PDA

View Full Version : Waiting to upgrade..help. (Intel)


Pages : [1] 2

Hex
03-18-05, 08:54 PM
Have been waiting to upgrade for a bit now.
Am sticking with Intel, I can not really say why just never really treated me wrong so I stand with it much as I have always stayed with Nvidia while everyone was all Ati crazy.

The main thing I have been waiting for is the Nforce Intel boards with SLI, but can not stand how hard it is to get a solid timeframe on when they will be available to pick up. (which is question 1 : Late march or April is what I am understanding as of now, or am I misreading?)

Second thing is that I was leaning heavily toward the P4 660 (I figure I should be able to get it to 4ghz with very little stress) that is question 2: Has anyone had any comparisons of their OC capability? (air cooled)

Third is the dual core P chips, if I understand correctly the X version should be out in the next month or so?
I know they are at 3.2 but I really do not think that the loss would be that huge between the 660 and the X dual core. Which leads to question 3: Will they be able to be oc by bumping the fsb up much like the single core and if so is there any feelings about what their potential might be.
(Main reason to go with the dual core is because again I do not think the stats lost between the 660 and the X would really be that major and I really do not want to have to upgrade for a while)

Fourth and last, I am planning to go with a pci-e 6800 ultra (one first, then sli not long after) but now I am hearing rumors of the g70 popping up very soon and the 512 6800 u so I am torn between just going with the 6800 ultras or one 512 mb or still waiting for the g70.

Any insight would be appreciated.

jAkUp
03-18-05, 09:45 PM
Did you see the review of the intel nForce board? Granted its still very early, but the results are terrible for SLI. Some say because of botchy drivers, some say because of the Memory Controller on the NB. I dunno, if I were you I would wait for some more mature benchmarks before I plop down the cash for an SLI board.

Not too sure about the dual core chips, but I'm fairly sure we won't see the 7XX series till the summer, if you wanted to get a P4 chip now, get one of the 6XX series with the 2MB L2 cache.

Hex
03-18-05, 09:55 PM
I have seen them, but they are the only intel SLI option right now that I am aware of, and I think that the manufacturer will make a difference as well as a solid driver.
Even if I did not use SLI right away, I just want the option on the board if I choose to use it without having to upgrade again in a matter of months.
I am not expecting it to come close to an fx 55 because it is just not a reasonable expectation, though the benches were a bit dissapointing.

Your advice is sound on the chip.

bkswaney
03-18-05, 10:47 PM
I feel your pain man. I've been running P4's for a long time now.
I've been waiting on the Intel SLI setup to.
But after really thinking it through there is no reason
why I should not go AMD this time around.
The 64's are just kickass anyway u look at it.
I need more CPU power than graphic so last night
I changed my mind. My 6800GT has all the power
I need for at least the next year to 18 months.
So I'm going to grab a Epox board and a 64 3000+
for only 200 bucks. My memory is fine I have now.

The reason I told u my story is you really should
take a LONG hard look at why you do not want AMD. ;)

Face it intel has nothing to run with AMD right now
and will not for some time to come.
Intel is just shooting blanks. :rofl:

Hex
03-18-05, 11:22 PM
I hear you.
I really was hoping that the 660 and 670 (680?) would be comparable because gaming is not everything to me (but it is up there) and Intel's stability and reliability have always been good to me and was hoping that with new chips and running under XP64 some catching up may have happened.
The fx55 is on my mind but for some reason find it really hard to switch.

bkswaney
03-19-05, 12:54 AM
I hear you.
I really was hoping that the 660 and 670 (680?) would be comparable because gaming is not everything to me (but it is up there) and Intel's stability and reliability have always been good to me and was hoping that with new chips and running under XP64 some catching up may have happened.
The fx55 is on my mind but for some reason find it really hard to switch.


I hear ya man. You sound like me. If it gives u good service why switch. :)

I really hate intel fell so far behind in performance. I was an AMD fan
back when I had a K6. Stuck with AMD then switched when
intel released the P4. Though I did have a dual P3 866 setup
with scsi's that was badass. :D

Don't worry about AMD does make stable setup's these days. ;)
Intel just does not have anything that can touch the 64.
When there clock speeds hit a wall that was it.

I'm going to make the switch back to AMD for the time being.
When Intel gets off there ass and gets something to market
that's worth buying I'll come back.

