P IV 3.2GHz vs AMD Athlon 64 3000+

T

TheYak

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2004
Messages
927
Reaction score
1
Location
Randburg, Gauteng
P IV 3.2GHz vs AMD Athlon 64 3400+

So, my birthday is coming up on Friday and the significant other has agreed that I can get a new machine.

I have my eye on the AMD Athlon 64 3000+ processor and an ASUS K8N4-ED motherboard.

My current machine is a Pentium IV 3.2Ghz and I have a Geforce FX 5200 LE graphics card with a gig of Memory. It's a great machine.

My question is this: Will it make such a big difference? The 3000+ is a 3 GHz machine, so in effect, I'm buying a "slower" machine. But it's a 64bit processor and I've seen this machine in action, it's not too shabby at all. I will be adding a 256M PCI Express graphics card to it as well.

Should I, or is it not worth it?

Any advice or suggestions?

Thanks guys.
 
Last edited:
well the 3700+ chip doesnt cost that much more... so rather socket one of those instead!
 
bboy said:
well the 3700+ chip doesnt cost that much more... so rather socket one of those instead!
Click to expand...

How much is "that much more"? :)

Are we talking 100 - 300 bucks or a 1000-2000 bucks more?
 
I can't comment on the (expected) performance of AMD systems since I've never used them. IMO, your machine is fine and you don't need a new one; I'd consider upgrading components (video card, sound, storage, etc.)

However, a clarification : the AMD 3000+ is NOT a 3GHz processor. AMD brands their CPUs according to their (AMD's) comparison to Intel CPUs. So in the case of the 3000+, AMD claims it runs with equivalent performance as an Intel 3GHz.

To my knowledge, the fastest (non-overclocked) AMD CPU is 2.8GHz - the FX57 which will cost you somewhere between 7 & 8 grand for the CPU :eek:
 
Correction: It's the dual-core FX-60 that's top-of-the-range.

The AMD 3000+ outperforms an Intel 3GHz for games. Maybe go for a 3200+ or a 3500+? I'd imagine the 3700+ is quite a bit more though.
 
Dominic: I am actually considering the 3500+, I'm finding out prices now but it seems that it's only about R300 more than the 3000+ - might be worth it.

Gaming is what I do, mostly. I played World Of Warcraft on the AMD and cranked up ALL the settings to max - it ran without ANY hiccups. However, if the 3500+ is only R300 (give or take a few bucks) more, it might be worth it, as that will make a considerable difference.

masticore: You are correct, AMD do brand their CPUs to the equivalent Intel CPU and, as you said, the 3000+ is, in fact, a 2GHz cpu that performs like an Intel 3Ghz.

As for the 3700+ ahahah! That's a bit too rich for my blood, thank you very much! :D
 
The 3700+ is about R200-R300 more and comes with 1Mb L2 cache, as opposed to the 512Kb which the 3000+, 3200+ and 3500+ have. If upgrading for the sake of gaming on a strict budget, I'd suggest the 3200+, a minimum of 1Gb DDR400 and a recent 256Mb PCI-e graphics card (the Legend 7800GT being first choice for under R2,500, then a 6800GS for R2,000 and lastly a 6600GT for R1,000).

Just my 2c
:D

edit:
Dominic: I am actually considering the 3500+, I'm finding out prices now but it seems that it's only about R300 more than the 3000+ - might be worth it.
Click to expand...

Seriously, if you were looking at a 3000+ and would opt for a 3500+ but not a 3700+, then get teh 3200+. It's a good performer, which is only 200Mhz behind the 3500+. You'd be happier using the money for a better graphics card.
 
Last edited:
Dominic Rooney said:
Correction: It's the dual-core FX-60 that's top-of-the-range.

The AMD 3000+ outperforms an Intel 3GHz for games. Maybe go for a 3200+ or a 3500+? I'd imagine the 3700+ is quite a bit more though.
Click to expand...

Correction: He said fastest as in Ghz so then the FX57 is the fastest but not top of the range.

FX60 = 2x2.6Ghz
FX57 = 1x2.8Ghz
 
Hey, im selling my 3700+ for R1500.00 (its still in the box with everything, 2 months old)

Im in CPT so PM me if you are atall interested
 
TheYak said:
So, my birthday is coming up on Friday and the significant other has agreed that I can get a new machine.

I have my eye on the AMD Athlon 64 3000+ processor and an ASUS K8N4-ED motherboard.

My current machine is a Pentium IV 3.2Ghz and I have a Geforce FX 5200 LE graphics card with a gig of Memory. It's a great machine.

My question is this: Will it make such a big difference? The 3000+ is a 3 GHz machine, so in effect, I'm buying a "slower" machine. But it's a 64bit processor and I've seen this machine in action, it's not too shabby at all. I will be adding a 256M PCI Express graphics card to it as well.

Should I, or is it not worth it?

Any advice or suggestions?

Thanks guys.
Click to expand...


No it's not worth it, Yes the AMD will be 10-15% faster for games, but rather take the R2000 you would have used for a Graphics card and motherboard, and spend it on a high end graphics card and some RAM. Then you will get a 200-300% increase in performance!
 
