JoseyWales Posted April 22, 2002 Share Posted April 22, 2002 This game has acted as a long needed catalyst to make me upgrade my system. I'm now in the process of trying to decide how much to spend, so I'm curious about the performance anyone is getting with the equipment I'm thinking of buying. I'm considering a P4 2.0 GB with an ASUS P4B motherboard, and some brand GeForce 4Ti 4600. My current system consists of (don't laugh ) a PII 400 with a GeForce II. Needless to say, some of the larger outside levels become unplayable when you throw in some stormtroopers, etc. Will I get the kind of bang I'm hoping for if I lay down the bucks required to get the stuff I'm considering? If not, can anyone suggest something better? I'm really looking for maximum performance, and although I don't want to lose my shirt, cost isn't the main factor. Also, are any particular brand of GeForce 4 cards better than the others? I've been partial to ASUS cards in the past, but they tend to be more expensive than some, and I'm wondering if the extra $$ is worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BZA Posted April 22, 2002 Share Posted April 22, 2002 Intel CPU's are all fine and good but is the difference in price really worth it? better yet, are you one of those blind consumers who is so caught up in the GIGAHERTZ battle that you think that a 2.0 P4 actually runs faster than a 1.7 Athlon XP? you will pay close to $400 for the P4 @ 2.0 GHZ and you will pay HALF that for a AMD Athlon 2000+ XP Running at 1.73 GHZ. check the benchmarks, in every content creation benchmark AMD still reigns supreme when it comes to almost everything. so...if I were you i would save the $200 + and spend it on an extra 256 of DDR ram or maybe put it towards a new monitor...dont dont dont buy an intel when it has been proven time and again that an AMD CPU is simply more stable, more efficient, and most of all, CHEAPER!!!!! you have much better things to do with your money..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoseyWales Posted April 22, 2002 Author Share Posted April 22, 2002 Actually, as for the Intel vs. AMD thing, I'm also a contract programmer for some businesses that exclusively use Intel, and in the past I've seen some (admittedly small) incompatibilities between the two, which caused some unnecessary grief. I also had some reliability problems with an AMD processor I had several years back, and since then I've just stuck with Intel because saving $50 really wasn't worth the added headache to me. I'll admit, I haven't paid very close attention to the AMD vs. Intel war over the current generation chips, and I'll be sure to do that before laying out cash. As I said before, money is important but not the ultimate consideration. If I go back to AMD, I want to be sure I'm not going to inherit any "Real Life©" pains just to save a few bucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiles4 Posted April 22, 2002 Share Posted April 22, 2002 When it comes down to it, the final decision will be yours. But hundreds of thousands have seen the reviews, benchmarks, and the awards being showered upon AMD processors, and have made the switch and never looked back. It's been quite a long time since Intel made better cpus than AMD. Intel got derailed with the P4. Clocked at the same speed, the PIII is actually a better processor. But with the advent of the Athlon, AMD currently wears the cpu crown and continues to answer Intel's offerings with superior processors. If Intel concentrated less on marketing and developing propietary technologies to squeeze out the competition and more on technological excellence, maybe they'd be more successful. But it's not the cpu that's given people problems in recent history. If anything it's the mainboard's chipset supporting the cpu. Intel developed the AGP bus and their implementation is superior to other chipset makers. Intel has the reputation of making the best chipsets - except for a few blunders recently. But, in all fairness, VIA and SIS are making excellent chipsets today as well. I've heard that the Intel route might be better for some very high-end professional video applications but for gaming, the argument for AMD is so strong that buying Intel leaves alot of people just shaking their heads. Not directed at you, but so many have the "Intel Inside" ingrained in them that they are blinded to the excellence of AMD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoseyWales Posted April 22, 2002 Author Share Posted April 22, 2002 If I do decide to go down the AMD path, what would you recommend as a *robust* and *reliable* motherboard/chipset? I've seen that ASUS has some VIA-based boards, and I've had good results with ASUS in the past, but I'm definitely "out of the loop" when it comes to judging AMD support components. Also, how does the Athlon fare when it comes to overheating? I seem to remember that AMD chips used to have a reputation for running hot, but again, this was quite a while ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilCanuck Posted April 22, 2002 Share Posted April 22, 2002 I use all AMD at home, and have switched my workplace over to them as well. The stability problems with AMD are mostly urban legend, and the actual cases were almost always du to the horrid mainboards people bought with their K6 chips. So buy an Athlon XP on a solid motherboard. I have an Epox 8KHA+ at home that has been very good to me (VIA KT266A based). As for your question about graphics card vendors, nvidia controls the build specs on GeForce cards very strictly. In the past, there has been little or no real performance difference between nvidia based models from different vendors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No1zLegacy Posted April 22, 2002 Share Posted April 22, 2002 It's my personal preference, but I say get an Athlon as well. Seeing since you probably want the latest and greatest so you don't have to upgrade for a while, this is what I recommend. I'd get the