Whats a good processor?
- Thread starter Player 1
- Start date
pandamoan
Banned
the 3000+ is actually only a 2 and change ghz processor... but it's rated to compete with intel's 3 ghz processor... supposedly.
it breaks down like this: anything over 2 ghz is fine, so get the cheapest over 2 ghz, which is going to be an xp derivative.
however, if you want the very MOST powerful, get the fastest intel, but you're going to pay through the nose.
it breaks down like this: anything over 2 ghz is fine, so get the cheapest over 2 ghz, which is going to be an xp derivative.
however, if you want the very MOST powerful, get the fastest intel, but you're going to pay through the nose.
GogoTheMimic
Pimpin' Red Mage
It got my 2.66ghz P4 for $200 or so from newegg over the summer.
Doomulation
?????????????????????????
The newest athlons aren't as powerful as they say to be (or was I wrong?) Anywho, 3 ghz? I mean, there's no need for as much as that. Get the 2000+ series of athlon processors; they should do.
On benchmark sites I've been to, the Intel P4 processors have the top/high end, and the competing Athlons are not quite as fast (not taking into consideration overclocking, mind), so perhaps if you had lots of money, Intel is probably your best bet.
I'd probably get an Athlon (2000+ series like Doom said) myself, though, as they are much cheaper as the only thing that will tax it is N64 emulation as PC games tend to be graphics card intensive these days.
You could wait for the 64-Bit Opterons etc. if you hold out for a few more months and want the best.
I'd probably get an Athlon (2000+ series like Doom said) myself, though, as they are much cheaper as the only thing that will tax it is N64 emulation as PC games tend to be graphics card intensive these days.
You could wait for the 64-Bit Opterons etc. if you hold out for a few more months and want the best.
Nope. Well, not according to this:
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030623/index.html
The Athlon 3200+ has trouble competing with the Pentium 4 2.66GHz (look below). But it probably gives far better "bang for the buck" than the Intel offering or however that phase goes.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030623/index.html
The Athlon 3200+ has trouble competing with the Pentium 4 2.66GHz (look below). But it probably gives far better "bang for the buck" than the Intel offering or however that phase goes.
pandamoan
Banned
Tagrineth said:LOL... still hanging around Tom's I see? Look at Serious Sam benchmarks, you'll find the P4 3GHz has trouble competing with the Athlon 2600+.
seriously, whatever you do, DO NOT buy a celeron or duron. The savings are not worth it.
if money ain't an issue, get a p4 with as much ghz as you can afford.
if money IS an issue, get an athlon with as much ghz as you can afford.
it's just that easy.
jamie
Doomulation
?????????????????????????
You guys are seriously wasting your money. Processors evolve amazingly fast. Soon, that processor that you bought will be cheap, like the others. And to boot, my small system (far below your processor) is enough to run all games, including emulation, at full speed. At highest (or best) settings as well.
My point? You could save a _LOT_ of money by buying a cheaper processor and still get what you want out of it. But hey, it's not my decision.
My point? You could save a _LOT_ of money by buying a cheaper processor and still get what you want out of it. But hey, it's not my decision.