Dude, buy a Venice 3000+ socket 939 (with a decent stepping), then pop it onto a Biostar TForce 6100-939 m/board (+/- R699) (update with one of the later bios'), and overclock it with ease to 2.4GHz (3800+ performance) with stock cooler.
IMO :)
 
As much as I'm an AMD supporter, Sapphiron's suggestion is a good one. If you're buying a new motherboard, gfx-card and CPU, then that's a minimum of R3,000 and possibly more.

Assuming your motherboard uses AGP gfx, I vote for a 6800GS AGP, if you can find them. Alternatively a 2nd-hand 6800GT or Ultra, or an over-priced X800Pro would make you happy.
 
the number quoted for an amd cpu isnt diddly squat to do with the "equivalent intel speed cpu".

it never was, and never will be. Go go internet fanboys getting their facts twisted.

the number reflects the speed of the chip within that family of cpus, with a 1ghz tbird being the benchmark. cool? so a 3000+ =roughly 3 x 1ghz tbirds. not a p4 3ghz.

I suppose I have to give a link now to back up what I say, so here you go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PR_rating

I will quote the relevant bit for those too lazy to look, or who feel like reading the wrong sentence
"The Athlon XP (as well as the Athlon 64) PR rating scheme is not intended to be anything more than a comparison to the same family of processors, and not a direct comparison to Intel or any other company's processor speeds (in raw MHz) which most skeptics say isn't true."

Here is a 8 page pdf on amd's site
http://www.amd.com.cn/chcn/assets/c.../AMD_White_Paper_-_Final_Version_11.15.02.pdf
the relevant bit is on page 4
quote "AMD now names its
AMD Athlon™ XP processors with model numbers that indicate the
performance of each processor relative to other AMD Athlon XP
processors and the prior AMD Athlon family of processors."

:-)
 
I've got a Venice Amd 64 3000+, unOC'd. It runs great, I can play any game available. I would love to Oc it in future. I'd say you should go for it. I bought my pc last year for R7300. It's AMD64 3000+ Gigabyte Nforce4 4x mobo, Gigabyte Geforce 6600 256MB PCIE, 1 GB dual channel DDR400, dvd writer, 2.1 speaker system, 17" Monitor, 120GB Seagate SATA 150. Chenbro Gaming Bomb Silver.
 
Sapphiron said:
No it's not worth it, Yes the AMD will be 10-15% faster for games, but rather take the R2000 you would have used for a Graphics card and motherboard, and spend it on a high end graphics card and some RAM. Then you will get a 200-300% increase in performance!
Click to expand...

Hmm, I gotta say I don't disagree..
What about keeping ur processor, but buying a really nice cooler, and overclocking a bit(or not), ..as long as ur board has an AGP/PCI lock..
Ye, and rather investing in a higher end graphics card etc.
..oh and wait, is ur current mobo AGP?
cos then I would stick ,for sure, to with my previous suggestion, as there is nothing close to, eg. a 7900gt etc. (performance-wise) in AGP..
Especially since the 7900gt for example, performs like a 7800GTX but for an affordable price..
Ok, enough from me! ;)

P.S. Re: flarkit's post: Ye I spose you could game quite nicely with a 6800gs/7800gs/x850xt etc., I wouldn't go for anything lower in terms of longevity tho.
 
Last edited:
yeah, its not worth it to upgrade at the moment especially with the rig you have, just the graphics card and thats only if you game, then get a 6800gs or something for your AGP.

Maybe you should save up whats left for the now Intel Conroe or new AMD's rather...
 
Wooha. Thanks for all the feedback guys.

After some thinking I've come up with the following spec machine:

ASUS K8N4-ED Motherboard
AMD Sempron 3400+ CPU
nVidia Geforce 6500 (256Mb)

Better?

What concerns me though, is that in the description for the CPU it mentions the following:

1.Ghz clock
333Mhz Bus
128kb Cache

That doesn't sound like much AT ALL! Is the bus that they're referring to the FSB? 'cos I have an 800Mhz FSB at the moment and (again, if I'm not mistaken) 512k cache.

I'm confused. A little more help?

As for investing in only a new graphics card *shrug* I guess I could do that, but looking at the performance of this other machine (3000+) while running Windows and it's associated apps (it opens Microsnot Word in less than a second!) it just seems that it's a faster machine already, and it has less memory than my machine!

MrE: My current board is an AGP, yes. And that brings me to another question: I have a 256Mb AGP card at the moment, is the PCI-E really that much better?

Thanks for all the information you guys have given me so far. Hopefully I can use all of this to make an informed decision and not waste my money.
 
your current setup is fine, i assume that your cpu has hyperthreading capabilities making multitasking better. personally i would upgrade the motherboard and get a new pci-e gfx card and maybe another gig ram. pci-e runs at 16x, the fastest agp runs at 8x. plus you have the option of running an sli configuration. as somebody mentioned earlier you would get more gaming performance by upgrading the ram and gfx card than to go for a new cpu
 
A AMD Sempron 3400+ CPU is 2GHz, has a 800MHz Hypertransport link, uses DDR 400 RAM and has a 256kb cache...

Not worth it over your 3.2...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X