View Full Version : VIA k8t800 pro vs nforce3 ultra
05-06-05, 04:55 AM
I finally decided to upgrade my aging 3.06 p4 to a 939 athlon 64 mb (agp) and processor and was wondering why alot of people are saying to avoid via chipsets and go for a nforce3 chipset. When i did a search, i found people saying to buy a nforce3 chipset, but they never say why. Is via really that bad?
05-06-05, 05:55 AM
A 3 GHz P4 is hardly old and is still more than sufficient for gaming today. Such an upgrade would be a waste of money. Save it and wait a few more months for the dual core processors to reach market.
05-06-05, 05:56 AM
Nforce 2 are the better overclockers. Some boards reach over 300HTT wich VIA based motheboards usually don't. Mine doesn't either though. :( It craps out at 290 wich still is good though.
The neforce3 is very fast and stable so why don't you just follow the advice?
Edit: I disagree with sat. I switched froma 2.45ghz AXP wich is as fast as your P4. The difference is noticabel and dualcore wont help with gaming AT ALL. You're better off to get a Veniece and OC the crap out of it. Then switch to dualcore (yes you can with AMD - same socket and compatible too) once games support it.
05-06-05, 08:26 AM
I went from a P4 3.0C to an FX53. The difference was noticeable, but only in certain situations. Certainly not in Windows, and a lot of games seemed to perform exactly the same as well. FarCry was one of the few games I noticed a difference in - and even then only in certain areas like the carrier level.
I would stay with what you have for now. If you absolutely cannot wait then get yourself a 3500+ venice core and a good motherboard for it. But it really won't be a night/day difference in performance IMO.
As far as nforce3 v. K8T800 goes - I've had both and for a stock system I'd choose the VIA. I didn't like the Neo2 at all. If you insist on overclocking the Neo2 is your best bet though.
VIA has had some dogs in the past - but the K8T800 is a solid chipset. The Neo2 has a goddawful layout and a POS onboard SATA controller. There are some other stupid idiosyncracies as well but I won't go into that now. Let's just say that the only reason the Neo2 is popular is that it tends to overclock well. That's pretty much it.
05-06-05, 11:50 AM
thanks for the replies! well my processor is the 3.06 p4 533 fsb, which is getting kinda old, bout 2 1/2 years. would there be a difference in going with say an A64 3200 venice?
05-06-05, 11:54 AM
A difference yes, but probably now worth bothering with IMO. I'd wait a while until you can get more for your money.
Damn I yearn for the days of yore when you upgraded from a 286-386 and it was worth the $$. The difference was truly night/day. Now we have people paying $800 to go from an FX53-FX55. It's just crazy IMO. Some of them even claim to see a difference - I think it's just wishful thinking.
I wish there was a hybrid via/nf3/nf4 style board out there with the best of all manufacturers and the worst of none :angel:
05-06-05, 12:58 PM
It would be called VIAForce. :)
Make it so. lol
05-06-05, 06:06 PM
To be honest. I didnt see a huge difference between my Athlon XP 3200+ and my A64+. If it werent for SLI I mean. SLI kinda skewed the results a bit. But it still isnt a bad upgrade. The CPUS available right now are plenty fast for most things..
05-06-05, 06:20 PM
nice thread, nice to have some confidence in my athlon xp at 2.35ghz (180x13)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.