Want a new CPU and mainboard

[Clements]

Pentium M is for laptops, and are not really built for high-end gaming or working with apps or desktop computers.

In fact, P-M are really good at gaming and number crunching, but really poor at content creation and media encoding compared to desktop chips.

Hmm, so an Athlon 3800+? This is probably a laughable comparison, but how would an Athlon 3800+ hold up to a 2.4 GHz Celeron? To my knowledge, Celeron's are cheap crap. I know I shouldn't base everything on GHz, but would a 2.4 GHz Celeron beat an Athlon 3800+ at stock speed?

Heh. Not even in the same league. It is like comparing a 6200 Turbocache with a 7800GTX. The Athlon64 X2 will obliterate it in every single benchmark by several fold. It also beat the P4 3.73GHz Extreme Edition in any truely multithreaded app, and almost all games.

Also, how much can I expect to pay for a good PCI-E graphics card?

If you don't want to spend too much, a 6600GT is around $120 or $69 can get you a plain 6600.

 

[TerraPhantm]

I'd go with an X2 3800 or Opteron 165 with the DFI Ultra-D (or SLI-D/DR). I have the Ultra-D and its probably the best OCing board for S939, the SLI-D and the SLI-DR are different versions of the Ultra-D which like their name suggests, feature SLI. The SLI-DR also sports 8 SATA ports instead of 4. On water, I got my X2 4400+ to 2.8GHz.

 

[Toasty]

I know I shouldn't base everything on GHz, but would a 2.4 GHz Celeron beat an Athlon 3800+ at stock speed?

It's not a perfect means of comparison, but the 3800+ on the Athlon 3800+ means that the processor is roughly comparable to a 3800MHz (3.8GHz) Intel P4 counterpart (though, sometimes it's not quite as good). They perform differently depending on the application, but you can get a fair estimate of how AMD's will compare to Intel's that way. Also, for a much more accurate way to gauge processor performance, head over to Tom's Hardware. In their CPU section they have reviews of major processors, AMD and Intel, and every few months they release CPU charts, complete with benchmarks in a handful of applications.

 

[Doomulation]

Hmm, so an Athlon 3800+? This is probably a laughable comparison, but how would an Athlon 3800+ hold up to a 2.4 GHz Celeron? To my knowledge, Celeron's are cheap crap. I know I shouldn't base everything on GHz, but would a 2.4 GHz Celeron beat an Athlon 3800+ at stock speed? Also, how much can I expect to pay for a good PCI-E graphics card?

Now that is one stupid question :happy:
Not to mention Celeron != Athlon. Celeron is, as you know, a budget version of Pentiums. In other words, if anything, compare them to Durons.
And, as mentioned, 3800+ could be compared to roughly a 3.8GHz Pentium CPU. But it varies, of course...

 

[arnalion]

It varies. I think AMD chips tend to run cooler and faster than the same clocked Intels, but the Pentium M chips are nice pieces of kit and I think (not sure about this, I'm a bit out of date with this stuff) at least the equal of AMD. When I do my major desktop upgrade I'm considering a Pentium M, as they run very cool and give a fair amount of power.

I think the general rule of thumb has always been AMD rules for gaming machines, but Intel wins hands down with office apps and some number-crunching ones (e.g. Photoshop). When it gets down to it, it depends on what you want to use the system for and if you're planning on overclocking to get every last little bit of performance out. My current desktop (AMD Thunderbird 1.3GHz, 768MB of PC100 RAM, 128MB GeForce Ti4600 (golden sample, no less) and a VIA KT133A-based motherboard) works perfectly for programming and playing the games I like (UT, Darwinia (just about), Armagetron, Project Eden), but is hopeless for the new super-uber-ultimate-mega-better-than-life-graphics games. The only reason for me to upgrade is a little more power would be handy, and the motherboard sucks.

Edit: with cooling: don't worry about recent Pentiums - they throttle down if they get too hot and are pratically impossible to kill. Tom's Hardware did an experiment a while back with taking the heatsink off a running processor, and the P4 just throttled down to something like a 5-10% duty cycle. AMDs you need to be more careful with, though they may have improved the thermal protection in the last year - as I said, it's been a while since I looked at this.

Pentium-M is a greate cpu. If the cpu starts throttling will it get slower. Amd 3700+ lies around 33C idle temperature with the stock cooler, so theirs no worries of overheating. Tom's Hardware shouldn't be trusted since they have mixtured with tests (earlier). Intel paid them to show better results on their cpu's.

