Venice vs Onleans

[RDN]

I so badly wish to upgrade my current system.

- Abit KR7A w/ AMD Athlon 1700+
- Seagate 20 gig HD
- Maxtor 40 gig external encloser backup USB 1.1

This system has functioned incredibly well over
the last four years since I built it.

But, I would like to take advantage of all the latest technology

-SATA 2.0
-USB 2.0
-PCI express 16x, 4x, 1x
-HyperTranport
-Cool & quite
-Gigabit ethernet
-CPU on chip memory controller (dual channel & DDR2)

And I want to be ready for Windows Vista.

I'm having a hard time picking the AMD socket platform.
Socket 939 (venice) would be a cheaper setup.
I'll use an Asus MoBo. (I don't care about SLI for now)
And 1 gig of RAM.

The stuff I've read about AM2 (orleans) is that you will
have to use PC6400 (DDR2-800) memory to see a major performance
benifit over pc3200 (DDR-400). The price difference between the
two speeds is about $25 (using Corsair chips)

I plan to start with an entry level Athlon 64 3200 CPU @ 2.0 Ghz.
Which is a quantum leap from the system I have now.

 

[***** charles]

I so badly wish to upgrade my current system.

- Abit KR7A w/ AMD Athlon 1700+
- Seagate 20 gig HD
- Maxtor 40 gig external encloser backup USB 1.1

This system has functioned incredibly well over
the last four years since I built it.

But, I would like to take advantage of all the latest technology

-SATA 2.0
-USB 2.0
-PCI express 16x, 4x, 1x
-HyperTranport
-Cool & quite
-Gigabit ethernet
-CPU on chip memory controller (dual channel & DDR2)

And I want to be ready for Windows Vista.

I'm having a hard time picking the AMD socket platform.
Socket 939 (venice) would be a cheaper setup.
I'll use an Asus MoBo. (I don't care about SLI for now)
And 1 gig of RAM.

The stuff I've read about AM2 (orleans) is that you will
have to use PC6400 (DDR2-800) memory to see a major performance
benifit over pc3200 (DDR-400). The price difference between the
two speeds is about $25 (using Corsair chips)

I plan to start with an entry level Athlon 64 3200 CPU @ 2.0 Ghz.
Which is a quantum leap from the system I have now.

Wait before you buy until AFTER Vista comes out. Then the hardware
you get can be validated. Anything before the official release is a
guessing game.

later.....

 

[General Schvantzkoph]

I so badly wish to upgrade my current system.

- Abit KR7A w/ AMD Athlon 1700+
- Seagate 20 gig HD
- Maxtor 40 gig external encloser backup USB 1.1

This system has functioned incredibly well over
the last four years since I built it.

But, I would like to take advantage of all the latest technology

-SATA 2.0
-USB 2.0
-PCI express 16x, 4x, 1x
-HyperTranport
-Cool & quite
-Gigabit ethernet
-CPU on chip memory controller (dual channel & DDR2)

And I want to be ready for Windows Vista.

I'm having a hard time picking the AMD socket platform.
Socket 939 (venice) would be a cheaper setup.
I'll use an Asus MoBo. (I don't care about SLI for now)
And 1 gig of RAM.

The stuff I've read about AM2 (orleans) is that you will
have to use PC6400 (DDR2-800) memory to see a major performance
benifit over pc3200 (DDR-400). The price difference between the
two speeds is about $25 (using Corsair chips)

I plan to start with an entry level Athlon 64 3200 CPU @ 2.0 Ghz.
Which is a quantum leap from the system I have now.

The advantage of going with an AM2 platform is that you can put more than
4G on it, the 939 is maxed out at 4G. Aside from that the two platforms
are essentially identical. I'd suggest a dual core processor such as the
X2 3800+ or X2 4000+ instead of the single core 3200+.

You should wait until the end of July before you buy anything. Intel is
introducing Conroe on July 24 which will be as fast or faster then the
Athlon 64. AMD has timed some big price cuts to coincide with Intel's
introduction so you'll win no matter which way you swing, Intel or AMD.