last in the Athlon XP line, the XP 2100+ (1.73GHz). Which is priced around $230. Coupled with an EPoX 8K3A (+ if you want RAID) motherboard, a Gigabyte GA-7VRXP, or a Soyo Dragon Ultra (KT333). The Epox board overclocks nice and is stable(cheapest price). The Gigabyte board is very stable but doesn't overclock well (a little more expensive). The Soyo Dragon Ultra is extremely stable, but not that good at overclocking. It's also alot more expensive because it comes with onboard RAID as it's standard. There is no non-RAID version of this board. All the KT333 boards are pretty much even, except these three boards stand out a little higher in gaming statistics. You can get an older KT266A board as mentioned above in the previous post, and they'll run great too. You are getting an older product though, with many of the features that are on the newer boards missing. You really should get some OCZ PC3000 or 3200 DDR RAM if you get one of the KT333 boards. Good memory is always a key factor in how well your computer runs. Back to the Processor: The "which is better for gaming?" issue is becoming less noticable between Intel and AMD cpu's now though. At lower clock speeds an Athlon will kill a Pentium in gaming performance, but at higher clock speeds we now see them becoming almost dead even. At least until AMD's new ClawHammer processor comes out (in fall?)...then I suspect AMD will rule by far again... If you must have a Pentium though, then I'd recommend to go for the best right now again, the P4 Northwood 2.4GHz processor. As it's the only one in the line of P4's that actually beat AMD latest Athlon XP 2100+ processor...The difference in price is high though, it runs at about $540. I hear that the latest P4 Northwood 2.4GHz processor can easily overclock to almost 3.0GHz with just standard air cooling, which is defenitly something an Athlon processor can't achieve. So if you're an overclocker thats something to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colmag Posted April 22, 2002 Share Posted April 22, 2002 Hi, I've got an Athlon, and it works fine. If you're building it yourself though, make a careful choice of HSF, 'cos they're a bugger to fit on Athlons. If you do go for a P4, make sure you get a Northwood core (i think they do it from 2GHz upwards). The benchmarkers have started using this in place of XP's, which speaks volumes. As for the GFX, just don't buy one from one of the larger soundcard manufacturers... I have one, and they are inexcusably (spelling?) bad with drivers. Speaking of sound, anyone recommend a good soundcard for gaming? (low cpu overhead etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coor's Light Posted April 22, 2002 Share Posted April 22, 2002 I too was a diehard Intel man until I built my latest system with these specs 2 months ago: AMD XP2000+ (Thermalright AX7 Heatsink w/ 80mm Fan) Abit KR7A 133 512MB Corsair C2 DDR Ram Audigy X-Gamer Visiontek Ti4600 Logitech Z560 Speaker System(Can't recommend enough AWESOME sound) This has been a super stable system and runs Jedi Superbly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiles4 Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 Athlons may run hotter and have no thermal protection - i.e. they self-destruct when the HSF is removed on a running system. But in the long run, those points are irrelevant. You can buy effective heatsinks that go on easy and do a fine job of cooling - as long as you remember the Arctic Silver. My two favorites cost only about $20 and could be used on any Athlon. I too have used mostly Epox boards for the past 4 years and have found them to have superb quality and extremely stable. Either the Epox 8KHA+ or the 8K3A would be great. Not sure if you need a raid board or not. I built one RAID system for a friend and came to the conclusion that it wasn't worth the extra expense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death-Dude Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 You'll have to make a call on the AMD vs. Intel issue, but I have an Epox 8K7A, and would gladly have another of their boards. Asus has a rep for fine boards, and the Abit boards are well thought-of too, of course. I think I would try to get a board with USB 2.0, and ATA133 if I were looking now. I bought an eVGA GF4 Ti 4400, and it is a nice board, but if I had it to do over, I think I would get the Leadtek, with it's nice cooling solution, or a Gainward, or an eVGA with the high-end cooling solution. (They have two cooling approaches, mine and the really nice one! They are a bit tougher to find) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoseyWales Posted April 28, 2002 Author Share Posted April 28, 2002 Thanks to all who've added their input here. From the opinions here and my own research, I'm just about convinced that it may be time for me to travel down the AMD route again. Having said that, there is one more question that I have, regarding video cards. I'm seeing MSI cards all over the place, and in fact, I've found what looks to be a good package deal including an Athlon XP 2100, an EPOX EP-8K3A board, a decent ThermalTake CPU cooling unit, 512MB DDR 333MHz memory and an MSI GeForce 4 Ti4600, all for $804. Prior to my recent shopping, I haven't been familiar with MSI cards. Can anyone tell me if they are decent cards? I can opt for the package minus the video card and save $333, but from what I've seen I'll spend more than that for the equivalent card from another manufacturer. Thanks again for your input! Now if I can just get my wife to cooperate when I tell her I'm spending the $$$... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coor's Light Posted April 28, 2002 Share Posted April 28, 2002 Unless you are a diehard overclocker, Sounds like a good choice. Most of the Ti 4600 cards are basically the same but some overclock better. MSI has been known to make some good Motherboards so I don't know why this would be a bad choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.