 

[bcrew1375]

Now that is one stupid question :happy:
Not to mention Celeron != Athlon. Celeron is, as you know, a budget version of Pentiums. In other words, if anything, compare them to Durons.
And, as mentioned, 3800+ could be compared to roughly a 3.8GHz Pentium CPU. But it varies, of course...

Well, I did say it was probably laughable . The first Celeron I had was 533 MHz, and it got beat down by a 266 MHz Pentium. BTW, Any suggestions on where to buy?

 

[bcrew1375]

No suggestions on where to buy?

 

[Clements]

http://newegg.com/ is normally the cheapest in the US for Computer Hardware. I've only heard good things about it, although I cannot shop there myself being in Europe.

 

[bcrew1375]

Clements, thanks for the suggestion. I looked up NewEgg on ResellerRatings and they still have a 9.63 Lifetime rating even with 1470 pages of reviews!

Hmm, as for the two CPUs that TerraPhantm suggested, NewEgg has this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103588, and this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103562. I'm assuming the Opteron is better since it costs more, but the only difference I can find is the size of the L2 cache. Is that the only thing that separates these two? Terraphantm, is this the mainboard you were talking about?: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813136152

 

[shadow dragon64]

hey do any of you no how i can get pictures under my user name if so can some one tell me

 

[bcrew1375]

Well, first of all, you could have made a thread instead of posting a message in one that has nothing to do with your question lain:. It's called an avatar, you should be able to change it from the User CP in the upper left of the forums.

 

[arnalion]

Opreton is Amd's server processor like Intel got Xeon. It's less good for gaming

 

[BoggyB]

No suggestions on where to buy?

In the UK, Overclockers and eBuyer are pretty good. You could also try Scan, Insight and Dabs. I don't know if any will ship outside the UK though.

 

[bcrew1375]

Opreton is Amd's server processor like Intel got Xeon. It's less good for gaming

Ah, so I should go with the 3800+ then? Also, I've never actually bought a CPU from anywhere except computer shows. So, do they come with the fan and heatsink, or do I have to buy that separately? Also, I'm probably going to need a new case. Which would go good with the mainboard I linked earlier?

 

[Clements]

It's less good for gaming

Nonsense.

Opterons perform identically with equivalent Athlon64/X2 since they are virtually identical chips. In fact, Opterons overclock much better, at a small price premium. That's why 1xx Opterons have been selling like hot cakes in the enthusiast sector.

 

[bcrew1375]

I just found a comparison of the two. The Opteron has more L2 cache, but less speed. According to what I read, the difference in cache is not enough to make the Opteron faster, but it has more OC potential. Does that sound right?

 

[Clements]

Here is a GREAT comparison of Opterons, dual-core Opterons, Athlon64s and Athlon64 X2 processors in the budget range, with Intel processors thrown in. You can see that Opterons have no issue keeping up with Athlon64s in gaming.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2736&p=9

The Opteron 144 is a single core, and 165 is a dual-core CPU.

I just found a comparison of the two. The Opteron has more L2 cache, but less speed. According to what I read, the difference in cache is not enough to make the Opteron faster, but it has more OC potential. Does that sound right?

All dual-core Opterons come with 1MB cache, therefore there is no equivalent Opteron to the Athlon64 X2 3800/4200/4600+. The Opteron 165 runs at 1.8GHz, and the Opteron 170 runs at 2.0GHz. The performance of the Athlon64 X2 3800+ will lie somewhere between the two on average.

The Opteron 165 has more overclocking potential over stock than the 3800+. If you are not overclocking, the performance of the two are roughly equivalent, as the Opteron 165 has double the cache, but the X2 3800+ is 200MHz faster.

 

[Doomulation]

Ah, so I should go with the 3800+ then? Also, I've never actually bought a CPU from anywhere except computer shows. So, do they come with the fan and heatsink, or do I have to buy that separately? Also, I'm probably going to need a new case. Which would go good with the mainboard I linked earlier?

CPUs come with a stock heatsink if it not OEM. As far as cases go, they really have little to do with the mainbord. What they should have, though, is good air cooling.

 

[cooliscool]

(AMD took years to support SSE3!).

Um, they have a licensing agreement with Intel which states that they can use Intel's instruction sets (SSEx is one of them), after a year of introduction. SSE3 was introduced in 2004, and AMD released Venice in 2005 (which has SSE3).

Pentium 4 is a dead end. Conroe is badass, but P4 would be an idiotic buying decision right now.

 

[bcrew1375]

CPUs come with a stock heatsink if it not OEM. As far as cases go, they really have little to do with the mainbord. What they should have, though, is good air cooling.

What I'm saying is will all mainboards fit in all cases? The case I have now is fairly old and I doubt it would hold a newer mainboard.