Is it a Good Time to Get an Athlon64? 124
City_Idiot asks: "I'm looking to upgrade my current P4 2.4Ghz and i'm giving serious thought to a Athlon64 3200+. The tests look good, and it gives a 3Ghz P4 a good run for its money but is the technology ready for end users?"
run ordinary 32 bit linux on it for now? (Score:5, Informative)
AMD 64-bit linux distros. Can one just use
a 32 bit one for now, and wait a while for the
64 bit ones to mature?
If not, it doesn't sound reasonable (as in, what?!!?
Getting X to work is a challenge?)
Re:run ordinary 32 bit linux on it for now? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:run ordinary 32 bit linux on it for now? (Score:1)
Unlike itanium it actually performs very well on 32 bit applications, in fact better than any other processor currently in existance, including the G5.
Astute.
Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Funny)
You should be running cat - > file instead (Score:1, Offtopic)
Nah, e3 [www.sax.de] is much better. It's only 13k (statically linked) and supports both vi and emacs key bindings.
But, if you want a real command line editor, go for cat.
Re:You should be running cat - file instead (Score:2)
Re:You should be running cat - file instead (Score:2)
Re:You should be running cat - file instead (Score:2)
Re:You should be running cat - file instead (Score:2)
Re:You should be running cat - file instead (Score:2)
Oh, yeah thats a nice way to write short programs.
Re:You should be running Vi instead (Score:1)
Re:Yes (Score:1)
Re:Yes (Score:2)
Re:$51 for that D&D CD? (Score:1)
Jealous? (Score:2)
Re:Jealous? (Score:1, Troll)
But besides that, once I have the money, I will see about getting a dual amd64 system(they will probably be pretty good by then). With 4 lcd displays, SB audigy vX(whatever is newest then) ATI video and gig network to access my (to be built) terabyte file server... ah dreams...
Re:Jealous? (Score:2)
However, the HDD in the 64 died and is in the process of being replaced and so far I havnt had anything I really needed to do that I could do just fine right here on the PIII. Why upgrade from a p4? maybe the proper option is to make sure there is enough ram/decent graphics card or get rid of all the junk you are running on startup/spyware.
Re:Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
As fun as it'd be to have a machine like that, I should share with him the conclusion I came to: Don't buy the latest greatest hardware unless there's some big screaming reason to do it. If Lightwave were 64-bit, I'd probably have bought one. Instead, I bought a dual Athlon machine. And ya know what? I enjoy the heck out of it. Maybe he should consider one for himself? Personally, I think the nicer multi-threading he'll end up with will yield a more responsive computer than having a single processor, even at 64-bits.
Re:Yes (Score:2, Interesting)
Since I am creating and giving courses on Linux, this system will give me plenty of horsepower to create courses on Linux for midrange systems : databases, web servers, UML, terminal servers, volume management, backups and so on, while at the same
Re:Yes (Score:2)
You've never tried radiosity rendering, have you? Or maybe a TV-res scanline render animation of a few seconds that includes anti-aliases ray-traced reflections? 2.4GHz is spittle.
Besides, how else is he going to be able to play Doom III at a decent framerate?
Re:Yes (Score:2)
Yes, that's correct, but I think that you and I both know what 99% of people with the "upgrade itch" don't really need that much firepower, and just want the latest snazzy computer specs and toys!
Buy the last generation (Score:2, Insightful)
Save some money, buy the last generation chips instead of the latest and greatest.
Re:Buy the last generation (Score:2)
Asking Slashdot... (Score:1)
100% - As long as you don't use microsoft wares on the processor
Upgrading from a 2.4 P4?????? (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyways, my question is, what do you do that requires THAT much horsepower? If you're web surfing, writing emails and writing letters in Word, then I'd recommend that you not upgrade to anything and that your P4 should be more than adequate. Details are important here. For instance, you want to work on porting XXXXXXX to run natively at 64 bits. Then of course its a good time to upgrade, and it probably makes sense for what you're doing. Or perhaps you want to frag some people when HL2 comes out. Then I'd say "probably not worth it" or ask "What kind of video card do you have?"
We can't give you a recommendation off the top of our head without any details.
