Hardware Analysis Community Forums http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/ 2008-11-20T21:49:18-05:00 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/ http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/halogo.gif text/html 2004-09-27T14:15:27-05:00 Col http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#187518 Richarddx,<br /> <br /> Got to say, the AMD 64 Bit 3500 is much faster than the Intel P4 3.0 Ghz. I upgraded from a 3.0 Ghz and can't tell you how much you would notice the difference, to the point where I was surprised!<br /> <br /> The jump in performance was like going from my Barton 2500 to the 3.0Ghz P4 (if not more!)<br /> <br /> I built systems using the AMD 3500 for 2 customers and have had nothing but praise for them, both of them are amazed at how fast they actually are! text/html 2004-09-27T13:59:48-05:00 Dale Bucyk http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#187509 You're absolutely right. While there are developments ongoing in computer hardware and software, with the advent of PC Express, SATA then eventually moving to a solid-state RAM drive, silent PC's, developments in RAM (DDR2) and other RAM as well as different computer peripherals, there is one thing that lacks in the computer hardware technological field.<br /> <br /> That is imagination.<br /> <br /> All this hardware development we have at present is just trickling down from other technology (ie USB - USB RAM drive - USB biometric RAM drive as well as a USB biometric mouse).<br /> <br /> So I do agree with you in that technology is at a standstill because of this.<br /> text/html 2004-09-25T23:43:10-05:00 Super XP http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#186295 ATI releases X700 graphics chips <br /> <br /> CANADIAN FIRM ATI formally announced the Radeon X700 range of graphics chips.<br /> Its partners - such as Sapphire - are shuttling out cards using the chip as we write.<br /> <br /> It also formally announced the PCI Express version of its All-in-Wonder technology. This provides native 16-lane PCI Express and ATI claims it's twice the speed of AGP8X boards.<br /> <br /> The Radeon X600 Pro has a 400MHz core and 256MB of 600MHz memory, said ATI. The TV tuner will pick up 125 channels of goggle-box stuff, and also FM broadcasts.<br /> text/html 2004-09-25T23:39:26-05:00 Super XP http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#186285 Asus to launch Athlon 64 based notebook.<br /> <br /> AMD Mobile Athlon 64 (3000+, 3200+ 3400+)<br /> nVIDIA Crush K8M<br /> (2) SO-Dimm sockets (Upto 1GB DDR 333 [PC-2700])<br /> GeForce FX Go 5650<br /> 15&quot; XGA/SXGA+ Display /w ACE View Technology<br /> DVD or Combo DVD/CD-RW or DVD-EW<br /> Integrated 802.11b/g<br /> Intregrated 56k Modem<br /> Intregrated 1.44mb Floppy Disk Drive<br /> 4-in-1 card reader (SD, MMC, MS, and MS PRO)<br /> IEEE 1394<br /> (1) 10/100/1000 ethernet port<br /> (4) USB 2.0 ports<br /> <br /> text/html 2004-09-25T23:38:34-05:00 Super XP http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#186283 AMD extends chip deal with IBM.<br /> AMD will pay IBM up to $280 million from September this year to December 2008. text/html 2004-09-23T19:59:01-05:00 Michael Poteat http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#185443 AMD does offer a number of different processors but I think it is clear that their main cpu for the future is the socket 939. Read the comparisons of the 939 boxes versus P4 boxes at AnandTech. My AquaMark 3 score went from about 16,000 to 36,000 simply by switching from a P4 2.4 (again o/c to 2.7) to a stock 3500+ (I think real clock speed is 2200). I am still using the same ram -- and the motherboard chipset probably accounts for some of the difference. This is reflected in real world performance. In my game (IL-2 Forgotten Battles -- very graphically intensive WW2 flight sim), I now have acceptable FPS (30 or 40 plus) in places where my Intel would slow to single digits. I can now use the so called &quot;perfect&quot; landscape setting and still have acceptable frame rates in most situations. New ram and a 6800 gt and I will be smoking. For my other hobbies (bit torrents of live music), the new rig doesn't make any difference.<br /> <br /> The Intel chips are either very hot and offer less performance or are (reportedly) easy to bend and offer less performance. Again, four of the six machines in the MAX PC shoot out had AMD 64 chips. Two had extreme edition P4s (one was o/c from 3.8 to 4.3x). All had 6800 ultra video cards. The super overclocked P4 took second place but cost $7,000. My guess is that INTEL will continue to pick up a lot of the beige (or black) desktop box market. I think they plan to use their mobile chips as their main desktop offering (lower heat?) and some folks will be attracted to the &quot;future features&quot; of the L775 (is that its name) socket. But for somone who wants to play games, the AMD 64 chips are the best bang for the buck and socket 939 chips are the ones that will continue to be developed. NOTE THAT UNTIL I STARTED TO PLAN MY UPGRADE ABOUT 6 WEEKS AGO, I WAS PLANNING ON ANOTHER P-4. This is my first AMD.