Upgrading my Mobo and Cpu...

**en4rcment** · 02-05-2004, 02:20 PM

Hi Tech-experts....

Due to the new games coming out soon, I wanted to upgrade my motherboard and processor.

Here's my current specs:
MY SYSTEM:
-Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP Professional 2002 (Service Pack 1)
-Motherboard: Gigabyte-GA-7VRX
-Processor: AMD Athlon XP 2000 1.67GHz
-Memory: 1.00 GB of RAM (PC266 DDR)
-Hard Drive: 60 GB 7200 RPM
-Video Card: Radeon 9600XT
-Sound Card: Soundblaster Live 5.1 (although I use a plantronics headset for TS and GR so this bypasses my card on my current settings)
-Monitor: NEC AccuSync 90 19" SVGA

I planning on getting this mobo: Intel 865PERLX
http://www.intel.com/design/motherbd...browse+motherb

And this processor: Pentium4 2.8GHz http://www.intel.com/products/deskto...index.htm?iid=

I guess my biggest question is whether or not my current memory will bottleneck the system. This new mobo supports my current memory as well as DDR 400 and DDR 333. I've talked to a few people and they've said that my current memory speed should not be a problem.

Let me know your thoughts.

**Cobra** · 02-05-2004, 03:24 PM

If you use 266, your CPU will be forced to run slower than it can.

**en4rcment** · 02-05-2004, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by Cobra

If you use 266, your CPU will be forced to run slower than it can.

Yeah, I think I'm gonna swing for the DDR 400 memory. That's the max memory that this mobo can handle.

**Overlag** · 02-05-2004, 11:33 PM

stay AMD man!

A64 3000
K8V
some DDR400
and sorted

if you STILL do the intel route, may i suggest the P4C800-e from Asus although the Asus P4P800 will do just as good if your not overclocking.

(i do not work for asus, but they DO make the best boards out there)

**CingularDuality** · 02-05-2004, 11:36 PM

But Abit is your reliable partner...

**Overlag** · 02-05-2004, 11:37 PM

hahah....so the advert says.... dont believe it though

corsair ram will be ok though

**Cobra** · 02-06-2004, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by Overlag

stay AMD man!

A64 3000
K8V
some DDR400
and sorted

if you STILL do the intel route, may i suggest the P4C800-e from Asus although the Asus P4P800 will do just as good if your not overclocking.

(i do not work for asus, but they DO make the best boards out there)

Why does the P4C800 overclock better than the P4P800?

+PARADOX+ · 02-06-2004, 08:42 AM

I have built 2 PC's recently on the ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe motherboard with Corsair PC3500 DDR RAM. I love these boards. My personnel rig has 2 x 512 sticks of ram and a P4 3.0 ghz cpu. I would go with the P4 3.0 since the price cuts dropped that processor to under $230.00 at newegg.

**Overlag** · 02-06-2004, 02:52 PM

P4C800 and the P4C800-e use canterwood chipsets, most do 300mhz (1200 fsb)

P4P800 uses a springdale chipset that is a cut down version of the canterwood chipset. So basicaly is a canterwood that failed intels testing so they "speed binned it"

BUT, saying that, the odd ones get through that are good enough but most seem to top out around 250-270 (1000-1080)

also, the Asus P4C800-e is better than the P4C800, since it has intels newer southbridge too, and some improvements to the stability of voltage lines to the CPU... but most people dont need that

**L0GiCaL1** · 02-06-2004, 09:45 PM

Why would you buy a A64 3000+ when for the extra couple of bucks you can get the 3200+ with the 1 MB L2 cache? $30 more than the P4 3.0 that Paradox suggested and will absolutely blow its doors off. I have to agree on the Asus motherboard thing, although for the A64, MSI's Neo FIS2R(?? I'm working from memory so I might not have gotten that right) is top notch. I don't put much faith in Tom's Hardware but EVERYONE is giving it good reviews. Either the Asus or the MSI... pretty much a toss-up and about a $25 price difference. Also, Dual Channel DDR isn't much of a benefit for the A64's so it is the matter of whether or not you want to spend the extra $15 and get a Dual Channel set for a 3-5% increase. If you are cutting the proverbial "cost" corners, hopefully this helps you make up your mind. The AMD chips and the Intel chips have fundmental differences in design... if you want stable application performance and better video processing (Digital camera and film editing), get an Intel. If you want to play games and don't mind waiting a couple of extra seconds for that video to finish encoding, get the AMD. The best suggestion I can make is do your homework, read the reviews, ask around, and don't get in a hurry. Hope that helps en4.

**Overlag** · 02-06-2004, 11:57 PM

Originally Posted by L0GiCaL1

Why would you buy a A64 3000+ when for the extra couple of bucks you can get the 3200+ with the 1 MB L2 cache? $30 more than the P4 3.0 that Paradox suggested and will absolutely blow its doors off. I have to agree on the Asus motherboard thing, although for the A64, MSI's Neo FIS2R(?? I'm working from memory so I might not have gotten that right) is top notch. I don't put much faith in Tom's Hardware but EVERYONE is giving it good reviews. Either the Asus or the MSI... pretty much a toss-up and about a $25 price difference. Also, Dual Channel DDR isn't much of a benefit for the A64's so it is the matter of whether or not you want to spend the extra $15 and get a Dual Channel set for a 3-5% increase. If you are cutting the proverbial "cost" corners, hopefully this helps you make up your mind. The AMD chips and the Intel chips have fundmental differences in design... if you want stable application performance and better video processing (Digital camera and film editing), get an Intel. If you want to play games and don't mind waiting a couple of extra seconds for that video to finish encoding, get the AMD. The best suggestion I can make is do your homework, read the reviews, ask around, and don't get in a hurry. Hope that helps en4.

I said A64 3000 because everyone moans about A64's costing so much... maybe they should look at intel cpu's, and mb's???? then see what costing so much is about. And anyway, i said that as entry level.... I wouldnt recommedn the XP line (socket A) to anyone anymore. I dont care if it will be "fine" for now, why buy old **** thats already obsolete?

that MSI A64 board is good, and it was why close 2nd choice (ie i would have orderd that instead if the asus was out of stock....

Dualchannel mode is about the difference 512kb extra cache gave the A64 3200... so to me i would sum up the CPU's like this:

512kb cache, 2000mhz single channel = 3000
1mb cache, 2000mhz single channel = 3200
1mb cache, 2000mhz dual channel = 3400...
(note theses are NOT offical)

thats how i see it, but dual channel A64s are going to cost an arm and leg.

whats this about stable only being Intel..i REALY wish this myth would be layed to rest.

+PARADOX+ · 02-07-2004, 12:46 AM

Intel=Stable
AMD=Not Stable

FireMarshal · 02-07-2004, 01:23 AM

I have a A64 and the Asus Mobo... no problems here...

**Overlag** · 02-07-2004, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by +PARADOX+

Intel=Stable
AMD=Not Stable

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!

**L0GiCaL1** · 02-07-2004, 09:23 PM

I think what we are classifying as stable may be 2 different things. AMD's show signs of unstability due to different core processing methods when placed under long-term load. Intel does not suffer from this because of non-agressive core timings which provide for long-term performance but none of the "umph" AMD gives the gamer and home user. I would much rather have an AMD at home and an Intel in my server cluster.