32 or 64bit help?!!!!

[turbo]

hi,

wonder if anyone could help me out?

looking to get a new computer but unsure as to how this 64 bit stuff works!

will a 64 bit with a lower clock speed, say 2ghz, be faster than a 32 bit chip with a higher clock speed, say 3ghz????

also is a 939 pin better than the 700 pin and how?!!

so confused!!!! lol

if anyone could recomend a good but not ridicuously expensive graphics card with 256mb then that would be cool.

sorry for all the quetions!!

thanks

 

[ChristopherP]

Ok...

AMD use a much more efficient architechtire to Intel, so a lower clock speed in ANY AMD processor (be it 32bit or 64bit) will be faster than an Intel processor with a much higher speed...

e.g. the Athlon 3200+ about 2GHz i think is roughly the same as the Intel P4 2.8...

Socket 939 is the best by far... go 64 big - maybe a 3500+ Winchester?

Also a 256mb say FX5200 is rubbish compared to a 128Mb 6600GT or 6800 or even 128Mb 9800.

Amount of memory isnt everything, at all. Get a good 128Mb card (Gainward 6600GT GLH) rather than a crap 256Mb card.

Saying that, The good 256Mb cards ARE better than the 128Mb cards - e.g. the 6800GT 256mb, X800Pro, X800XT, X800XTPE, 6800Ultra... those are all good.

Try and get a new gen card, any 6600GT (with 1.6ns mem), 6800GT, X800pro/xt/xtpe, or 6800 ultra would be an excellent choice to compliment your new system.

Other things to consider are SATA hard drives in RAID or Dual channel RAM...

Make sure you use only good quality components - dont get a cheap motherboard if you build a new computer, it will only slow things down...

(bet you can tell i'm dead bored in my ICT CAD CAM lesson at college )

Hope all helps

Regards

Chris

p.s. welcome to PCR

 

[Kye]

If you have windows XP, then windows XP 64-bit is out in the first half of this year.

With a 64-bit processor, it looks promising. Then again, intel has a 64-bit coming out soon, but i think it is just 64-bit extensions?

AMD 64-bit's are better for alot of reasons, cooling, performence, cheaper...

 

[Techy]

An AMD 3200 is generally the equivilant to an Intel 3.2Ghz hense the naming convention. AMD chips as you may have noticed have a lower clock speed than the Intel but the performance is made up in the AMD by the chip's cache, you'll notice that AMD chips generally have more L1 (Level 1) and L2 (Level 2) memory. Even though the two chips are different AMD's equilivant to Intels are of similar performance, there are downsides to both, intel chips are cleverer e.g. they clock themselves down when they get too hot so that the heat doesn't damage the chip where as an AMD would simply overheat and die, the downside to intel chips (mostly pentium) is that they run very hot and this can cause problems in SFF (Small Form Factor) cases.

Anyway to the main point 64bit chips only perform better than 32bit chips when they are running 64bit software. Although it has to be said that AMD have done a great job of creating a 64bit chip that is exceptionally fast (sometimes faster than Intels dedicated 32bit chips) at processing 32bit data and 64bit data.

Alot of my collegues, friends and associates on PC Review (to name one Mr Postill ) are recommending 64bit chips to people who are planning to purchase a new system or upgrade, i seem to stand in the minority with this but IMO 64bit technology isn't worth investing in for another 2 years or so. I'm aware that 64bit versions of linux are available and that a 64bit version of windows is soon to be released, but has any of you 64bit lovers tried to find 64bit versions of apps like winzip? they're simply not available yet and will not be available until windows 64bit is available and microsoft iron the bugs out (of which there will be plenty i'm sure ) also the release of a mainstream 64bit intel chip for home use will be a factor.

What i'm getting at is that if people invest in 64bit technology now, then in a couple of years when 64bit machines really get going and most apps are 64bit the hardware that you've spent all that hard earned cash on will be out of date before you've got the most out of 64bit technology.

