Help on buying new pc - amd or intel?

C

CadniuM

n00b
Joined
Mar 30, 2004
Messages
33
Guys,

I am looking at buying a new pc soon and was originally planning on getting a AMD XP 2500+ or 2800+ but then found out they only have a 333mhz fsb unless you overclock (which i wasnt too keen on for now) - which would reduce the theoretical dual channel speed of the ddr400 ram. So i am tossing up between these two systems:

1. AMD XP 2500+ with Epox 8rda3+ mobo with dual channel ddr400 ram

2. Intel PIV 2.8ghz prescott w/ 1mb cache with Abit AI7 mobo with dual channel ddr400 ram.

The intel setup is a bit more expensive but has the 800mhz fsb. Also i can get an ordinary PIV 2.8ghz (ie: 512mb cache) for the same price as the prescott but i assume the prescott is better?!

Which of the above systems would you recommmend?


Cheers for any help



CadniuM
 
From what i've heard, the Prescott Runs really hot... Personally, I'd recommend the AMD... Just to get comparable performance, and have some extra cash.
 
How comparable is the performance - does the 333mhz fsb slow it down much (although i did hear it is very easy to o/c the 2500+).

I tried to find reviews on the new but couldnt find any good ones for the cpus i was looking for.

CadniuM
 
It is quite unfair to compare the Athlon XP 2500+ and the Intel 2.8GHz, especially after reiterating the price difference. The AMD Athlon64 2800+ should be something that you would be willing to look into - it is a solid and fast processor.
 
if you go intel you should get the 2.8c instead of the 2.8e, but i still say that it would be better to go with a nice athlon64 system.
 
Polite Warning: This thread will stir argument and flaming. Just a warning. Be nice, kiddies.

I would take the AMD. Personally, if i had the money, i would take the Athlon64 with 512 or 1024 meg of RAM in dual channel. It runs cooler, i think, than the Prescott, and although the Prescott has a 1mb cache and has theoretical potential, it runs real hot and wouldn't be worth it. Team the Athlon64 up with a 9800XT Pro and you have the ultimate machine. With 1gig RAM in dual channel, of course.
So take the first system.
 
Hm. I will have to think about this some more then. The reason i was upgrading is because i have a 9700pro in an older via KT266 board but i was thinking the AMD 64 was a little expensive.
 
I went with a P4 3.0C.. because.. well, I've always had a pentium system. Perhaps someday I'll build an AMD rig. ;)
 
On another note: current Athlon64s don't support dual channel. I'd suggest either a Pentium 4 C or an Athlon64 depending on your needs.
 
$200 for A64 3000+ OEM + $93 for Aopen AK86-L is roughly the same as the 2.8E + a good mobo. If you are a gamer go the A64 route.
 
Since I'm a gamer I'd be going with the Athlon 64 rig.

If you go with the P4, I would go with the P4C instead of the P4E.

Erik
 
Cheers for the help guys.

I think ill be going with the Athlon 64 with a MSI K8T800 mobo (its the only one avail where i live in australia).

CadniuM
 
get a AMD Xp MOBILE 2600+
with a SP-97 Heatsink and Vantec 92mm Tornado with PC3200 2x512mb Ram CAS2 and enjoy the OC'ing madness
 
Originally posted by Kirkov
get a AMD Xp MOBILE 2600+
with a SP-97 Heatsink and Vantec 92mm Tornado with PC3200 2x512mb Ram CAS2 and enjoy the OC'ing madness
Click to expand...

the 2400 or 2500+ mobiles will probebly overclock just as well as a 2600+. and u probebly wont be able to hit your max OC using pc3200.
 
Originally posted by Kirkov
get a AMD Xp MOBILE 2600+
with a SP-97 Heatsink and Vantec 92mm Tornado with PC3200 2x512mb Ram CAS2 and enjoy the OC'ing madness
Click to expand...

2400+M would make more sense, since it is more or less the same chip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top