I'm building a computer right now, wondering should I go with Intel 3.2ghz prescott, or the AMD 64bit 3400+? Which socket should I go for, if I do go for the 3400+ and should I go with the 1mb cache?
Want to enjoy less advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
Look If your planning on using an Intel atleast go with the Northwood core the Prescott core runs alot hotter. Personaly I would recommend an AMD system such as a Socket 939 with a 64bit 3500. If your planning on gaming defenatly go with Amd over intel. Intel's do well in video editing and such but the Amd's are not that far behind those marks. If you are going to get the Amd system go with an Abit or MSI mobo. Dont forget to get an aftermarket fan and heatsink for it.
very very small difrence with a 3400+ and the 3500+ same core. runs same temps. Just make shure you get the right core. I realy think your going to be a lot happyer with the AMD 3400+. I had the 3.2 pentium 4 E over clocked to 3.9. You wont like it.Kind of disapointing. AMD winchester core is unlocked for over clocking. 3400+ will hit 4000+ on air cool. You would need watercooling to do that with the P4E. Get the 939 so when AMD comes out with dule core this year you can get one. Use some good PC 3200 DDR 400 ram with heat sinks so you can over clock.
If I'm in your shoes; I'd definitely go for AMD Athlon 64. First argument, Athlon 64 benchmarks and real life performance tie and even outperforms Pentium Prescott and EE. Second, it is already a 64-bit CPU so your system is futureproof and ready for the final release of Windows 64-bit. Third, it has Cool n' Quiet feature which I love most, I only get 45C max at full load with the quiet HS/F that is provided with my Athlon 64, it even automatically adjusts its fan according to temp. I've been using AMD CPU's for 5 years already and it never failed me! Cheers! =)
It all depends on how much you have to spend. Personally, I'd go for a 90nm Athlon 3500 (socket 939) fitted with an Arctic Cooling Freezer 64 on an Abit AV8 3RD Eye motherboard with 1GB of OCZ PC3200 Platinum Edition EL-DDR Revision 2 CAS-2. Total cost - around £500.
Stick with AMD if ur true gamer, Athlon 64 3500+ is the way to go, the integrated Dual Channel Memory insures great bandwidth. If u want cheap 90nm, S939 processor... get 3200+.
3400+ is based on S754 which does not have any future, so if u go with S939 u can upgrade to faster processor later on.
ABIT, MSI, Gigabyte makes good board, for memory i suggest GIEL, OCZ or Crucial.
Hi, Michael
I have both AMD and Intel CPUs, and I can tell you that the AMD may be a little better for playing games, but not especially. Despite my AMD being higher specced than my Intel, the Intel is my computer of choice as it does seem faster during day to day operation. As I dabble in sound and video editing, the intel is better.
But, then again, it really is up to you.
3DMARK03 CPU TEST SCORES
AMD64 3000+ = 789
AMD64 3000+ OC'd @ 3200+ = 797
But that's my point...
If the difference between my overclocked 3000+ and the 3.2E is only 1 CPUMARK, then how big a difference are you going to see in real life?
Don't forget - the graphics card is just as important as the CPU when it comes to gaming. A cheap graphics card on an Athlon64 will do it no favours whatsoever.
What you have to question is whether you believe that because of substantial evidence or because AMD told you so.
There's no question that AMD has always targeted people on a fixed budget(although the problem they're trying to fix now is earning less revenue than Intel). Most gamers are teens and college students. Most teens and college students are on a fixed budget. Therefore, you can come to the conclusion that AMD is better for gamers.
However, when you measure real world performance(which is the substantial evidence), there is no difference between the two in any game.
Intel never had a serious agenda of targeting any specific consumer constituents. If you look back at one of the whitepapers of their Socket 423 P4's, they include a Quake III test that shows the P4 slapping around the P3. Since then, they've turned a cold shoulder on consumers, as a serious company should.
By saying AMD's are better for gamers, you're implicating that AMD's are toys. I'd get more done with a tool than a toy.
In response to the thread starter, at this point, you shouldn't be looking at whether to get AMD or Intel, but whether to upgrade now or later. If you wait a few months, there will be hardware available that makes current technology look entirely undesirable.
If you absolutely need an upgrade now, get whichever is cheaper and try to keep your budget under $600.
Yes a serious company should totaly forget their consumers and not care about who is buying their product. That is the best thing any company can do is ignore the people who are investing in them.
Also Sean I have never seen an AMD advertisment geard twoards GAMERS!! And games. That is something people have just come to and say AMD doesnt gloat and market GAMMING CPUS! Its what we as consumers say about the product.
Umm dude you realy need to get it together. Your little 3000+ is a based off barton core. A 3200+ is a next gen winchester core. There is no comparing the old 3000+ to a P4 3.2E. none at all. Thats crazy dude trying to pass off bench marks to an over clocked 3000+ with a core based off the old barton cores to a new P4 3.2E. you have so missed the point. There is no reason to get crazy on cooling my 3500+ over clocked to 2.62 GHz runs at 47c fully loaded. Your just fine on air cool.
World's Best PC Processor. Period.
Enjoy immersive gaming and amazing digital media with the
AMD Athlon™ 64 FX processor – simply the best PC processor you can get.
Most advanced PC processor for notebook computing.
The AMD Athlon 64 processor offers the ultimate performance for the most demanding notebook users. Perfect for computer enthusiasts or gamers who demand the highest performance available.
AMD is the only processor manufacturer that mentions gaming as a selling point.
Yes but your telling me I FALL for that garbage and Im telling I DONT. Your whole speech about warm fuzzy companies is bulls**t after working within a growing corperation. I know NONE of them are warm and fuzzy and although you maybe htink AMD is trying to be that way they arnt they want your money its their intention. And again anyone who has a brain knows that.
Because of that page I NOW SEE THE HOW INTEL GIVES GAMMERS THE PREFORMANCE THEY NEED.
In fact look at that whole page. Dont tell me Intel doesnt advertise for gamming either. Come on Sean its like you cant even realize both these companies are out to make money any possiable way.
Its great you love Intel and all but you need to be more reasonable sometimes Sean.
naysayers beware, the ressident experts have spoken.
Sean when the 915 boards came out, did u visit the intel website? ..... guess not .. Intel had splashed the word GAMES all over the place... it was enough to make u barf.
Actually, I'm not upgrading here, I'm building a new computer, tired of buying computers from Dells and stuff when I can get better performace at lower prices.
I no longer believe in waiting for better processors in a few months. Yes, in a few months, there are going to be better processors. But then, the price will be high at the same time. By then, there will be better than the better processors for our desire.
I've heard bias towards both Intel and AMD. Personally, I never owned a computer with the AMD processor. I don't know anything about it
I didn't noticed the 3400+ was using the socket 754. I guess I'll go with the 3500+. Is there a huge difference between the 3500+ and the 3200+? What's the fastest RAM I could use with these processors?
Also, can someone tell me what's the difference between these processor, hence, a $60 difference?
RSS Updates