My advice to anyone who is planning to upgrade, build or buy a new machine in the next few months is to enjoy the price drop of 64bit CPU's and Mobo's and buy 32bit hardware enjoy the end of the 32bit era, then, when your next due an upgrade or a new machine then buy 64bit when all software, including games will be available for 64bit.

Think people forget that Microsoft released their first fully 32bit operating system for use in the home only a few years ago in 2001 the first fully 32bit microsoft o/s was windows XP and version before XP was based on 16bit code but was capable of running 32bit.

Why spend extra cash on hardware your unlikely to take advantage of?, the software just isn't available at the moment to take advantage of 64bit.

And remember when i say two years, you may not think thats a long time but as mucks regulary reminds us two years is the equivilant to twenty years in computing and alot can happen in twenty years.

NOTE: The above refers to home users. As you may know 64bit technology has been in use for a number of years in corporate environments mainly in servers. Intels 64bit chips (Xeon) are being run using windows 64bit server operating systems, this is where Intel out run AMD. Whether this will change remains to be seen.

64bit chips are used in servers and high powered workstations because the demand for processing power on such machines is so high. There are very little applications, if any, that a home user would use that would require the power of a 64bit CPU so IMO were not ready for the world of 64bit just yet.

Something to think about, have we used 32bit technology to its full potential or are AMD just trying to make a quick buck before Intel get a grip on the market?

Would just like to say that from a business point of view i think AMD made the right choice releasing 64bit chips when they did, Microsoft and Linux developers will be building their operating systems around the AMD chips therefore they should perform better than rival chips.

Wouldn't mind seeing a lover of 64bit reply to this post with a decent argument from a different angle.

And thats about it, waffled on a bit (mmm... waffles!) but seen as i can't afford to go out until April after spending a fortune over christmas i had to do something to entertain me on a friday night.

Hope everyone is well and somebody has enough time to read this.

All the best

James aka Techy

 

[muckshifter]

You'll get no arguments from me on that one Techy.

I personally am a "few years behind", technology wise, and will continue to be so, after all I'm not a games player so don't need the "latest-n-greatest". However, I try to keep up with the latest technology and we are in for some really big changes within the next couple of years, it could be sooner, but hardware technology is pushing the limits of software to keep up.

Writing software, be it games or operating systems, is not an easy task especially if it means taking advantages of what the new hardware has to offer. Just take a look at all the "updates" we have to keep downloading updating software is not the only consideration to think about, keep in mind there is also "Firmware updates" that a lot of users don't realise are available that do indeed enhance or improve your hardware ... BIOS updates being a good example. One I always remember was a firmware update to Nettie's old Kodak camera. It improved the memory capacity, which allowed her to take more pictures, and improved battery life.

Ask yourself the question ... What do I want my computer to do?

 

[ChristopherP]

James, while the post was very interesting and accurate, i'd like to look at 64 bit from a different angle, perhaps a somewhat contraversial one. While 64bit chips gots not 64bit windows yet, they are proven to run 20% faster than their 32bit cousins, and they have hypertransport technology, something the old Athlons never had. Theres also the fact that 32bit was socket A, whereas the newer ones are 754 and 939 supporting newer technology e.g. PCI-E...all these factors mean that there will be at least some element of futureproofing whilst building a faster system.

If the 64bit windows is released and isnt that buggy, im sure software manufacturers will be quick off the line to satisfy the market for such applictaions, and if not, what the hell - windows will run twice as quick!

I think that it's sensible to get the newest generation of technology if you can, for example if you wanted to listen to music at work or college, you wouldn't go out and buy a portable cassette player now would you, you would almost certainly choose MP3, CD or DAB.

It is a case of weighing up the advantages and disadvantages. Whilst yes, there are a few disadvantages to buying 64bit hardware so soon you have to look at the broader view on the matter and i'm sure that the advantages, maybe only just, outweigh the disadvantages.

 

[JonnySpam]

Buy what u can afford, no matter what budget you've got there's a system to suit and usually the good people on this site will help out, usually chris

 

[Matt Jason H]

I have an AMD64, it outperforms an AMD 32bit of the same speed but that's only because of the more modern CPU features.