Simple analysis (Score:5, Insightful)
Figure that between now and summer, the price of an Athlon64 system with a given set of specs (RAM, HD, video card, etc.) will go down about US$500.
So, ask yourself this - is $500 over the next six months worth it?
If you are making money with this machine - you are a consultant, or do freelance work that earns money, will the roughly 40% speed improvement make you back that $500 in six months?
If you are a hobbist, will the "fun" of being one of the first people on the block with an Athlon64 be worth $500 over the next six months?
Me, I am looking at the Atlon 2000+ I'm typing this on, with the Radeon 7500, and saying "I'll wait". But that's me.
Alternatives (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's not forget human-centric productivity increasers, like macro-scriptable keyboards, larger moniters, and deleting AIM. Have you considered DVORAK?
There are many thing cheaper than an Athlon64 that will increase productivity. An intern, for example. Only when the system is both financially sound and better than the alternatives should the transition be undertaken. Perhaps you are the system network maintainer for Google, but for most people the Athlon64 just isn't ripe yet.
Re:Alternatives (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Alternatives (Score:2, Insightful)
I wouldn't imagine that changing from an Intel P4 to an Athlon 64 could cost more than about $1500, even if you went for the FX version and needed to buy new registered memory + motherboard. How long can you pay for an intern with that much money:)?
Re:Alternatives (Score:2)
We've had many interns in our lab; most work so that they can get experience to put on their resumes. That way, when they graduate from college, they can be hired as experienced. Heck we've tried to hire some of them ourselves after training them.
Do not go dual processor (Score:2)
If you intend this as a games machine, go for hyperthreading P4, or athlon64, don't go dual processor, its not worth that hassle.
SMP (Score:2)
Re:Do not go dual processor (Score:1)
BTW, HT is supposed to work more or less the same as SMP, so it will probably give you the same driver problems.
Re:Do not go dual processor (Score:1)
Re:Do not go dual processor (Score:1)
Re:Do not go dual processor (Score:2)
Hmm... I've been running a dual processor since the 350 MHz PII was released. Still using in preference to faster machines (that I have passed on to my children) because of the far greater responsivnss of a dual processor. It has never had anything but Creative soundcards and it has survived Number 9/Matrox and nvidia graphics cards w
Re:Do not go dual processor (Score:1)
In any case, that wouldn't work for me, because although I use Linux 99% of the time, I do need to boot Windows once in a while. Creative cards caused me lots of problems as well, especially the combination of the SB Live with the VIA686B southbridge, which caused lockups and disk corruption.
Re:Do not go dual processor (Score:2)
Although I don't actually use Linux in this particular case. I have some severe reservations about Linux ablbeit far, far less than I have about Microsoft OSes. I'm a BSD geek. I should have mentioned that. I've had no troubles with any BSD but I never actually loaded Linux or an MS/OS on the SMP box.
Re:Do not go dual processor (Score:1)
Re:Alternatives (Score:2)
Re:Simple analysis (Score:3, Funny)
Is that like a pervy hobbit fancier?
There are only 2 good times to buy computer kit (Score:1)
2) Never
YAW.
Wait a bit (Score:1)
Re:Wait a bit (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, I'd go with AMD over Intel any day.
Performance/price ratio is almost 2:1 in favor of AMD EXCEPT at the very top of the line where it gets closer (with AMD still winning by a nice margin).
Intel is only better if you have a really fat wallet.
Yeah, I know; websites tend to compared a Athlon 3200+ with a Pentium 4 3.2ghz and conclude that the P4 is better.
But they get the CPUs for free! If you actually compared, say, an Athlon 2800+ from AMD with something SIMILARLY priced from Intel you'll see that AMD is clearly the winner.
Re:Wait a bit (Score:2)
AMD is the fastest for games, except older Quake3 engine based.
Intel is faster at Media creation programs and desktop applications. (SSE2, and Intel optimizations are the main reason...)
Bang for the buck, I'd go with an ATI 9600 or Nvidia 5600 and AMD 2600 cpu for the sweet spot on a good gaming rig that will do everything now. By the time Doom3 or Halflife 2 comes out next year, the 500 bux you save could upgrade your mot
Re:Wait a bit (Score:1)
I may have to upgrade the video card come
Re:Wait a bit (Score:1)
Re:Wait a bit (Score:4, Insightful)
Load of crap.
