hi Tony,
i realize that the question is *broad* however if i mention that i want to
put together an intel-based (p4) system, i keep hearing that amd is better
and i would like to know in what?
i appreciate the links, they are interesting and helpful!
No problem! First off, as I mentioned above, both Intel and AMD make
very good chips and they're both available for pretty reasonable
prices, so it's tough to go too wrong with either one. However for
either situation it pays to spend a little bit of time looking into
some options and potential gotchas.
I know that a few others have mentioned motherboard chipsets, and I
would definitely second that. For Intel processors you have the
choice of Intel, VIA, ATi and SiS chipsets (and possibly a few other
niche players), but the vast bulk of people stick with Intel chipsets.
For AMD processors the selection is similar but the spread is a bit
more even. Not surprisingly Intel does not make chipsets for AMD, but
VIA, ATi and SiS do, as do ALi (aka ULi) and nVidia (AMD also makes
their own chipsets, but only for high-end workstations and servers).
Each of these companies have a variety of chipsets that have a range
of features and come in at different price-points. The end result can
be a bit of a mess, but it's probably the best place to start since
the motherboard and it's chipset pretty much for the base of
everything in the computer.
Personally if it were me that were building the system, I would look
either towards an Intel P4 sitting in an Intel i915(G) chipset or an
AMD Athlon64 sitting in an nForce4 chipset. These two seem to be
hitting a good price/performance point these days with decent feature
sets, so they would probably be good starting points if you're looking
into things.
A couple things to look into for motherboards these days include:
1. AGP vs. PCI-Express graphics slot
PCI-Express is the new replacement for AGP and is quickly becoming the
norm for video cards. While PCI-E boards might be a bit more
expensive, often they can use cheaper video cards which nullifies this
price difference. What's more, PCI-E is definitely the way things are
going, so I would generally recommend against getting an AGP board
unless you've already got a decent AGP graphics card to drop in the
system.
2. Integrated graphics vs. discrete graphics
Keeping with the graphics theme, there is the choice of getting a
board with built-in graphics or an add-in graphics card. Most people
here are rather opposed to integrated graphics because they really
don't do so good at computer games. They can also lower overall
system performance by a bit, though these days the difference is
pretty small. In many cases going for an integrated graphics solution
can save you quite a bit of money and you can even get boards with
AGP/PCI-Express slot for the later addition of an add-in card if you
so desire. One downside to AMD systems is that there isn't much in
the way of decent integrated graphics solutions available, while for
Intel chipsets they are quite common.
3. Number of ATA and SATA connectors
One of the real downsides, IMO, of Intel's i9xx series chipsets is
that they dropped one of the ATA controllers, leaving you with a
maximum of 2 ATA devices (ie hard drives and CD-ROMs). Now in theory
hard drives are moving towards the newer SATA standard, and you should
definitely get a board with at least a handful of SATA controllers,
however SATA CD drives (including DVDs, CD-RW, etc.) are almost
non-existent. In my system I've currently got 3 ATA drives (2 hard
drives and a CD-ROM), so I'd already be over the limit of Intel's new
chipsets. Fortunately many boards built using these new i9xx series
chipsets do include secondary ATA controllers on-board, though these
do complicate things slightly.
4. Dual vs. single channel memory, memory sockets and max memory
Many boards these days use dual-channel memory, ie they take their
memory in matched pairs. Here AMD and Intel do differ somewhat in
that AMD has their memory controller built right into the processor
while for Intel the memory controller is off on the chipset. For AMD
chips, any of their Athlon64s that fit into Socket 939 are
dual-channel, regardless of the chipset used, while those that fit
into Socket 754 are single channel. For Intel it's a little bit more
complicated in that, for example, the i915 is dual channel but the
i910 is single channel. Generally speaking, dual-channel is better
for performance and shouldn't change the price much, but you do have
to remember to add memory in matched pairs, which can complicate
upgrades slightly. For example, a dual-channel motherboard might have
4 memory sockets, but after you drop the first two sticks in you've
only got room for one more matched pair of memory to upgrade with down
the road. Keep in mind that two or three years after you get your
computer, upgrading the memory is almost always the best bang/buck
upgrade you can get.
Well, that should give you a bit of food for thought! Good luck!