 

[NoNoBadDog!]

The advantage of going with an AM2 platform is that you can put more than
4G on it, the 939 is maxed out at 4G. Aside from that the two platforms
are essentially identical. I'd suggest a dual core processor such as the
X2 3800+ or X2 4000+ instead of the single core 3200+.

You should wait until the end of July before you buy anything. Intel is
introducing Conroe on July 24 which will be as fast or faster then the
Athlon 64. AMD has timed some big price cuts to coincide with Intel's
introduction so you'll win no matter which way you swing, Intel or AMD.

Depends on what you mean by faster...

Current *independent* testing indicates a 12-15% increase by Conroe over
*Current* AMD, not the 40% claimed by Intel.

Link:
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/conroe-performance-claim-being-busted.html

Add to that the recent announcement by Intel that it will not be able to
meet production for Conroe, and you have a recipe for disaster ala earlier
Intel releases.

I would stick with AMD. They do not inflate test numbers, do not lie about
their architecture, and do not require you to but a new motherboard with
each new revision of a given chip. Add to that the cost savings, the lower
heat, and the lower cost of operation (electricity) of the AMD, you'll still
have a better system.

When 65nm hits the street, AMD will regain the speed crown. But you must
understand that just because a processor tapes out faster, does not mean it
will perform better in the real world (HYPErthreading comes to mind).

Best bet for the future: AMD
Best "bang for the buck": AMD
Processor used at Microsoft (Irvine and Redmond Campuses): AMD (M$ does not
use Intel in the development of Vista).
Best TDP: AMD

Of course, if you have lots of money to just blow, then go for Intel.

Bobby

 

[RDN]

A dual core would be nice.
But remember I'm upgrading from an Athlon 1700
I'm kinda on a budget.

Good news. I recently checked on AM2 CPU prices, they've dropped.
(6/13/06)
I'll bump up the chip upgrade to a Athlon 64 3500 at 2.2Ghz or the 3800 at
2.4Ghz

Read in Tom's Hardware guide that DDR2-800 works better on the faster AM2
chips.

Also the Asus MoBo I want is on back order. I'm looking for the Asus M2N-E

 

[Merrill P. L. Worthington]

A dual core would be nice.
But remember I'm upgrading from an Athlon 1700
I'm kinda on a budget.

Good news. I recently checked on AM2 CPU prices, they've dropped.
(6/13/06)
I'll bump up the chip upgrade to a Athlon 64 3500 at 2.2Ghz or the 3800 at
2.4Ghz

Read in Tom's Hardware guide that DDR2-800 works better on the faster AM2
chips.

Also the Asus MoBo I want is on back order. I'm looking for the Asus M2N-E

The advantage of AM2 is almost all in theory. The looser timings of
DDR2 offset its theoretical speed advantage. The measurements don't
seem to support the theoretical advantages. Besides most users won't
seem much a difference.

If you're upgrading from an Ath 1700 and on a budget there are a few
thoughts to consider:

The price of a socket 939 Ath 64 3800+ has dropped significantly. Its a
real deal at less than $150. The CPU is a monster.

If you're going to use a Asus motherboard (my personal fay vo right),
have a look at the A8N-VM CSM. Its inexpensive and contains onboard
video PLUS can be upgraded to use a PCI-X 16x video card when you're
ready. Its a feature-rich board at a bargain price, especially if SLI
is not in the equation. The on-board video may be better than you have
today. On-board gigabit LAN is part of the basic package. 8 x USB 2.0.
4 x SATA II with RAID 0 or RAID 1. (lets consider real-woarld
implementations)

Have a look at the Western Digital SATA II 250gb hard drive with 16mb of
cache. VERY fast and is usually available for around $90. It will
probably be a very imnportant contributor to a performance increase.

Corsair Value RAM, especially the model with CAS 2.5 is a pretty good
deal. If you go with the A8N-VM CSM, you could get by with 1 gb for a
while, but its probably a good idea to get a couple of gig just to make
sure you don't run short.