Intel chips dissipate more heat than AMD does now.
And as for core temperature -- it doesn't matter. Different chips are designed to run at different temperatures. Yeah, they all have (more or less) the same maximum temp, but depending on how you do design you can have different operational temps.
Which, if you add it up, actually amounts to the same price as a Intel processor!
You're dropping $100 on fans? You're seriously overspending. Even if you do, for some ungodly reason, decide that you need to replace the retail fan (which isn't needed unless you're going to overclock or want a quieter HSF), a really nice Zalman or Thermaltake HSF is under $40. Panaflo system fans are under $10 (except the 92 or 120 mm).
AMD are also notorious for their short lived processors that die prematurely due to the excessive overclocking that AMD fanatics live by.
Wow... you overclock the CPU, you shorten the lifespan! Amazing thing that -- running it out of spec is bad. With prices of CPUs nowadays overclocking is for the fanboys that don't have any more of a life than bragging about how fast their system is. Once upon a time (back in the Celeron 300A days) you could get substantial speed boosts by overclocking. Now it's in the single digit percentile range -- if that.
for those of you that want your PC to last longer than a couple of months then Intel is the way to go.
Wow. Really? I guess my AMD Athlon 750 didn't really last me nearly 3 years then. My wife's Athlon 1.33 is, lets see, two years old or more now? My Athlon XP 2.2 should've died long ago, since it's 13 months old. And my file server with an Athlon 1.4 (admittedly, I really should've gone for a Via Eden here, but I was doing a ton of CD ripping initially) is 10 months old.
I guess they'll all fail immediately, since you've said they only last a few months.
Oh, and that must really be hell for AMD too. I mean, look at all those retail boxed processors with 3 year warrantees that they apparantly have to replace every few months.
To repeat what others have said requires education; to challenge it requires brains.
Let us know when you get either one.
Re:Wait a bit (Score:2)
Umm... I think you're out of touch. P4 2.4GHz chips are routinely getting 3GHz (often with the stock retail HSF), and Athlon XP 2500+s are doing the same sorts of numbers. The best part is that the RAM a
Re:Wait a bit (Score:2)
That's a 25% gain at best in performance.. and real world results will be less.. Most of the benchmarks I've seen give the P4 3GHz a 10-20% edge over the P4 2.4.
Maybe overclocking and hassling with things makes that kind of gain worthwhile. It isn't for me. It's not like back in the day where with the Celeron 300A you could get 50% performance boosts.
Athlon64 3000+ (Score:5, Informative)
I personally bought the 3200+ two months ago, but I totally would have been happy with the 3000+.
Also check out Fedora Core 1 preview release of AMD64 [linuxtx.org]. Official test1 release should be coming soon because they fixed the last blocker bug in pango.
Confused about the question (Score:4, Interesting)
I really dont get that question. How can a technology be ready or not ready? It is being shipped and it apparently performs to specs. Like you said it challenges P4 in terms of value, which might answer that question.
A certain number of vendors are making motherboards for it. When you have one or possibly two companies making chipsets, you might have an issue, but with a large number of chipsets and drivers getting mature, you might have the right timing for it.
One other benefit of buying a product early in its selling cycle is that youll have a current product for a longer period of time. Buy a P4 when its really cheap, and youll have a new chip from Intel in the next 6 months.
I am curious about your applications though. What is it for which a P4 2.4GHz doesnt suffice? My P3 550 is giving me good service through games, video and 3d model editing...
Re:Confused about the question (Score:2)
--Download and test Linux kernel 2.6.0 on a variety of hardware, and then see if you can still say that. (This is not a troll.) For that matter, see if you can find any SparQ drives on ebay and try booting and running an operating system on them for more than a month.
What most people forget is... (Score:5, Informative)
End users? (Score:2)
It's a great time... (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a number of 64 bit machines already, if I want to 'dabble' in 64-bitness. My Sun Ultra 1 boxes run NetBSD/Sparc64 and cost me $12.50 each at auction.