It's still kinda funny to hear but the fastest and most stable computers
on the planet run AMD64 cpu's. :angel:

After I saw the stability test toms hardware did with a 64
and new P4 it did me in.
AMD was by far the most stable rig. Things sure have changed
in the past year. "lol"

$n][pErMan
03-19-05, 01:48 AM
The last pentium I bought was a P3 550mhz .. lol. Been using AMD ever sense. Solid chips ;)

rohit
03-19-05, 11:59 AM
I was a COMPLETE Intel believer, and i was of the believe that it was the only solid and stable thing available.. i owned the 2.8e HT till 1 week back, wen i gav it off for my AM64.
I understand u stickin with intel. the Intel 6xx sound like 2mb L2 cache...n then SOUND really HOTTTTTT and ULTRA-Hi Fan Rpm'sss.
see the heat with 1mb prescotts...n then think abt the 2mb prescotts. Hmm.. just another way of lookin at it.
Btw, i was abt to get the intel p4 630 + ASUS P5P800 (with AGP8X).
but i switched to AMD... coz of the Heat...

john19055
03-19-05, 05:26 PM
I keep hearing that intel is more stable then AMD ,but my system never cashes or do I have any problems with my AMD system so I don't see how I can get more stable then that.

rohit
03-20-05, 04:05 AM
even i was under that ipression, of intel being more stable. damn, i was a fool.
after switching to AMD i realised there aint any difference.

Hex
04-05-05, 02:56 AM
Well, I am about to give inand go AMD.
Partially because i am tired of waiting for the Intel Nforce SLI boards, but mostly because I hear that the AMD dual core will run on the same 939 boards as other chips with just a bios update.
I have peeked in the AMD thread at the top and am wondering if there is anything else I need to know.
I am really looking at the venice line, with an nforce 4 sli board right now.
(Will not make final decision until we get some solid word about the next Nvidia offerings which means probably e3 which is really irritating but why spend x amount on 6800 ultra pci-e when something else will be out in a month or so).
Anything I am overlooking in giving up on Intel?
Also, I do usually have a few conversations on ,a webpage or two, music playing and such open while playing games...will I notice the lack of hyperthreading that I am used to?

Gator
04-05-05, 03:44 AM
My take, Athlon64 is superior to everything else. But that being said if you wanna go Intel then the only way to go is get a Pentium-M CPU, and either a Pentium M desktop board or the new Asus Pentium-M to Desktop socket adapter.

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=48395
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33810460
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=40017

rohit
04-05-05, 06:47 AM
Well, I am about to give inand go AMD.
Partially because i am tired of waiting for the Intel Nforce SLI boards, but mostly because I hear that the AMD dual core will run on the same 939 boards as other chips with just a bios update.
Ya looking forward for the same.
I have peeked in the AMD thread at the top and am wondering if there is anything else I need to know.
Not much, but keep looking.
I am really looking at the venice line, with an nforce 4 sli board right now.
(Will not make final decision until we get some solid word about the next Nvidia offerings which means probably e3 which is really irritating but why spend x amount on 6800 ultra pci-e when something else will be out in a month or so).
Wen nvidia came up withe the idea of SLi they must have thought the same. Frankly i beleve the nex gen cards wont be faster than 2 ultras SLi'd. Buts thast mi opinion.
Also, I do usually have a few conversations on ,a webpage or two, music playing and such open while playing games...will I notice the lack of hyperthreading that I am used to?
Hahah, HT is useless, believe me. USED HT for 8months, and now using amd64 for over 2 weeks without HT & i wonder, did i even "EXPERIENCE" HT ever?

i generally use winamp, msn, yahoo, I.E and netscape run 24x7 on mi comp. with many many utilities on too. Steam spyware is on for 24x7 too. + the system temps monitoring utilities on too.

With these on i havent yet noticed that HT even made a diff or no. HT may be usefull, i bet, but i havent even noticed its lack as yet.

rohit
04-05-05, 06:58 AM
My take, Athlon64 is superior to everything else. But that being said if you wanna go Intel then the only way to go is get a Pentium-M CPU, and either a Pentium M desktop board or the new Asus Pentium-M to Desktop socket adapter.

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=48395
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33810460
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=40017
Ya pentium-m sure is good, but is hell expensive. i wuld put mi money on DUAL-CORE than dothan. also if tomorro u wanna change to pentium dual-core you wil hafta get a new mobo too. wit 939 there's a small hope for dual-core without new mobo.