<br /> <br /> As explained by someone one another forum:<br /> <br /> &quot;The Athlon 64 FX processor has a fully integrated DDR Dual Channel memory controller providing a 128-bit wide path to memory and therefore eliminating the need for a Dual Channel interface on the motherboard which traditionally was always located in the northbridge. Although the P4 (800fsb variety) and the A64 FX, both share the same theoretical peak memory bandwidth of 6.4GB/sec, the Athlon FX realizes significantly more throughput due mainly to it’s integrated memory controller. Even so, it still suffers from the required use of registered modules which are slower than regular modules, in terms of subsystem latency. The upcoming Athlon 64 / A64 FX processors designed for Socket 939 will be free from this major drawback and will also feature Dual Channel memory controllers.&quot; by Exit edited by FastEddie text/html 2004-09-23T19:11:52-05:00 Shadow_Ops_Airman1 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#185426 ya i think since they started with the Socket 754, they should stick with it but add a dual channel Controller onto the motherboard for the Ram and a disable function in the bios for single channel so you can run dual channel on 754. text/html 2004-09-23T18:53:08-05:00 Steve S http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#185417 In the first post, Mike says:<br /> &quot;I don't understand where INTEL is headed with their new sockets and form factors. I will be using AMD for the next couple of years.&quot;...<br /> Surely AMD aren't exactly sending out clear messages about where they are going...Socket A, Socket 745, Socket 940 and Socket 939.....hmmmmm. It's a mess frankly.<br /> <br /> <br /> text/html 2004-09-23T16:07:10-05:00 Michael Poteat http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#185382 Here is a link to an old review of graphics cards at Tom's Hardware. It is consistent with reviews I have seen in Max PC and some of the Brit magazines (excellent publications IMHO). <br /> <br /> <a class="ext" href="/action/r/http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-13.html#unreal_tournament_2003" target="_blank">http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-1...ament_2003</a><br /> <br /> It is an old review and does not include the newer ATI cards or the 6800 cards. AnandTech has a review of the newer cards. I have had both ATI and NVidia and certainly thought the 9700 and 9800 cards were better than the NVidia (spelling) cards of that generation. But from all I have read the 6800 is the best card now available. The only other card I would consider would the 256 9800 pro (the last revision) which actually out performed some of the newer ATI cards in a MAX PC test a few months back. If you could get a 9800 pro under $200 it might be a worth whild purchase. My decision has been to wait until the 6800 GT drops to around $300 and keep on o/c the 9700. If if blow the 9700 then I will probably buy a 9800 pro as a temp replacement.<br /> <br /> Cheers, Michael text/html 2004-09-23T13:07:37-05:00 Michael Poteat http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#185320 If you have a 9700 Pro -- I was a little bit confused by your first post (needed upgrade) then I think a 9600XT would be a step backwards. Go read some reviews -- one of the Brit slick computer magazines had a big review about 6 months ago of almost 20 cards. My suggestion would be to put some type of heatsink and aftermarket fan on your 9700 and o/c it. Of course you may break it (getting the stock fan and heat sink off is a pain in rear). I bought the 9700 pro when it was the fastest card around and have been very happy with it but when it is replaced (I hope in the next couple of months) I will get a 6800. Depending on what the prices are like when I make my purchase I will get either at GT or an Ultra. One thing is if you break or burn your 9700, you can get a 128 9800 pro for about $200.