Motherboard Help
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 5,881
Likes: 0
From: Corn Country
Motherboard Help
I am in the market for an AMD Barton motherboard. I want 6.1 Channel Audio onboard, as well as a FSB of at least 400mhz. I want lots of room to expand. I currently have a AMD 2400+ and if I went to a 2500+ Barton of faster, would I notice a difference? Also, should I go Pentium 4? or just wait it out for the AMD 64 or cheaper P4?
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,143
Likes: 0
From: Garden Grove, CA
If I was gonna go with the barton, I would get any NForce2 board.. and for the 2400 thunderbird to a 2500barton? eh I wouldnt expect much... I myself am currently waiting on the Prescott (the newer version of the Pentium 4) Cpu as my last upgrade on my current computer because of the next evolution in computers 
? BTX standard will require new case, new motherboard layout, new power supply, new memory DDR2-2, new sockets 778 
no more agp no more pci will both be replaced wth PCI-Xpress but at least no more legacy..!!! and maybe no more bios, a new software managed bios that will decrease boot up time!!! 
? BTX standard will require new case, new motherboard layout, new power supply, new memory DDR2-2, new sockets 778 no more agp no more pci will both be replaced wth PCI-Xpress but at least no more legacy..!!! and maybe no more bios, a new software managed bios that will decrease boot up time!!!
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
From: Ft. Campbell
Dang this is the first time I've heard of all that stuff coming out and I'm pretty nerdy. You must be super-geek I envy you! When's the next evolution (or revolution?) supposed to occur? I'm planning on buying some upgrades for my PC with all this money that the taxpayers give me so I'm curious as to whether or not it's worth it.
-skitz
-skitz
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,319
Likes: 0
From: City
Some key points to keep in mind when building a system:
You want the fastest available system bus so you can use the fastest available RAM. This minimizes the bottlenecks that slow everything down.
You want the fastest hard drive available. This has meant 7200 rpm drives for at least the last 5 years, if you stay with ATA-based drives to save some money.
Integrated video is not designed to be as good as a dedicated high-performance graphics card.
Processor prices fall as new models are released, so buying a slower, cheaper processor today isn't such a bad idea, assuming there is a faster processor supported by your board. You can buy a faster CPU next year, when they are dirt cheap, but not much slower than the new fastest CPU.
AMD claims clock speed means nothing, but names their processors after Intel clock speeds. To me, that is false advertising. Their 3200 doesn't run at 3200 MHz, it is supposedly "comparable" to an Intel 3200MHz P4. That tells you they consider Intel processors to be the benchmark. So just buy the best the first time. If AMD was really better, they wouldn't be trying to trick the consumer with such deceptive marketing. The benchmarks typically show that AMD is the winner in performance per dollar, but the cheapest racecar never wins, and claiming your processor was cheaper than an Intel is not an acceptable excuse for not having your work done, or for losing a game. Benchmarks also are not a good indication of actual performance, since there is no interaction going on, so responsiveness isn't tested. Intel processors multi-task better, given comparable components, while AMD chips are "adequate." I guess AMD and Celeron are comparable, but I wouldn't spend much time debating between a P4 and any AMD.
Intel processors will slow themselves down, and eventually just shut off before any damage is done if they get too hot, while AMD processors will simply go up in smoke. Something to think about when someone tells you you can overclock the piss out of an AMD.
Tomshardware.com has lots of useful information, and links to more information, as well as links to online retailers. They do sometimes fall into the AMD fanboy trap, but by and large, they are pretty objective and very useful when spec'ing a system. Intel.com has volumes of useful information about building a new system, with tips like new P4's will require a new power supply that has connectors that support the P4, something to be aware of if you go the Intel route. I am not as knowledgeable about the AMD site, being unsatisfied with their relative performance, but I imagine they are comparable.
I am not what I would call an expert, and some of what I just wrote may be in error or misinformed, so please don't spend your money based solely on my opinions
You want the fastest available system bus so you can use the fastest available RAM. This minimizes the bottlenecks that slow everything down.
You want the fastest hard drive available. This has meant 7200 rpm drives for at least the last 5 years, if you stay with ATA-based drives to save some money.
Integrated video is not designed to be as good as a dedicated high-performance graphics card.
