What Is The Best ?

[bigdawgfoxx]

Intels Prescott man..wake up! lol just playing. Your system is pretty good. I would wait about 3 months...NOT 6! and buy the stuff i posted earlier! INTEL PRESCOTT

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by bigdawgfoxx@18 October 2003 - 01:48
Intels Prescott man..wake up! lol just playing. Your system is pretty good. I would wait about 3 months...NOT 6! and buy the stuff i posted earlier! INTEL PRESCOTT

Small tip; if your opinions are not based on facts, they won't be heeded.


IMO 64-bit technology will take a while to catch on. It would be best to update your current rig just now and wait until 64-bit tech becomes widely used; only then will the benefits outweigh the price.

We will also have seen and tested the new processors. To say "Intel is better" or "Athlon64 ownz Prescott" at this point is ridiculous - there are no reliable facts to support it.

[clocker]

Just out of curiosity...

Even after the release of 64 bit chips won't you have to have software optimized for it to really see any big improvement?
I'm sure the chips will be backwards compatible with 32bit software, but will they run it any faster?

[abu_has_the_power]

Originally posted by ricochet@17 October 2003 - 05:05
Im thinking about getting a new pc arroound $3,000 . I have been reading about the new amd 64 bit processers with the hyper transport tech. and the p 4 with the hyper threading tech. I heard that the p4 is still the best. I want to use this for gamming so what do you think is the best ????

the real question is: do u need a computer at this very moment? wat i would do is just wait till next year, and c wat's up with pentium 5, which will most likely be a 64 bit cpu as well. then, amd goes down the drain. might be a bit more expensive, but u got $3000, u got nothing to worry bout. if u build urself, u'll have enought for almost two seflbuild alienwares. lol. almost 2, prob 1 and half

[abu_has_the_power]

Originally posted by metalrebelzz@18 October 2003 - 01:20
$3000 will get you a NICE gaming rig....

honestly, i love AMD better, but thats just my opinion..... if you really want that extra 5-7% in performance, then go for it.... otherwise, i'd stay AMD...

btw... the 64 bit crap IS out, but it didnt exactly amaze the testers or anything.... not a HUGE inrease like they thought...

as for the rest, he didnt ask our help on deciding it, just the CPU....

but, if it IS guna be a gaming rig.... Asus mobo, GeForce5900AGP 256DDR, ....shit im copying the dude before me.... oh well, you get the picture...

1 GB DDR, no more, you shouldnt NEED any more than that, seriously...

LCD , i would recommend a ViewSonic... Sony are good also....

cheers, and tell us how it ends!!! :beerchug:

dude, a 5900 ultra? with that much money? u got be nuts. he could get like a super modded case, water cooling, max oced 9800 pro 256mb using a gpu water block, pentium 5 at watever speed, dvd +- rw, 1 teribyte (4*250gb SATA or ATA), and Sound Audigy 2 Platinum, and some more stuff. if u wait till next year dude, that 1 terabyte of storage will be much cheaper.

[DWk]

Originally posted by ricochet@18 October 2003 - 01:44
Yeh I think you are right I better wait for 6 mo. I got a 1.7 gig. with 512 sdram and it seems so slow even I know its just as faet now as when I bought it 2 yrs. ago. I got a 400 sys. bus and with amd talking about a sys bus of 1600 and a 3.2 gig. That is so much faster than mine... Where did you here about intel going with a 64 bit system ??? I havent heard nuthn... Also what do you think about the alienware system ???

yea ur system is good enuff for sometime....

wait it out

DWk

[bigdawgfoxx]

Im with DWK...its good enough for now wait a while.

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by clocker@18 October 2003 - 12:50
Even after the release of 64 bit chips won't you have to have software optimized for it to really see any big improvement?
I'm sure the chips will be backwards compatible with 32bit software, but will they run it any faster?

Not sure about Prescott, but the AMD Athlon64 chips will run just like a normal Athlon in the "legacy mode" for 32-bit applications with a 32-bit OS.

Their true power will only be realised when using a 64-bit OS; then they can run in 'long mode', running 64-bit code with full 64-bit capabilities while also supporting 32-bit applications in 'compatibility mode'.

M$ are designing a version of Windows XP which will utilize 64-bit capabilities, and game designers are also looking at the possibilities of 64-bit processing.


So yeah, not many applications at launch, but they will certainly come.



For further reading, Ars Technica have an excellent article on the Athlon64.
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/x86-64/x86-64-1.html

[ricochet]

A friend said he could build me a system with dual 2.5 cpu, for a 5 gig. system, does this sound right???

[lynx]

If you are running multiple applications, you will certainly get a lot better performance, but since most of us only use one processor intensive application at any one time, you are unlikely to see the sort of benefits you are hoping for.

Multi-processor systems are ideal for servers, but they are normally not much use for desktop situations simply because the applications are not written to use more than one processor.