If your power supply is old, its probably also tired. A 400 to 420 watt
power supply of decent quality can be found for less than $50. Maybe
consider the Thermaltake 420 watt supply. They have worked well for me
with fully loaded Ath 64 systems.

A system based on the above components has an entry price of about $300
to $350 and can be upgraded as time and budget permit.


If you feel the need to get an AM2-based system, equivalent components
are available for a little more $$. Early indications are that there
isn't much advantage using AM2 CPUs. I haven't tried a system myself,
but I do read between the lines of the reports.

 

[Ed Light]

The 800 memory won't make a massive difference. Just a few percent.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org

 

[Bill]

The 800 memory won't make a massive difference. Just a few percent.

That's what I heard about going from fast page mode to edo memory?
Glad I didn't listen to that or I'd still be running a 486. A few percent
here, a few percent there, next thing you know F.E.A.R is running at 80 fps.


Bill

 

[Ed Light]

That's what I heard about going from fast page mode to edo memory?
Glad I didn't listen to that or I'd still be running a 486. A few percent
here, a few percent there, next thing you know F.E.A.R is running at 80
fps.

Well, if the budget is tight, a few percent there would be ok.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org

 

[VanShania]

According to CPU mag, Vista has 38 background processes running and requires
more ram than XP. Running Vista with 512 mb ram is like running XP with
128mb. If you want to use Vista, you want to have a minimum dual-core
processor, 1gb ram, 128mb vid card using ATI X800 series or Nvida 6xxx
series(or higher), SATA hard drives with NCQ and minimum 8mb buffer. This is
why AM2 is so appealing because AMD is supposed to release CPUs in 1st
quater 2007 with 4 cores. But this will mean you should be able to build a
dual core 939 system on the cheap with all the talk on price cuts. But then
your locked in to that system with no where else to go. AM2 is supposed to
be the "Socket A" of today.

--
Sapphire X1600 Pro 512mb AGP
MSI Theater 550Pro TV Tuner
Thermaltake LanFire Midtower(4X80mm fans),Antec 550 Watt PSU
Gigabyte GA-K8NSC-939 nForce3, A64 3500+, Stock Cooler IdleTemp 28 C
2 Gb Dual Channel PC3200 OCZ Platinum 2-3-2-5 CL2.5
Viewsonic A91f 19in Moniter
2XSATA WD 320gb Raid Edition, PATA WD 120Gb HD
Pioneer 110D Dual Layer burner
Logitech MX 310 Optical Mouse
Microsoft Sidewinder Precision 2 Joystick
Microsoft ergonomic keyboard
Cheap computer speakers with Sennheiser HD 477 Headphones

3DMark05Free-Overall-3134 1024X768, 4XAA/8XAF 6.4Drivers
Cpu - 4405
3Dmark2001 - 8702 4XAA/8XAF 1280X1024

Games I'm Playing- IL-2 Sturmovick Series
Empire Earth 2, Need For Speed: Underground 2,
Civ IV, Warhammer 40,000 Gold

 

[VanShania]

According to CPU mag, Vista has 38 background processes running and requires
more ram than XP. Running Vista with 512 mb ram is like running XP with
128mb. If you want to use Vista, you want to have a minimum dual-core
processor, 1gb ram, 128mb vid card using ATI X800 series or Nvida 6xxx
series(or higher), SATA hard drives with NCQ and minimum 8mb buffer. This is
why AM2 is so appealing because AMD is supposed to release CPUs in 1st
quater 2007 with 4 cores. But this will mean you should be able to build a
dual core 939 system on the cheap with all the talk on price cuts. But then
your locked in to that system with no where else to go. AM2 is supposed to
be the "Socket A" of today.


