Intel P4 3000C (800FSB)
AMD XP3200+
AMD Athlon64 3000+

Keeping in mind that the price of the CPU is not a factor but the price of the motherboard and other accessories are, which would you go for?

Oh and if you have time, why?

------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

[This message has been edited by Spork (edited April 07, 2004).]

I'd go with the 64 because of the 1600mhZ fsb, and future possibilities of optomized software and the likes. Then again, I'd rather add an FX-51 to that list and pick it.

------------------
-=I'm the wang of this here site, and it's HUGE! So just imagine how big I am.=-
1337Yectiwan
OSC Returns!!
10 of 14 -- 27 Lives On

Sure...

Hey Yecti, can I borrow $700?

------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

The Athlon64, no doubt, no question.

------------------
The future is here, and all bets are off.

Intel chips have always been overpriced to me. I cannot understand why. I've never been disappointed with AMD's chips.

------------------
<scribbly handwriting barely resembling name>

------------------
I'm not an actor. I just play one on TV.

After having problems with 3 brand-new, retail box athlon chips, I will never buy another one. So I would definitely suggest the P4...

After each generation, people say, "oh, they're better, more compatible, no more problems," don't believe it.

------------------
EvilMagic.net: Brian's Web Log

Brian, Ive been using AMD chips for years. Ive never had any trouble with them. If youve had problems, Im sorry, but please dont condemn AMD because of 3 bad chips...

------------------
The future is here, and all bets are off.

AMD XP3200+
it'd work with my not-working-right-now-MB

------------------
Kroko> Massassi is like Nazi Germany online, only it's not in Germany.
|\|\|\|\|\|
<kak> WHY DO THESE RETARDS CONTINUALLY TRY LINUX?
<kak> IT DOES NOT MAKE YOU COOL.

If price is no object at all, I'd take the Athlon 64 any day. After all, that's the chip I'm getting.

However, if you want to be able to afford the rest of the components, take the Athlon XP. Given that all Athlon XP chips can work with all Athlon XP boards, you should be able to easily throw together a decently powerful system at a reasonable price. Pentiums are generally too expensive...


I would judge it as a problem with your version of Linux... Although I've stuck with Windows for compatabilities issues (and I like to get mad at people like Bill Gates for making pieces of S***), AMD processors have always worked fine for me, all the way from their 286 clone. Of course, it's more likely your components didn't match up...

------------------
Nes digs around in the trash can.
Nes finds a hamburger!
Nes puts the hamburger in his backpack.

Is that a joke? AMD64. It's THE best chip on the market.

------------------
There is no signature

It's gotta be the XP 3200+. You don't need any ubermobo for it, it'll run whatever you want fine and it's not made by Intel.

------------------
"Apples rule. If it weren't for a conspiracy on the part of fruit manufacturers we'd all have apples."

you said no object.


------------------
-=I'm the wang of this here site, and it's HUGE! So just imagine how big I am.=-
1337Yectiwan
OSC Returns!!
10 of 14 -- 27 Lives On

I love my Pentium 4 2.8 Ghz 800 FSB to death, but if I had to buy a cpu NOW and price wasn't a barrier I'd go with either the Athlon64 or a FX-51.

Intel had the advantage last year (and believe me, I researched cpus for a full month before buying), but that was then. Right now the high end 64 bit AMDs are the top of the heap from what I've seen.

------------------
Cantina Cloud | BCF | The Massassian 1 & 2 | Gonkmeg
Corrupting the kiddies since '97

I would definitely choose the monkey.

P4, I've had problems with AMD. Never with a pentium. Are the expensive? Yes. Is it worth it, yes.

------------------

"Bantha's are filthy animals.......I don't eat filthy animals."

"Laugh it up Fuzzball!"
-Han Solo

GBK, that's like saying, "don't condemn microsoft for 3 bad operating systems."

------------------
EvilMagic.net: Brian's Web Log

In this case, it would probably be like saying "don't condemn microsoft for 3 faulty CDs."

ROFL


And i would go with the 64 =\

------------------

"Run Away!"

Thats a bad analogy...

------------------
The future is here, and all bets are off.