The crux of the problem is Windows is a 32 bit OS, which means you're not taking advantage of the 64bit capability of the processor. You have two options, 1 is to use Windows64 which is in beta at the moment it's buggy, unstable, and has very poor driver support. The second is to use Linux, which has had 64bit versions long before AMD released a 64bit CPU.

I use Linux for 64bit along with programs for it that are compiled for the 64 bit architecture and there is big difference. If you don't want to use Linux, you can either wait to buy your CPU at the time when Windows 64 is out (they'll be cheaper then) otherwise I'd recommend buying a 32bit processor with a higher clock.

 

[turbo]

cheers guys, quite a bit of information from a few different view points!!


think at the moment for my situation am gonna stick with 32bit processing and a decent clock speed.

take advantage of 64 bit when more things about that i can use it for.

thanks very much for all the advice

 

[Kye]

When 64-bit AMDs first started too come about, then i would understand that there is no point buying a 64-bit processor if you dont have the OS too run it properly on, but windows XP 64-bit should be with us soon.
Application-wise i dont know, but as for games...older games can be configured too take advantage of a 64-bit processor with the 64-bit OS. Framerates went up around an average of 15 fps from XP too 64-bit XP.

The review was from an american hardware site a while ago, i could try and find it on google but otherwise take my word for it

At least from a gamers point of view, 64-bit should be a well worth thing getting, thats considering it will be priced around the same as it is too upgrade from windows 98 too windows XP.

 

[floppybootstomp]

Good post, techy

It made me think.

And other input was good as well, balanced, I'd say.

I think, with the exception of my graphics card, I probably have about the best of what 32 bit socket A can offer at the moment.

The only thing that would make me want to upgrade a system right now is the new generation of PCI graphics cards.

But, Socket A and AGP cards are still going to be with us for quite some time. And at this moment I think upgrading to 64 Bit/PCI Grafix is expensive compared to what it will be in, say, July this year.

When I upgraded last year I promised myself that's it for at least 15 months.

I'm happy with my system, it seems fast to me and it's reliable.

I may splash out on a better graphics card, in fact I'm definitely going to, probably a 6800GT or maybe even an Ultra, but that's it.

I shall observe what happens this coming year in computer advancement, and maybe, when I feel the time is right, I shall go on to 64 Bit.

Were I to be building a new system right now, I'd actually be unsure what to go for, Socket A based systems are definitely a more economic option and still perform well. As are current Intel based systems, for that matter.

Nahh, this year I'm spending my loot on some travelling, not hardware

 

[Reefsmoka]

Exacly what im trying to do!

I want to upgrade to 64-Bit later on this year maybe, looking more at August, everything will come down and i'll probably save in excess of 50% compared to if i bought now.

Theres nothing out there my computer cant handle with all setting high at the moment, and even if it cant, games still look awsome on medium! I'd just be ripping myself off if i went 64-Bit right now.

But if you have a pretty rubbish PC at the moment, under 2Ghz, 256mb mem, 40 gig hd then ya probably should jump upto the 64 bit world .

Make sure your not upgrading your PC just to say you have the best PC out there! Some people will be upgrading like mad but not use it to half of it potential. Its easy to be caught up in the mainstream hardware life, wanting to upgrade all the time, and never being satisfied. Theres ALOT of hardcore gamer out there who are still there with there 1.5Ghz P4's and Geforce 4 Ti cards out there and are still happy with what they have because it does the job .

 

[erebon]

Good one Reef.

I don't think it's just 64bit. Who could use 16 TB of RAM that the 64 bit registers offer? Even 1 Gig is pretty much. The 64bit chips have a better architecture which has nothing to do with their 64bit capabilities. So IMO if you want to build a new PC from scratch, definately go for 64 bit.
If I had my old system (Northwood 2.6HT, 865 chipset, Geforce FX 5600, 512 MB DDR400) I'd at most upgrade my Gfx.