Your next CPU?

[Neomega]

Athlon 64. Just waiting until it is affordable and I feel I must replace my XP 1700

 

[Aphex_Twin]

Of course my plan would be to have something as The Earth Simulator and use it to play Minesweeper

 

[Rheinmetall]

No plans yet. P4 1.6@2.1GHz is fine for now. If I upgrade I'll be looking for a new mobo too. If I just buy the processor, what will I do with the old 1.6GHz one?. If I sell it I'll get nothing more than bad feeling for it. It has better use with the old mobo and some leftover parts as a secondary comp.

 

[Goober]

What is an Athlon 64? I have an Athlon XP 1800+, served me well. My only problem is Telus (ISP) and Micro$oft . . .

 

[Speedo]

Originally posted by RealGoober
What is an Athlon 64? I have an Athlon XP 1800+, served me well. My only problem is Telus (ISP) and Micro$oft . . .

It's a 64 bit processor. Almost all processors used in PCs (like your AthlonXP) are 32 bit. It's the next step forward, basically.

 

[Goober]

Ah-ha, whatddya know. Meh, I haven't noticed anything wrong with mine, and if I do, then I shove in more Ram!!! I have noticed quite a few things wrong with Micro$oft, and Telus (ISP)

 

[Civrules]

Hmm, so is there a big difference between P4 and Athlon's processors? What are they?
Also, I know that HP has PCs with Athlon processors but what are some other computers that use this?

 

[Speedo]

Hmm, so is there a big difference between P4 and Athlon's processors? What are they?

Intel (P4) and AMD (Athlon) are the actual companies, Pentium and Athlon are just the names for one product. AMD processors are cheaper than Intel. The newest AMDs (AthlonXP and 64s) run at slower speeds than their Intel counterparts, but perform the same- ie my AthlonXp 2100+ actually runs at a clock speed of 1.73Ghz, but performs comperable to a P4 running at 2.1Ghz.

In general Intel processers are usually slightly faster in tasks like zipping up large files, 3d rendering, and etc. Otherwise they're pretty much even.

And for those interested in raw power, the playing field shifts. Currently the Althon64 FX-51 is the fastest processor available for a PC (before it came out that title belonged to the P4 3.06Ghz, IIRC).

Also, I know that HP has PCs with Athlon processors but what are some other computers that use this?

There's no real standard or anything... AFAIK companies like Dell & Gateway sell both Intel & AMD based machines. Most people are brand-loyal to one or the other, or just go with whatever's cheaper.

 

[Civrules]

Thanks for the info, Speedo.

 

[Comraddict]

There's no real standard or anything... AFAIK companies like Dell & Gateway sell both Intel & AMD based machines. Most people are brand-loyal to one or the other, or just go with whatever's cheaper.

Sorry, that is not true.. neither Gateway nor Dell use single AMD CPUs because two reasons:

people want intel, they don't know what the heck is "athlon"
intel gives them deal if they drop AMD.

Intel's pentium 4 3.4GHz extreme edition should be near athlon fx-51.

 

[Speedo]

Sorry, that is not true.. neither Gateway nor Dell use single AMD CPUs because two reasons:

people want intel, they don't know what the heck is "athlon"
intel gives them deal if they drop AMD.

Well, their loss.

Intel's pentium 4 3.4GHz extreme edition should be near athlon fx-51.

But it still loses. And to think, the FX isn't even using a completed 64 bit OS, fully optimized 64 bit drivers, running programs written for 64 bit or anything yet.

 

[DreadCthulhu]

And the Athlon64 FX is a hundred dollars cheaper than the Pentium 4 extreme edition.

 

[Comraddict]

right..it costs 700+, it is overpriced as well. Windows XP 64 bit beta is out for free... and with current unoptimized drivers- is way slower than 32 bit. It will take years for 64 bit to replace 32 bit Windows.

 

[Goober]

You really don't need a faster processor then a 1Ghz, anything above is excess. Ok, maybe a 2Ghz, but a 4.3Ghz, come on, that is HUGE excess . . .

And ya, my Athlon 1800+ is actually a 1.47Ghz, but I haven't had a problem yet, and if I do, I get more Ram!!!

 

[DreadCthulhu]

Of course, you could just get the Athlon64 3400+, which is as fast as the Athlon64FX or the Pentium4 EE in most cases, for around $400. And even though 64bit Windows is only in Beta, the Athlon64 it still has really good 32bit performance, and can match anything Intel can make.

 

[Speedo]

You really don't need a faster processor then a 1Ghz, anything above is excess.

Define "need" though. If you want to play any modern games that utilize 3D graphics, you need a fairly fast computer. Being that all I use my PC for now is games and the net, what I have is barely adequate for my "needs."

 

[Comraddict]

Modern games need as fast CPU as possible. I discovered many games needing 2+ GHz CPU plus minimum 512MB RAM .

 

[Goober]

Originally posted by Speedo


Define "need" though. If you want to play any modern games that utilize 3D graphics, you need a fairly fast computer. Being that all I use my PC for now is games and the net, what I have is barely adequate for my "needs."

I should have clarified. I meant "Need" as in for word processing, etc. Also simple games, not high end graphics, you wont need a 1+Ghz.

By need I mean to run well, no slowness . . .

For those crazy, 3D games, ya, you might need these Athlon 64bits, whatever they are . . .

 

[kundor]

I already upgraded to an Athlon 64 3200+.

Currently, the cheapest Athlon 64 processor (3000+) is 211 dollars at newegg, and can perform on par with Intel processors costing $600 more. Plus, now that Windows 64-bit is finally available, and 64-bit apps can start coming out, the Athlon64 will be able to run 64-bit games when they come out. I really can't see any reason why someone would buy an Intel rather than an AMD processor right now.

 

[Grisu]

grrrr, just rub it in ... I want one toooo

anyway, have you already tried the 64-bit-winxp? I'm really curious how it runs.