Subtestube
04-05-05, 07:04 AM
Just a couple quick notes - I don't want to defend Intel here, as if I were buying a new system RIGHT NOW, I'd go for an AMD one hands down. That said though, if your primary computer usage ISN'T games, then AMD doesn't necessarily hold all the cards. If you're looking for better performance in terms of multimedia - video encoding, editing, and the like, Intel Chips still tend to squeak through in terms of raw performance. That said, they also (usually) cost more, and the minor performance differential is probably not worth it unless these sorts of thing are really your primary computer usage task.

If you're set on getting Intel, it might also pay to wait for a couple things:
* One of those Dual Core reviews (I can't recall which though) suggests that non-engi sample dual core P4s may not have locked multipliers. That would mean a VERY overclockable dual core chip. Nice.
* Pentium Ms will shortly be getting 915 (or is it 925?) chipset support. The P-M is a very very solid platform, though it does tend to excel in regions similar to A64s and fall down in exactly the same places. As that is as it is, P-Ms are probably not worth it, as their strengths are similar to A64s and they cost more. Low power consumption though, and low temperatures, which is nice.

Gator
04-05-05, 07:06 AM
...* Pentium Ms will shortly be getting 915 (or is it 925?) chipset support. The P-M is a very very solid platform, though it does tend to excel in regions similar to A64s and fall down in exactly the same places. As that is as it is, P-Ms are probably not worth it, as their strengths are similar to A64s and they cost more. Low power consumption though, and low temperatures, which is nice.

Indeed Pentium-M is not cheap, and Athlon64 obviously is more economical. Only reason it was worth mentioning was in case Hex had to have Intel no matter what. If you are a diehard Intel fan, Pentium-M is the only way to go in my opinion, it really is that much better than a regular P4. :cool:

rohit
04-05-05, 07:38 AM
Just read the review of DUAL-CORE Intel's pentium D. and Pentium EE on anandtech. Well Dual Core is Impressive for sure, but HT isnt. Having 2 real processors is better than having one Real and a physical.
The new Pentium D or EE will require new chipset 955X and 965X.

Yeh certain apps like ENCODING and other professional apps AMD cant even be considered. But i dont belong in that category, mi primary usage of comp is Gaming, music, entertainment etc.. and lil use of certain office apps, and lil programming etc.
for that i wont get an expensive pentium to perform as good as mi AMD 3200+ and generate 2wice the amont of heat than mi current amd produces.
ive said it before and i am sayin it again, i was a fool to get p4 earlier, and suffered from FAN-Noise of 5500+ rpm. i was excited with the idea of OVER_HYPED HT.
not anymore.

Gator
04-05-05, 07:50 AM
...Yeh certain apps like ENCODING and other professional apps AMD cant even be considered... i was a fool to get p4 earlier, and suffered from FAN-Noise of 5500+ rpm. i was excited with the idea of OVER_HYPED HT.
not anymore.

Well actually I often edit & encode audio & video, as well as use a lot of Photoshop. And I can safely say the Athlon64 is excellent for it all. People claiming that P4 is faster at those tasks are unwilling to admit it applies specifically to Intel codecs, and that just because the P4 can use Intel codecs faster doesn't mean the A64 is bad at it. A64 gives you the power you crave at very resonable prices, and it does not run hot in comparison to the P4 line. I agree, I will never buy Intel ever again, but if I had to then Pentium-M is the only way to go.

rohit
04-05-05, 09:15 AM
Well actually I often edit & encode audio & video, as well as use a lot of Photoshop. And I can safely say the Athlon64 is excellent for it all. People claiming that P4 is faster at those tasks are unwilling to admit it applies specifically to Intel codecs, and that just because the P4 can use Intel codecs faster doesn't mean the A64 is bad at it. A64 gives you the power you crave at very resonable prices, and it does not run hot in comparison to the P4 line. I agree, I will never buy Intel ever again, but if I had to then Pentium-M is the only way to go.
I 99.99% agree to that

But i its not like i'll nevr ever buy intel again. If i havto buy a processor+mobo 1st thing i look at price+performance. at this moment AMD64 suits the price+performance category. next thing will definitely be the HEAT issue. AMD64 staisfies that too. so AMD64 is superior in these terms.
If intel's processors suit these then i'll pro'lly get intel. But it wont happen, atleast not with the current gen. of products.

