• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Witch CPU ???

E

EvanL

n00b
Joined
Jun 23, 2004
Messages
10
Hey all,
I will be getting a new rig really soon, and it will be top-top notch.
Im talkin 1 gig matched cosair LL w/ the LED lights, and maybe a X800XT PE (Ill probly end up getting just the XT not the PE, but who knows) I would like to know witch cpu is best now, in both price and value

I am looking at the 3.4 Ghz or the 3.2EE or maybe even an athlon 64. fx-51 or 53, or maybe a 64 3200+ or 3400+ or 3700+ . I really dont have a clue about the exact performance ratings of these chips.

I would like to know whats the scoop on the northwood and prescott chips? I have heard that the northwoods perform marginally better and run a bit cooler? Is that true? Witch is better overall? Prescott or Northwood? I would be interested in extreme OC'ing with the best air cooling thats under $50, and I will be purchasing a good mobo and good ram and GPU, so I need some opinions, on witch chip is right for me. I am leaning more into the P4's over the Athlon 64's because they OC higher and run cooler? I wont be offended when ppl correct me because I admitadly, dont know alot. Since the northwood and prescott chips cost about the same, witch should I get? There doesnt seem to be any current advantage of the .9 nanometre prescott ... if anything, it would seem to be slower and run hotter..... will this change in the near future ? Also, What is a safe bet for Athlon 64's ? I would specifically like to know what makes a clawhammer 64 better then a newcastle 64? they run 200 Mhz slower but have half the lvl 2 cache ? What difference in real world gaming and computing does this difference have? Witch is easier to OC ?

And finally, what order of "good-ness" are these chips in --> P4 3.2EE, P4 3.4C and 3.4E , Athlon FX-51/53, Athlon 64 3200+/3400+/3700+ Clawhammer and newcastle for each. What does the FX-51 compare to in P4 Terms and to other athlon 64's, say a 3700+ clawhammer ?????????????????????????????? Also, could you please recommend any good mobo/cpu/cpu fan/sink combos for the chips you talk about...

Thanks alot guys, your great.
Evan
 
Im really not sure but one thing I know you should really stay away from the wicked witch from the east and her sister from the west. Those two witches are real witches.

Which brings me to another point.. but I cant quite remember what it is.
 
I got a laugh out of it :D

Really though man, how about reading some of the other 10,000 threads about the chips you've mentioned. I'm sure you'll have a better idea of what you should look for.
 
Prescott scales better and will OC higher. Northwood is faster per clock cycle due to a shorter pipeline and runs cooler.

For serous OC's Prescott's need to be cooled by a good water cooling rig. Northwood is the better chip IMO for what you are wanting to do.

Also Prescott's power needs are different. All current socket 478 boards were designed for Northwood. Some boards did design around Prescott specs that they were aware of. Few boards support Prescott out of the box. But nothing is fully compliant with Prescotts power designs that I know of outside of the LGA775 boards. However alot of people run Prescott's on Abit and Asus boards without difficulty. However it remains to be seen how that will effect the boards voltage regulators and other hardware over the next year or so.

Prescott's extreme heat may in fact damage the boards or shorten their life span considerabily. Only time will tell.

As far as the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, those are a sort of Gallatin Northwood hybrid chip. It has Northwoods basic core and bus type, pin type but Gallatin's cache layout and design.

The extra 2MB L3 cache makes for some impressive results when playing games. But not worth the amount of money you pay for it for most people. These are socket 478 currently but I think an LGA775 version is due out soon.

All the Althon FX and Pentium 4 EE really have on thier lower end counterparts is cache memory. More cache memory=better game performance. Games take advantage of cache memory. This is evidenced by Duron's and Celeron's lack of comparable performance to thier full cached counterparts.

On the AMD side of the house the AMD's are a little better for gaming. Although in my opinion AMD stability is often lacking. This has been my experience in the past with earlier Athlon's This isn't AMD's fault, but rather the fault of the chipset companies for not having a good stable driver set. Also several motherboard manufacturers are to blame for making substandard boards. Intel has alot of control over vendors that make and sell Intel chipset boards. Although I've got no experience with them, I hear the NForce series is the only way to go on Athlon's.

Evidence concerning the stability problem being on the AMD front can be seen with third party chipsets on Pentium 4's. AMD based and SIS based chipsets often suffer from driver problems and stability issues with Intel chips as well as AMD chips. Few people would ever actually buy an Intel Processor and not mate it to an Intel chipset based motherboard.

Generally an Athlon is just as fast as a Pentium 4 at the same PR Rating. So a Athlon 3000+ is about as fast as a Pentium 4 3.0GHz. However AMD is faster for gaming. Intel is faster in certain other apps. It just depends on what that software was optimized for.

Pentium 4's generally rock in video editiing and memory bandwidth dependant apps as that's where the Pentium 4 dominates. So for professional apps I'd say go Intel. For games AMD is hard to beat.

Although neither platform is bad for any application. They both do everything well. But that' smy summery of the two sides.

My argument may be sided twords Intel. But only for stability reasons. I've yet to see an AMD platform that matched the stability of an Intel platform. But performance wise AMD is better than Intel's in MANY areas.

But.....that being said. Although I've not found one that doesn't mean they don't exist and my experience with modern Athlon's is limited.

Since Intel's LGA775 offerings aren't that compelling to me at the moment and I am a hardcore gamer, I am thinking about building an Athlon 64 based machine. Instead. So lately I have been doing some research on the AMD boards and chipsets. But I am scared of going back to AMD after the whole KT133/KT133A chipsets on my Thunderbird 1.4 system.

I hope this sheds some light on the situation.
 
LordVampyre said:
Im really not sure but one thing I know you should really stay away from the wicked witch from the east and her sister from the west. Those two witches are real witches.

Which brings me to another point.. but I cant quite remember what it is.
Click to expand...
golf clap :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top