Need Advice - 2.8 XP or 2.8 A64?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rog344
  • Start date Start date
R

rog344

I'm on a budget and currently ready to upgrade to something a little
faster than the K6-2 500MHz/128 MB/FIC VA-503+ I'm using right now. I'm
a bit of a newbie when it comes to building, so I could use some advice.

The local computer shop is selling the Athlon XP (Barton) 2.8 for $99
and the Athlon 64 2800+ for $119. I want to do video capture and burn
DVDs smoothly and probably learn to overclock a little down the line.
Would I be gaining much performance by spending $20 more for the Athlon
64 or would I be better off going with the XP (since it's operating
frequency of 2.083 is faster than the 1.8 of the A64)? I don't think
I'll need the 64 bit support for awhile.

I was thinking of pairing the cpu with either: 2.8 XP with the A7N8X-X
or A7N8X-E Deluxe. Or A64 2800+ with K8N. Is the A7N8X-E worth $30 more
than the A7N8X-X?
 
rog344 said:
I'm on a budget and currently ready to upgrade to something a little
faster than the K6-2 500MHz/128 MB/FIC VA-503+ I'm using right now. I'm
a bit of a newbie when it comes to building, so I could use some advice.

The local computer shop is selling the Athlon XP (Barton) 2.8 for $99
and the Athlon 64 2800+ for $119. I want to do video capture and burn
DVDs smoothly and probably learn to overclock a little down the line.
Would I be gaining much performance by spending $20 more for the Athlon
64 or would I be better off going with the XP (since it's operating
frequency of 2.083 is faster than the 1.8 of the A64)? I don't think
I'll need the 64 bit support for awhile.

I was thinking of pairing the cpu with either: 2.8 XP with the A7N8X-X
or A7N8X-E Deluxe. Or A64 2800+ with K8N. Is the A7N8X-E worth $30 more
than the A7N8X-X?
Click to expand...

Under pathological conditions, the core clock speed of these
processors is the most important parameter. I first got a
taste of this, when someone with a scientific application
was looking for a new motherboard. I recommended S939 based
on the outstanding memory bandwidth numbers available on
it, but what happened was, it behaved more like its clock
speed rather than its P.R. rating. In other words, if one
processor is 2200MHz with 512KB cache, and another processor
is 2000MHz with 1MB cache, then if an application doesn't
benefit from L2 cache, the 2200MHz processor is going to win
by exactly 2200/2000 => 10%.

This article, for example, kind of surprised me. The S754 is not
doing too bad, in the mix of applications they selected here. But
as they note, the S754 socket has no future, so whatever you get
today, is all you will ever get. Otherwise, the S939, even if you
lose a bit in performance today, might allow a better tomorrow,
when prices on some of these processors drop a bit.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/531-7/testing-12-athlon-64s.html

Now, you would hope that most of the time, the extra
hardware you paid for, would pay off. The AMD P.R. rating
system is documented, and for the P.R. rating system to
make sense, you would have to be doing the same mix of
programs as the AMD guys used. I cannot seem to find one
of these docs for S754... Note that office applications is
part of the P.R. rating system, something that participants
in this newsgroup probably don't care about.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/30579_hi.pdf

This AMD doc suggests dual channel is worth 200MHz, and going from
512KB cache to 1MB cache is worth 200MHz. The Behardware article
doesn't seem to agree about the benefit of the dual channel
memory.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_9487^10248,00.html

In terms of overclocking, you should visit the many private
forums and search there. This database used to be a great
place to access raw data, but after they redesigned it, and
threw out the old data, there isn't much left. In any case,
this might give you some idea as to how much overclock to
expect.

http://www.cpudatabase.com/index.cfm?action=search

HTH,
Paul
 
Paul said:
Under pathological conditions, the core clock speed of these
processors is the most important parameter. I first got a
taste of this, when someone with a scientific application
was looking for a new motherboard. I recommended S939 based
on the outstanding memory bandwidth numbers available on
it, but what happened was, it behaved more like its clock
speed rather than its P.R. rating. In other words, if one
processor is 2200MHz with 512KB cache, and another processor
is 2000MHz with 1MB cache, then if an application doesn't
benefit from L2 cache, the 2200MHz processor is going to win
by exactly 2200/2000 => 10%.

This article, for example, kind of surprised me. The S754 is not
doing too bad, in the mix of applications they selected here. But
as they note, the S754 socket has no future, so whatever you get
today, is all you will ever get. Otherwise, the S939, even if you
lose a bit in performance today, might allow a better tomorrow,
when prices on some of these processors drop a bit.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/531-7/testing-12-athlon-64s.html

Now, you would hope that most of the time, the extra
hardware you paid for, would pay off. The AMD P.R. rating
system is documented, and for the P.R. rating system to
make sense, you would have to be doing the same mix of
programs as the AMD guys used. I cannot seem to find one
of these docs for S754... Note that office applications is
part of the P.R. rating system, something that participants
in this newsgroup probably don't care about.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/30579_hi.pdf

This AMD doc suggests dual channel is worth 200MHz, and going from
512KB cache to 1MB cache is worth 200MHz. The Behardware article
doesn't seem to agree about the benefit of the dual channel
memory.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_9487^10248,00.html

In terms of overclocking, you should visit the many private
forums and search there. This database used to be a great
place to access raw data, but after they redesigned it, and
threw out the old data, there isn't much left. In any case,
this might give you some idea as to how much overclock to
expect.

http://www.cpudatabase.com/index.cfm?action=search

HTH,
Paul
Click to expand...