Hex
04-05-05, 06:40 PM
Ok, 99% decided on the +4000 "San diego" E4 proc.
Now just need board options, I know nothing about AMD boards.
I was looking at the Lanparty boards and such though I am not sure if they are all that they seem.
Nforce 4 and SLI , 939, those are the main musts
Just picked up an xconnect 500 w psp so I should not have to worry about that.

rohit
04-06-05, 04:53 AM
Ok, 99% decided on the +4000 "San diego" E4 proc.
Now just need board options, I know nothing about AMD boards.
I was looking at the Lanparty boards and such though I am not sure if they are all that they seem.
Nforce 4 and SLI , 939, those are the main musts
Just picked up an xconnect 500 w psp so I should not have to worry about that.
Are you 100% sure you wanna go for SLi or only one Pci-e slot will do?
i feel if you r buyin a mobo with PCI-e slot, rather Buy a SLi board. So you can SLi any time in the future.
anyways good SLi boards are ASUS A8N-SLi Deluxe.
And DFI lanparty boards are excellent too (from wot ive read, they overclock the best)

Non-sli boards ASUS A8Ve Deluxe (VIA chipset)
or any nForce4 Ultra chipset board

six_storm
04-06-05, 10:48 AM
Dude, go with AMD. Until these newer Dual-Core CPUs come out (at a reasonable price :)), I don't think you will get any better. When I first started building a PC, I had Intel P4 2.4 GHz and the performance really sucked. I then bought a AMD Athlon 2500+ Barton and I got way better performance.

Like I said, go with AMD64 unless you want to wait for the dual cores. My 3200+ 939 kicks some serious tail end with any game you throw at it. I highly recommend the 939s (ON SALE AT NEWEGG BTW).

Subtestube
04-06-05, 03:26 PM
Bear in mind, I think AMD has said that their Dualies will be compatible with any S939 MoBo, so if you get a 939 with an A64 now, you can always pick up a Dual core down the track.

keith33
04-06-05, 04:59 PM
I made the switch from a P4 3.0 ghz a few months ago and I really haven't noticed the lacking of hyperthreading. A64s are great multitaskers whether people believe it or not. You can run them on stock heatsink and even overclock a bit without worrying about heat issues. Cool n' Quiet is a far superior technology to Speedstep (this makes a huge difference when running your computer for days at a time without doing much from the ordinary). A HUGE factor that no one has mentioned yet is the fact that you can use DDR1 with A64s with timings as low as 2-2-2-5 (2-2-2-10 with nforce3 optmimzation), while DD2-667 is still at CAS 5. That said, there are no genuine AMD chipsets, so make sure you get a good motherboard (not MSI). I've had many problems with my K8N Neo2 Platinum and finally got it running completely stably after a few BIOS flashes, custom settings etc. etc. etc... There is a short learning curve when switching over, just don't get frustrated if it may not work the first time.

Good luck.

bkswaney
04-06-05, 11:04 PM
I made the switch from a P4 3.0 ghz a few months ago and I really haven't noticed the lacking of hyperthreading. A64s are great multitaskers whether people believe it or not. You can run them on stock heatsink and even overclock a bit without worrying about heat issues. Cool n' Quiet is a far superior technology to Speedstep (this makes a huge difference when running your computer for days at a time without doing much from the ordinary). A HUGE factor that no one has mentioned yet is the fact that you can use DDR1 with A64s with timings as low as 2-2-2-5 (2-2-2-10 with nforce3 optmimzation), while DD2-667 is still at CAS 5. That said, there are no genuine AMD chipsets, so make sure you get a good motherboard (not MSI). I've had many problems with my K8N Neo2 Platinum and finally got it running completely stably after a few BIOS flashes, custom settings etc. etc. etc... There is a short learning curve when switching over, just don't get frustrated if it may not work the first time.

Good luck.

When I went from a AMD Athlon 2400+ to a 2.4Ghz P4HT @ 2.8 I noticed
a huge difference in performance. I can do a LOT more at one time.
My old AMD rig would just sit there thinking it seems. "lol"
My intel rig is smoother doing multi things.

Now I have not built a 64 yet. So I cannot say
on how it does doing a lot at once.
I do 6-7 things at one time at times.
I put a lot of load on my system at times.

I really hope the 64 can do what mine does now
faster. I might just need a dual core rig.