--
Sapphire X1600 Pro 512mb AGP
MSI Theater 550Pro TV Tuner
Thermaltake LanFire Midtower(4X80mm fans),Antec 550 Watt PSU
Gigabyte GA-K8NSC-939 nForce3, A64 3500+, Stock Cooler IdleTemp 28 C
2 Gb Dual Channel PC3200 OCZ Platinum 2-3-2-5 CL2.5
Viewsonic A91f 19in Moniter
2XSATA WD 320gb Raid Edition, PATA WD 120Gb HD
Pioneer 110D Dual Layer burner
Logitech MX 310 Optical Mouse
Microsoft Sidewinder Precision 2 Joystick
Microsoft ergonomic keyboard
Cheap computer speakers with Sennheiser HD 477 Headphones

3DMark05Free-Overall-3134 1024X768, 4XAA/8XAF 6.4Drivers
Cpu - 4405
3Dmark2001 - 8702 4XAA/8XAF 1280X1024

Games I'm Playing- IL-2 Sturmovick Series
Empire Earth 2, Need For Speed: Underground 2,
Civ IV, Warhammer 40,000 Gold

 

[Ed Light]

If you want to use Vista, you want to have a minimum dual-core processor

It ran ok on my Winchester. Though I didn't throw much at it.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org

 

[Merrill P. L. Worthington]

According to CPU mag, Vista has 38 background processes running and requires
more ram than XP. Running Vista with 512 mb ram is like running XP with
128mb. If you want to use Vista, you want to have a minimum dual-core
processor, 1gb ram, 128mb vid card using ATI X800 series or Nvida 6xxx
series(or higher), SATA hard drives with NCQ and minimum 8mb buffer. This is
why AM2 is so appealing because AMD is supposed to release CPUs in 1st
quater 2007 with 4 cores. But this will mean you should be able to build a
dual core 939 system on the cheap with all the talk on price cuts. But then
your locked in to that system with no where else to go. AM2 is supposed to
be the "Socket A" of today.

Are you sure that's the minimum system? A friend of mine ran the latest
beta on a 64 3500 Venice with 1gb of RAM and it worked fine, better than
XP ME for the apps that would run. He also tried it on an Opti 148 with
1gb and said it ran fine.

Where did you get these recommendations? Could you provide a source and
test results?

 

[Ed Light]

Are you sure that's the minimum system? A friend of mine ran the latest

beta on a 64 3500 Venice with 1gb of RAM and it worked fine, better than
XP ME for the apps that would run. He also tried it on an Opti 148 with
1gb and said it ran fine.

Where did you get these recommendations? Could you provide a source and
test results?

It's probably for a full-blown multimedia machine running HDTV and
multitasking at the same time, while Vista indexes and defrags in the
background. Yikes.

--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org

 

[VanShania]

Its what cpu mag recommended as a minimum in its May 2006 issue "Gear Up For
Vista".(for obvious reasons). MaximumPC and PCWorld also had similar
recomendations. I'm sure their web sites have info on this stuff. AMD says
any of its 64 bit processors will do. I guess it depends on how much "real"
multitasking you want to do.
--
Sapphire X1600 Pro 512mb AGP
MSI Theater 550Pro TV Tuner
Thermaltake LanFire Midtower(4X80mm fans),Antec 550 Watt PSU
Gigabyte GA-K8NSC-939 nForce3, A64 3500+, Stock Cooler IdleTemp 28 C
2 Gb Dual Channel PC3200 OCZ Platinum 2-3-2-5 CL2.5
Viewsonic A91f 19in Moniter
2XSATA WD 320gb Raid Edition, PATA WD 120Gb HD
Pioneer 110D Dual Layer burner
Logitech MX 310 Optical Mouse
Microsoft Sidewinder Precision 2 Joystick
Microsoft ergonomic keyboard
Cheap computer speakers with Sennheiser HD 477 Headphones

3DMark05Free-Overall-3134 1024X768, 4XAA/8XAF 6.4Drivers
Cpu - 4405
3Dmark2001 - 8702 4XAA/8XAF 1280X1024

Games I'm Playing- IL-2 Sturmovick Series
Empire Earth 2, Need For Speed: Underground 2,
Civ IV, Warhammer 40,000 Gold