They had 3 bad operating systems for EVERYONE. You had 3 bad chips while practically everyone I've talked to that had AMD has had no problems.

GBK's right.


------------------
<scribbly handwriting barely resembling name>

every amd we've had has had an over heating problem and we end up having it mutated so it has like fifty gazillion (slight exaggeratio - ehenh :P) fans cooling it down. so i dont know, is the speed and the price really worth stopping your computer in the middle of a starcraft game coz it shuts down and says the computer temp is too high if you have that kinda patience, or have better luck than me with amds, id go for the athlon64 as well

------------------
[teletubbie voice] BIG HUG!!!! [/teletubbie voice]

The '64 is still brand new, so you'll pay more that you need to, plus you'll have to buy the special mobo, which will also cost you more than it needs to.

The Intel chips are high-priced (because of the name), and they fairly consistently get outpurformed by their AMD counterparts.

So, go for the Athlon 3200+. You'll get better performance without paying Intel prices, and you won't have to buy just-off-the-drawing-board hardware to use it.

------------------
Yen is but one part of a larger problem in japan's bumbling attempts to pull out of a seemingly endless stagnation -Googlism

I'd keep my P4 because I'm an A/V whore. Ever since I started encoding stuff on an 850 MHz processor, I've started to value my time greatly(Nothing like taking 6 hours to encode Star Wars as an MPEG2 for an SVCD).

That and I'm not one who buys into "OMG, this chip gets 500 FPS in Quake 3 when this one only gets 495!" More often than not, the differences in those areas are so minute that they mean nothing.

The higher end Prescotts(note I said higher end, the lower ones kind of lag behind) are quite nice too. That extra cache really helps out. Also, when SSE3 becomes more widely used, that should give it a little bit more of an edge.

Both Intel and AMD put out great processors. I've been an AMD man since 1998 and recently bought my first Intel (P4 2.4Ghz). I've never had any problems related to processors by AMD or Intel.

All of the processors that you've mentioned are great, but if it were me I'd wait on the 64-bit processor for a bit. You can't go wrong with the Intel or the AMD.

And since people are hopping on the Linux vs. Windows bandwagon debate, I'd just like to add that I thoroughly enjoy Windows XP Professional, and this is coming from someone who has messed around a bit with OS X and Linux (although I'm far from an expert). People here sometimes seem incapable of giving credit where it's due. Windows is great for what it is and I've never had any problems with security (although I do work hard at keeping my system secure).

My last word of advice would be to take benchmarks and reviews more seriously than the opinions you read in this thread, and that includes mine.

------------------
http://www.mentatmm.com (Status = Down :/)

Heh, I've read a million reviews and benchmarks and they all tell me different things! Opinion seems really divided here too... So far the 64 is winning with 8 endorsements, with 4 each for the P4 and 3200.

Does anyone know anything about the overclocking possibilities of these chips?

------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

Do I really need 2^64 worth of data/processing power? Not rhetorical question here. Seriously is 64-bit worth it for me right now?

------------------
<scribbly handwriting barely resembling name>

Sadly, I was recently faced with the same decision and chose the athlonXP, simply because you cannot overclock Athlon64's (only because of a motherboard chipset snafu which all current amd64 chipsets have... wait a few months for the next generation and itll be fixed), and athlonXP bartons overclock very well. So I'm currently running my barton 2800+ at 3200+ speeds, but I still wish i had the 64bit .

Go 64.

------------------
Ω of 14

Running in pure 64 bit: No.

Running an Athlon64 or Opteron: Yes.


64 bit isnt all its cracked up to be, but the chips themselves perform beautifully in 32 apps...

------------------
The future is here, and all bets are off.

Eh, it's a tough choice because it's hard to go wrong at the moment with both AMD and Intel not making any big **** ups. Competition good, me like

------------------
Cantina Cloud | BCF | The Massassian 1 & 2 | Gonkmeg
Corrupting the kiddies since '97

Actually, Intel's chips are way behind now, simply because the only chip they have out for commercial use emulates 64-bit technology. It's still a 32 bit chip, just acts like a 64. Also, AMDs don't overheat unless you get palominos. Thoroughbreds and Bartons, not to mention Opeterons, take a LOT to overheat.

------------------
There is no signature