagon. That's why they're making Windows XP-64 smart one. And since they have the beta now, I don't think it's going to take 2-3 years to release it.
 
Originally posted by xonik
I don't think you get it. What he was saying was that you shouldn't choose hardware with the attitude of "should I stay with Brand X, or should I choose another brand Y?" Instead, the mindset should be, "Okay, which processor, regardless of brand, is best for my needs?" Basically the idea is to eschew brand loyalty (or disloyalty) in favor of needs-based product selection.
Click to expand...

This man is asking the correct question.
The first thing to find out is what will the primary use of the platform be. Then depending on the answer, is the way to point someone.
 
Originally posted by CIWS
This man is asking the correct question.
The first thing to find out is what will the primary use of the platform be. Then depending on the answer, is the way to point someone.
Click to expand...

Well, he games AND burns DVDs...

hmmmm...
 
Originally posted by DaveX
Unless you've been living in a box for the past year, you'd have known Microsoft has already jumped on the bandwagon. That's why they're making Windows XP-64 smart one. And since they have the beta now, I don't think it's going to take 2-3 years to release it.
Click to expand...

Working on ("making") is a big difference from releasing. Shit look how long Id has been working on Doom3 or Valve has been working on HL2, etc. & those are just games... not a complete operating system, with all new drivers, kernels, etc. needed.

They are and have been working on Longhorn for years. But are still far off from releasing it. 99.999% of the whole PC market currently has 32 bit computers. Only probably 2% of the NEW computers being sold are 64-bit capable (if that) so 64-bit support isnt going to be that fast. MAYBE by the end of the year they will be close to releasing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top