<br /> <br /> If you are not comfortable with overclocking then don't do it. Also, I think most of us upgrade a piece at a time and therefore all of our components won't be matched at some time in the process. I could affort to buy everything at once but I have to keep my expenditures under my wife's radar screen. More than 4 or 5 hundred a month and she starts to kick -- of course I am aiming for 16 months between major upgrades and will try to spend about $1000 total on my current upgrade. I can then build a replacement machine and give it to my son or wife. text/html 2004-09-23T00:08:38-05:00 Jan Moore http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/?o=20#185033 Quote: In this regard, Jeff is 100% correct, you really need a better processor to effectively handle a higher end card, and that will require a motherboard upgrade and perhaps a power supply upgrade as well. <br /> <br /> For right now in your current system I recommend:<br /> <br /> Radeon 9600 XT<br /> or<br /> Nvidia 5700 ULTRA (the DDR2 version)<br /> <br /> Thanks a mil for your input! I appreciate it. I figured I would have to upgrade the Proc and I'm only using a 330/W PSU--enermax. ( I have 9 watts left to spare hehehe )<br /> <br /> As for the Vodeo,,,,,,My brother has a 9600XT,,,,,,I benched our cards using 3dMark and Mine blows his away! He runs a 2000+ AMD at 1.667Mhz compared to my 2400+ at 2.0. same amount of ram and drive transfers. In doom3 he runs at 800x600 W/low bells where as I use 800x600 W/full bells and to boot, I get better FPS!<br /> <br /> Is there a card you could suggest thats in between the 6800GT and 9700Pro? It would be a waste a $$$ if I shelled out that Denero for a card that my Proc can't handle! lol<br /> <br /> thanks again in advanced! text/html 2004-09-22T10:06:38-05:00 tom http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/#184733 There really is no point in having a 64-bit processor, I like my 3gig P4, it's sweet, so who cares text/html 2004-09-22T09:52:10-05:00 carl0s ki http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/#184726 I consider myself a heavyduty computer user<br /> high levels multitasking web browsing, occasional gaming, video encoding, capturing , watching tv and music. Lots of vartying software.<br /> <br /> however when it comes to recommended System requirements<br /> my system hasnt changed and it is still suitable for many games<br /> upgrade in GFX card will open the door to even more games. but the regular user doesnt care hell iu dont care<br /> <br /> I built myself a AMD Athlon XP 1700+ early 2002 <br /> ECS K7S5A 3.x board<br /> And Used 2nd hand 32 MB TNT2 M64<br /> i used my old 128MB Sdram<br /> Upgraded to 256 MB DDR333 3 months later<br /> <br /> <br /> nothings changed i can still upgrade this by only 40% to<br /> Athlon XP 3000<br /> I run Win XP Sp1 no problems but 512mb would be nice <br /> but? i still dont need it , then again IE alone want 256MB ram problem solved i dont use it anymores <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile1.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=":)" title=":)"><br /> <br /> Linux Mandrake 10 however 256MB is more then enough it doesnt want anymore<br /> <br /> i still have the computer it works perfect with a CDrw DVDrw.<br /> They computer speed have hit a logical wall, i dont care if it goes 20000000 mile per second faster then mine<br /> i cant notice it if im only need to travel 1 mile.<br /> <br /> I also agree thaT many schools and business dont require an upgrade but rather maintenance<br /> my Tafe college machines are P4 2.4ghz and slow as hell,<br /> if i quick scan them i find 1000's of spyware then a fragmented drive and reduntant programs loading al over the place.<br /> they aRE crippled with 256MB RAM<br /> <br /> they are phasing P4 3.0ghz with HT 512mb DDR to replace them <br /> wasted money i believe.<br /> they RAM could have been upgraded for &lt;$50 each machine, not $200+ after selling old machines<br /> <br /> <br /> AthlonXP 1700+<br /> 256MB DDR333 ram<br /> Ecs K7S5A rev 3.x<br /> 250 watt PSU <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile5.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=":P" title=":P"><br /> 120gig Seagate 8mb cache<br /> 10gig Samsung 5400rpm (Linux Mandrake/Windows pagefile)<br /> text/html 2004-09-21T21:51:47-05:00 Brian Stewart http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/#184484 rounded cables bad<br /> shielding = useless<br /> <br /> the best way to &quot;shield&quot; something is to have another wire close to it with current going the opposite direction. text/html 2004-09-21T21:25:59-05:00 James Marlin http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/32199/#184476 So anyway....<br /> <br /> Sanders giving away free hardware?!?<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> OK, I know he isn't, was just hoping the thread would devolve into a &quot;give us free hardware&quot; rant.<br /> Sorry <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile4.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=";)" title=";)">