Re:It's a great time... (Score:1)
Like everyone else (Score:3, Insightful)
Sig
-- Compare war time president's military record (www.awolbush.com) [awolbush.com] with Wesley Clark's (Wesley Clark's Army Career) [clark04.com]
Re:Like everyone else (Score:2)
Re:Like everyone else (Score:2)
Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. (Score:5, Informative)
Here is a quick summary of the AMD64 line. It comes directly from an AMD Engineer working on the AMD64 projects. His recommendation was to wait for the 2nd generation motherboard chipsets sporting the 939-pin sockets.
Current parts
The processor cores for Athlon64/AthlonFX/Opteron are currently all the same.
Opteron
940-pin Socket
Dual channel DDR registered/ECC required.
84X series are 1/2/4/8 way system certified.
24X series are 1/2 way system certified.
14X series are 1 way system certified ( same as AthlonFX51).
Athlon FX
940-pin Socket
The FX is simply a relabeled Opteron chip. This chip has pinout for dual channel DDR (needs to be registered/ECC and I believe buffered, yuck)
Athlon64
754-pin Socket
Opteron 14X but with single channel DDR Athlon64 comes in the 754 pin package now but only supports single channel DDR but can use unbuffered standard DDR.
Future parts
939 package Athlon64/FX is a new pinout to support dual channel unbuffered DDR, allows for 4 layer PCB motherboards (cheaper to make boards) and a faster HyperTransport external link.
Drill Hammer
512kB cache instead of the 1MB on current products. Packaging should be same as other chips (754/939).
Claw Hammer
256kB cache instead of the 1MB on current products. Packaging should be same as other chips (754/939).
Re:Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. (Score:1)
What is the Slot1/A Syndrome?
I can understand that the second generation chips support unbuffered RAM, but why would that be important? Given that it's hard to find a FX chip in the first place, how long should we expect to wait for a second generation chip?
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but I am looking at purchasing about 32 FX-based machines (the big draw is future 64-bit compatability and >4GB RAM in our lab).
Re:Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. (Score:3, Informative)
Intel originally issued the Pentium2 in a cartridge style using the 'Slot 1' interface. Intel stated that they would not change back to sockets. The major reason for the change was to move the L2 cache off the main processor die to improve manufacturing yields. AMD followed suit and announced 'Slot A' which was physically, but not electrically the same. Both AMD and Intel found that the overall system costs were substantially more that socket based processors and change
Re:Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. (Score:2, Interesting)
The real problem was that the cache had to be run at half the speed of the processor, and as the processors got faster, the cache speeds couldn't keep up. So you would end up with the processor running at 2.5X, 3X, etc times the speed of the cache. Not good.
-MDL
Re:Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. (Score:1)
Consider this fatoid: 60% of chip area is occupied b
Re:Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. (Score:1)
Re:Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. (Score:1)
First Drill Hammer already out... (Score:2)
Kjella
I don't get it ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I just built my system a couple of months ago:
and as far as I am concerned, it Screams
(note that I am not a hardcode gamer, nor doing and rendering; just surfing the web, watching dvds, using openoffice, and the occasional build)
Why? $60 for the processor; I'll upgrade to a 3200 when they drop beloy $75 or so...
I build the whole thing for < $700
I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:4, Interesting)
103.00 Antec Sonata Case
TruePower 380 Watt ATX12V power supply
193.97 ASUS SK8N NVDIA nForce 3 pro150 Chipset DDR RAM AGP8X 5xPCI Audio LAN 6USB2.0 ATX
722.00 Athlon64 FX51
27.00 Thermaltake A1838 CPU Heatsink/Fan for AMD Opteron / Athlon64
202.00 2@512 MB PC 3200 registered
35.00 1.44MB Floppy/6in1 Flash
246.00 2@Seagate ST3160023AS 160GB Serial ATA 7200rpm 8MB
200.00 Visontek ATI Radeon 9600 XT 256MB
58.50 Samsung SM-352BEB 52X24X52X16 CD-RW & DVD Combo Drive
206.00 Plextor PX-708A/SW-BL Dual Format 8X DVD
1179.00 VP201B Viewsonic Monitor
Add in thermal grease, round cables, etc and the price comes in below $3200.
Needless to say, I give AMD64 the thumbs up. If you can afford to go, you will help accelerate adoption.