Processor prices fall as new models are released, so buying a slower, cheaper processor today isn't such a bad idea, assuming there is a faster processor supported by your board. You can buy a faster CPU next year, when they are dirt cheap, but not much slower than the new fastest CPU.
AMD claims clock speed means nothing, but names their processors after Intel clock speeds. To me, that is false advertising. Their 3200 doesn't run at 3200 MHz, it is supposedly "comparable" to an Intel 3200MHz P4. That tells you they consider Intel processors to be the benchmark. So just buy the best the first time. If AMD was really better, they wouldn't be trying to trick the consumer with such deceptive marketing. The benchmarks typically show that AMD is the winner in performance per dollar, but the cheapest racecar never wins, and claiming your processor was cheaper than an Intel is not an acceptable excuse for not having your work done, or for losing a game. Benchmarks also are not a good indication of actual performance, since there is no interaction going on, so responsiveness isn't tested. Intel processors multi-task better, given comparable components, while AMD chips are "adequate." I guess AMD and Celeron are comparable, but I wouldn't spend much time debating between a P4 and any AMD.
Intel processors will slow themselves down, and eventually just shut off before any damage is done if they get too hot, while AMD processors will simply go up in smoke. Something to think about when someone tells you you can overclock the piss out of an AMD.
Tomshardware.com has lots of useful information, and links to more information, as well as links to online retailers. They do sometimes fall into the AMD fanboy trap, but by and large, they are pretty objective and very useful when spec'ing a system. Intel.com has volumes of useful information about building a new system, with tips like new P4's will require a new power supply that has connectors that support the P4, something to be aware of if you go the Intel route. I am not as knowledgeable about the AMD site, being unsatisfied with their relative performance, but I imagine they are comparable.
I am not what I would call an expert, and some of what I just wrote may be in error or misinformed, so please don't spend your money based solely on my opinions
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,143
Likes: 0
From: Garden Grove, CA
[QUOTE]Originally posted by no_really
AMD claims clock speed means nothing, but names their processors after Intel clock speeds. To me, that is false advertising. Their 3200 doesn't run at 3200 MHz, it is supposedly "comparable" to an Intel 3200MHz P4. That tells you they consider Intel processors to be the benchmark. So just buy the best the first time. If AMD was really better, they wouldn't be trying to trick the consumer with such deceptive marketing. The benchmarks typically show that AMD is the winner in performance per dollar, but the cheapest racecar never wins, and claiming your processor was cheaper than an Intel is not an acceptable excuse for not having your work done, or for losing a game. Benchmarks also are not a good indication of actual performance, since there is no interaction going on, so responsiveness isn't tested. Intel processors multi-task better, given comparable components, while AMD chips are "adequate." I guess AMD and Celeron are comparable, but I wouldn't spend much time debating between a P4 and any AMD.
The BTX should start showing up most likely when the new Socket 778 Pentium 4 (Prescott Core) starts showing up.
And for the AMD Rating goes, I believe its because the common consumer buys a Computer Based on MHz which means even though AMD's 2,200mhz (3200XP) runs almost or fast as a Pentium 4 3,200mhz cpu, the consumer would usually buy the Pentium 4. Based on mhz "more the better"?
Oh and for room to grow and without upgrading much later I say get a Serial ATA Drive preferably the Western Digital Raptor 10,000 RPM SATA150 8meg buffer 74 gig.
AMD claims clock speed means nothing, but names their processors after Intel clock speeds. To me, that is false advertising. Their 3200 doesn't run at 3200 MHz, it is supposedly "comparable" to an Intel 3200MHz P4. That tells you they consider Intel processors to be the benchmark. So just buy the best the first time. If AMD was really better, they wouldn't be trying to trick the consumer with such deceptive marketing. The benchmarks typically show that AMD is the winner in performance per dollar, but the cheapest racecar never wins, and claiming your processor was cheaper than an Intel is not an acceptable excuse for not having your work done, or for losing a game. Benchmarks also are not a good indication of actual performance, since there is no interaction going on, so responsiveness isn't tested. Intel processors multi-task better, given comparable components, while AMD chips are "adequate." I guess AMD and Celeron are comparable, but I wouldn't spend much time debating between a P4 and any AMD.
The BTX should start showing up most likely when the new Socket 778 Pentium 4 (Prescott Core) starts showing up.