I have two socket 754 mbs running. Since jan 05... The price of one 939=2
754 systems...

amd athlon 64 3000 newcastle other processor is a sempron 2800.....

xman
 
rog344 said:
I'm on a budget and currently ready to upgrade to something a little
faster than the K6-2 500MHz/128 MB/FIC VA-503+ I'm using right now. I'm a
bit of a newbie when it comes to building, so I could use some advice.

The local computer shop is selling the Athlon XP (Barton) 2.8 for $99 and
the Athlon 64 2800+ for $119. I want to do video capture and burn DVDs
smoothly and probably learn to overclock a little down the line. Would I
be gaining much performance by spending $20 more for the Athlon 64 or
would I be better off going with the XP (since it's operating frequency of
2.083 is faster than the 1.8 of the A64)? I don't think I'll need the 64
bit support for awhile.

I was thinking of pairing the cpu with either: 2.8 XP with the A7N8X-X or
A7N8X-E Deluxe. Or A64 2800+ with K8N. Is the A7N8X-E worth $30 more than
the A7N8X-X?
Click to expand...

If you're planning on keeping the next PC as long as you appear to have had
this one, I'd suggest a Socket 939 A64 setup. That way, you'll be able to
upgrade the CPU in a couple of years. We've already seen the fastest Socket
754 CPU.
Something like an Asus A8V (K8T800 chipset works with new dual core CPU's
with a BIOS update), $93 at Newegg. A Venice 3000+ CPU, $146 at Newegg. Of
course, you'll also need new memory and possibly a new video card, depending
on the age of your current card (I'm trying to remember if the 503+ had an
AGP slot.
 
I'm on a budget and currently ready to upgrade to something a little
faster than the K6-2 500MHz/128 MB/FIC VA-503+ I'm using right now. I'm
a bit of a newbie when it comes to building, so I could use some advice.

The local computer shop is selling the Athlon XP (Barton) 2.8 for $99
and the Athlon 64 2800+ for $119. I want to do video capture and burn
DVDs smoothly and probably learn to overclock a little down the line.
Would I be gaining much performance by spending $20 more for the Athlon
64 or would I be better off going with the XP (since it's operating
frequency of 2.083 is faster than the 1.8 of the A64)? I don't think
I'll need the 64 bit support for awhile.

I was thinking of pairing the cpu with either: 2.8 XP with the A7N8X-X
or A7N8X-E Deluxe. Or A64 2800+ with K8N. Is the A7N8X-E worth $30 more
than the A7N8X-X?
Click to expand...

Well if you decide to go the Barton route the A7N8X-X (VIA chipset)
would sort of be a bad choice IMO, it doesn't lock the PCI/AGP bus so it
has less potential in overclocking, unlike the A7N8X and A7N8X Deluxe
versions (Nvidia chipsets) it doesn't support Dual Ch. memory mode
either. The Deluxe versions also have SoundStorm, 2 LAN ports, SATA, so
for $30 more it's a pretty good deal if you can make use of those
features.

Ed
 
Thanks for pointing that out to me. I thought the A7N8X-X was the same
in terms of overclocking features as the A7N8X-E/A7N8X. And I did want
an Nvidia based board this time around, not Via. The extra $30 does look
like a pretty good deal.
 
Ed said:
Well if you decide to go the Barton route the A7N8X-X (VIA chipset)
would sort of be a bad choice IMO, it doesn't lock the PCI/AGP bus so it
has less potential in overclocking, unlike the A7N8X and A7N8X Deluxe
versions (Nvidia chipsets) it doesn't support Dual Ch. memory mode
either. The Deluxe versions also have SoundStorm, 2 LAN ports, SATA, so
for $30 more it's a pretty good deal if you can make use of those
features.

Ed
Click to expand...

Uh, Ed, I think you may have meant the A7*V*8X-X? The A7N8X-X has the NForce
2 chipset from NVidia, and does give the user the ability to lock the
PCI/AGP bus. In fact, the only feature found in the A7N8X and A7N8x Deluxe
that is not found in the A7N8X-X is support for dual channel memory.
I have both an A7N8X-X and an A7N8X Deluxe here both running happily with
2500+ Bartons overclocked to 3200+ speed (11 x 200) with AGP/PCI locked.
I agree the extra features on the Deluxe you mention may be worth the extra
$$ if the OP needs them, but the A7N8X-X will overclock just fine.
 
Uh, Ed, I think you may have meant the A7*V*8X-X? The A7N8X-X has the NForce
2 chipset from NVidia, and does give the user the ability to lock the
PCI/AGP bus. In fact, the only feature found in the A7N8X and A7N8x Deluxe
that is not found in the A7N8X-X is support for dual channel memory.
Click to expand...

YES YOU ARE RIGHT! (sorry bout that!)
I have both an A7N8X-X and an A7N8X Deluxe here both running happily with
2500+ Bartons overclocked to 3200+ speed (11 x 200) with AGP/PCI locked.
I agree the extra features on the Deluxe you mention may be worth the extra
$$ if the OP needs them, but the A7N8X-X will overclock just fine.
Click to expand...

The Unlocked Bartons are the way to go if you want to get all you can
out of these boards. 2+ years on my A7N8X and can't say one bad thing
about it, very stable (up to 210MHz), fails Prime95 at 212MHz even with
PC4000.

Ed
 
Thanks for pointing that out to me. I thought the A7N8X-X was the same
in terms of overclocking features as the A7N8X-E/A7N8X. And I did want
an Nvidia based board this time around, not Via. The extra $30 does look
like a pretty good deal.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected, the A7N8X-X does have the NForce2 chipset.

Ed
 
Thanks to both of you for the correction. I think I'm leaning towards a
Barton system now. Should suit my purposes fine.

-rog344
 
If I go the Barton route, I'll most likely get a different hsf. I guess
I should take a look at the A64 again. Thanks for the article link.

-rog344
 
Back
Top