Plus, don't forget that the Athlon64 is still a very fast 32bit processor. However, I'm not sure if the FX chip is worth the premium. I'll be building the system in January (after I get my xmas dough) and will then know.
The last high-end system I built was a dual ppro200. SMP in Linux was experimental (yet worked great for me) back then. Yet, this very old computer is still running and handling several domains' email. It has more than paid for itself. I hope this new system fares as well.
As an aside, if anyone sees something blatantly wrong with one of my part selections, please explain. I'm torn over going over to ATI. I haven't tried an ATI card since the early 90's and I hated them. However, from what I understand, ATI is the gamer's choice.
BTW, I have absolutely no need for the power this machine will provide. I just want to play and learn with 64bit OS's and still be able to run 32bit games with great graphics.
Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:2, Informative)
I think you'll be okay wit
Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:1)
While that's true, I believe the standard open-source radeon will work fine. They don't do 3D acceleration, but that's only an issue if you plan on playing 3D Linux games. Someone who would sink that kind of money into a gaming rig would probably be a mostly-Windows gamer, since there aren't too many visually demanding Linux games, and won't be until Doom3.
radeon not 3D accelerated? (Score:1)
This being the second time I've heard this, would someone mind explaining to me about this?
I've looked at the 2.4.2[23] kernel DRM sources, and there are clearly functions in the Radeon driver for pushing vertices and textures to the video card (radeon_cp_dispatch_* in linux-2.4.23/drivers/char/drm/radeon_state.c). Furthermore, glxinfo claims "OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Radeon 20020611 AGP
Re:radeon not 3D accelerated? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:radeon not 3D accelerated? (Score:1)
Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:1)
Although I feel it is time for me to check out ATI, my gut tells me that I will have more success with an nVidia FX5xxx card. However, the FX5900 is too pricey. My wife won't let me spend more than $3200 on the system (which is quite fair).
Here's a good question: what is the best nVidia card I can get for = $200? Quietness counts.
Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:2)
Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:2)
Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:1, Informative)
Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:1)
If you want good NVIDIA <200$ card, check new FX5700 models. But if you give so much money on CPU, it is a shame to be held back by mid-class video card. How will you explain to yor friends that your hot new 3200$ FX51 machine cannot play games in max resolution?
Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. (Score:1)
I've talked the wife in to letting me spend another couple hundred and I will get an FX5950 or a Radeon 9800XT. ALl things considered, why not, right?
Your point about blowing money on the processor is well taken. However, in the past when I have replaced a processor, I have also replaced a motherboard, as well as memory -- so, I'm not too worried about socket compatibility.
Th
It depends... (Score:3, Interesting)
For example, if you're waiting for a 64-bit version of XP, then you should not buy now. By the time XP-64 comes out, your current Athlon64 system will be underpowered compared against what will be available then. Thus the extra money you paid would have gone to waste.
And even if you have a 64 bit OS, what about software?! Unless you just have to have the latest and greatest, I'd wait until we have lots of 64 bit software and drivers to fully support the hardware.
However, if id releases a 64 bit version of Quake3 for Linux, I might have to change my opinion!
Oops... (Score:2)
Re:It depends... (Score:2)
For example, if you're waiting for a 64-bit version of XP, then you should not buy now. By the time XP-64 comes out, your current Athlon64 system will be underpowered compared against what will be available then. Thus the extra money you paid would have gone to waste.
Given the way Microsoft bloats up its operating systems I'd be willing to bet that by the time XP-64 comes out your Athlon 64 will be underpowered compared to the hardware requirements for said OS.
OS (Score:2, Informative)
Re:OS (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OS (Score:5, Informative)
Re:OS (Score:2, Informative)
Re:OS (Score:2, Informative)
Did you run the beta of Windows XP 64-bit 2003, the AMD64 version of the Longhorn Alpha, an AMD64 Windows Server 2003 beta, or an internal release/something else? Also, which build/compile date was the OS, and how well did it run? notice ANY bugs/compatibility problems?
TIA!
-KayBo
PS. Where did you get drivers?
Re:OS (Score:3, Informative)
Re:OS (Score:1, Interesting)
Microsofties make me wish Fight Club was real...
prostrate cancer? (Score:1)
timothy
Re:Right now = good, year 2010 = not good. (Score:2)