And for the AMD Rating goes, I believe its because the common consumer buys a Computer Based on MHz which means even though AMD's 2,200mhz (3200XP) runs almost or fast as a Pentium 4 3,200mhz cpu, the consumer would usually buy the Pentium 4. Based on mhz "more the better"?
Oh and for room to grow and without upgrading much later I say get a Serial ATA Drive preferably the Western Digital Raptor 10,000 RPM SATA150 8meg buffer 74 gig.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
From: Ft. Campbell
Don't let them swerve you to Intel. Yea they may be faster but it doesn't justify the price. Speeds are so fast now that overclocking is just straight overkill and there's no need for it. I've had AMD's and pentiums and the difference is only noticeable by computer programs that measure it, not the end user, you. My friends upgrade a lot and they've got the latest intel and blah blah blah, and I'm playing the same game on my "slower" cpu with the same video settings and all that without a hitch. Don't get caught up in the hype.
-skitz
-skitz
Trending Topics
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 8,601
Likes: 1
From: La Habra
I've never justified the price of Intel over AMD. I just replaced my aging 1.4 T-bird Abit mobo with a kick-ass MSI board: Athlon 64 3200 with on-board USB2, Firewire, Ethernet, 5.1 sound, and serial+parallel ATA RAID. 1 GB of DDR400 RAM. I would have bought the 3000-speed chip to save $50 versus the 3200 but almost nobody carries it (yet).
The board has processor thermal and fan speed sensing so don't let anyone blow smoke at you about an AMD weakness there.
The board has processor thermal and fan speed sensing so don't let anyone blow smoke at you about an AMD weakness there.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 5,881
Likes: 0
From: Corn Country
The reason why I want AMD is because of the price difference compared to Intel. With that extra money I save going to AMD I can buy more ram... a better vid card... you name it. Anyways, I think I'm going to be buying the AMD 64 chip when it comes out. I don't do overclocking and I just stick one fan in the front and back of my case and call it a day. No problems at all so far.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 517
Likes: 2
From: Orange Park
AMD marketing with the XP XXXX+ numbers is not a comparison with any Intel product but with their own previous processor cores. For example an AMD Athlon 2100+ does not run at 2100 Mhz, but at 1733 Mhz, and at that speed its performance would be equivalent or better than (hence the plus sign) the previous model processor core at 2100 Mhz. Thoroughbred core compared to Thunderbird core....not AMD compared to Intel...
I build computers as a hobby and have built about 10 systems so far mostly AMD but here recently also Intel systems..(I have three systems running now at home one Intel and two AMD's)
The new AMD chips do indeed have thermal protection built in to prevent overheating destroying the CPU if supported by motherboard BIOS which they usually do nowadays. And yes you can overclock "the piss out of AMD processors" I have one of my 2100+ T-bred "B" cpu's overclocked right now to 2340Mhz (it is spec'd to run at 1733Mhz so that is a 607 Mhz overclock running fully loaded at 104F 1.75Vcore)
I went with Intel with my latest build to take advantage of the new Hyperthreading technology and 800Mhz FSB capability with dual channel DDR memory. Needless to say all of my systems SCREAM....not because they have to but because I WANT them to....kind of like why I bought this car....so I can go fast ....not because I have to but .....oh you get the idea...LOL
In the end it has to do with what you will be wanting to do with your PC that determines what you should put into it.
I build computers as a hobby and have built about 10 systems so far mostly AMD but here recently also Intel systems..(I have three systems running now at home one Intel and two AMD's)
The new AMD chips do indeed have thermal protection built in to prevent overheating destroying the CPU if supported by motherboard BIOS which they usually do nowadays. And yes you can overclock "the piss out of AMD processors" I have one of my 2100+ T-bred "B" cpu's overclocked right now to 2340Mhz (it is spec'd to run at 1733Mhz so that is a 607 Mhz overclock running fully loaded at 104F 1.75Vcore)
I went with Intel with my latest build to take advantage of the new Hyperthreading technology and 800Mhz FSB capability with dual channel DDR memory. Needless to say all of my systems SCREAM....not because they have to but because I WANT them to....kind of like why I bought this car....so I can go fast ....not because I have to but .....oh you get the idea...LOL
In the end it has to do with what you will be wanting to do with your PC that determines what you should put into it.