Waht FS is best suited

[ctjoyce]

Well I refuse to run an intel CPU over the Pentium 3, Pentium 4 and D are just crap. I had an AMD 64 3200 and i out preformed a 3.6EE, also i only require a 30fps.

You sure it was the processer and not the rest of the system. Cus I can tell you right now my 550 Prescott can outbench all AMDs up to the 3800+ series (Last time I checked). I think it might have been the rest of the rig, cus there is no way that a P4EE can be outpreformed by a 3200+ Its just too much processer.

But as for your new system, did you bother resurching any of those parts? They are lowgrade, if that, gameing parts. The 2K series AMDs are now completely outdated, and throwing one into a NF4 will just bottol neck the hell out of the thing. Assuming it even accepts it. You should be looking at a 3200+ MINIMUM, pref a 3700+. 512MB of RAM? Are you serious? That is the minimum amount reccomended for basic modern computing. 1GB my friend, 1GB. And the 6200TC? That card not only was not designed for gameing but was outdated by the 6600 series in about 3 months. The 6600GT is minimum what you should be looking at for GPU, and pref a 6800GS.

I know your happy about getting a new system, but its really not a super computer, more like the HP or Dell special of the week.

Cheers
Cameron

[candle_86]

For one i have been bulding computers sense i was 12, built my first 486 back then. 2nd I dont know what you are smokeing dude, but a Pentium is technolgiclly slower than an AMD. Thats a fact that the Pentium 4 and Pentium D have a longer pipeline, so it takes them longer to compute data. As for the rest of the equipment, im looking to run FS2004 not run it at max, which i doubt an intel chip can properly do. I have just one problem with Intel and that is they market an inferior prodcut for more money. Any serious Tech will tell you AMD of Intel. The memory specification of 512 is to start with, im well aware of what is gaming is what is not. As for the NF4 bottle necking anything i doubt it, I've used Nforce sense Nforce 1 for 462 and never had a problem. If you want to know why I don't have my other system it was lost in a fire, and my warranty didnt cover it. I hope to get its specs or better agian. It was a 64 3200, 1gb DDR 400 CAS2, 6600GT AGP, MSI K8N Neo fsr, and a 200gb WD. I know what a gaming system is, but I have other things to blow cash on. The only reason im getting a Sempron 64 is because its a gift. Otherwise I'd prolly get an older 462 with a Sempron 2200 in it, and a 5200.

[Fozzer]

Good evening, Ladies and Gentlemen.
For today's fight we have...
Two young Lads...
In the red corner, ctjoyce (cus).
In the blue corner, candle_86 (Waht).

Place your bets: AMD or Intel. My system is better than yours. I can spell better than you.

Let the fight begin.... ...!

Paul... ... ...!

[Scorpiоn]

Good enening, Ladies and Gentlemen.
For today's fight we have...
Two young Lads...
In the red corner, ctjoyce (cus).
In the blue corner, candle_86 (Waht).

Place your bets: AMD or Intel. My system is better than yours. I can spell better than you.

Let the fight begin.... ...!

Paul... ... ...!

How soon can it be laundered?

[ctjoyce]

2nd I dont know what you are smokeing dude, but a Pentium is technolgiclly slower than an AMD. Thats a fact that the Pentium 4 and Pentium D have a longer pipeline, so it takes them longer to compute data. As for the rest of the equipment, im looking to run FS2004 not run it at max, which i doubt an intel chip can properly do.

Right. The next time you try to tell me otherwise, go with more than personal prefreance. http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/ ... arts_2005/

Also Intel is for all around computing, AMD is for gameing. So those of us who do more than just game, you should consider Intel.

Cheers
Cameron

[candle_86]

Well im going by facts, and I do not trust toms hardware at all. He shows bias alot, and with a lower spec system with the same benchmark i can usally score alot better, i have beaten his 3d mark 05 6600 score when i still had my good system by 400 points with no ocing, and i was on a slower rig than the one he benched, so i dont trust that site. With my own eyes i did take out a 3.6EE with a 6600GT that my friend owned, beat him in every benchmark except memory benchmarks, as he has faster read write with hi DDR2

[ctjoyce]

Right. Well Im not really going to believe that until I see it, so whatever. But lets face the facts. Your not going to outbench a P4 EE with say a 2600+ A L2 Cache of 2MB versus one of 128KB. Yes the process pipe may be longer, but the processing power of the P4 to the semperon is just unfair. Also 1.3Ghz vs. 3.6Ghz, there is just no contest. I know that AMDs are not all about the speed, however the difference is so great that it dosnt matter in this case. Thirdly your 6600GT would be bottolnecking because of your processer, so again your not going to beable to outbench him. Im sorry its just not going to happen.

Cheers
Cameron

[candle_86]

I was comparing my old 64 3200 to a P4EE a sempron i have no intention of pitting aginst a P4EE. You should read what i write. Buy a Sempron 2600 will take out any Celerons. I'm not comparing Sempron and P4 thats stupid, but a Sempron vs Celeron is fair, but my comparasion was 64 3200 vs P4EE 3.6.

[ctjoyce]

Even still. Edit the post to the 3200+ and you still get the same result. The GPU bottolneck is now minimal, however your not going to outbench a P4EE in PCMark, unless you have multiplyed the FSB, and somehow increased the L2 cache. I'm sorry my friend, but its just not going to happen. Its like saying a C182 is going to preform like a Cirrus. Yes they are both single engine light aircraft, but the Cirrus is just packing a hell of alot more. Like I stated before I would like to see the results of the bench before you open your mouth again about how your 3200+ has outbenched a processer with almost four times the power of yours. Unless the bench was in 3DMark, your just not going to win.

Cheers
Cameron

I futher support myself with this. http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/ ... age50.html

The 3.72EE recieved 4755 PCMarks while all the AMD 3200+ models recieved between 3139 and 2845 PC Marks. Now you can try and tell me that Toms hardware is byassed, and you can try to tell me that PCMark isnt completely true, however A difference of 1616~1910 PCMarks just cant hold up. The only amount PCMark is really ever off by is at most 500 Marks. And between the two 500 still puts the 3200+ behind.

[candle_86]

For one that computer got destroyed by fire so I don't have it. And in PC Mark it did beat it. The bigger L2 helps but its redundant and higher latancy on the P4 unlike the low latancy non redundant on the AMD 64. Also AMD 64 was a larger L1 than intel. Combine that with the lower latance ram and you have something faster. A 64 3200 will not bottle neck a 6600GT, one my friend is runing one on a 939 with a 7800GT and he upgraded from a 6600GT and trust me there was a massive increase in preformance. Also take into account that the majority of website do state AMD is better, AMD's market share is in the Desktop CPU is gaining fast, and major OEM's are switching over. So for all this AMD must be the better chip. You idea's on raw power no longer apply, large L2 and fast mhz dont mean a hill of beans anymore. If the product can access ram faster, has lower latancy chache it can do what the other guy can. AMD has the advantge now with the memory controler on the cpu. This means really low latancy, also means they no longer use exteranal FSB, but use the HTT to talk to ram. When Socket M2 comes out for DDR2 support Intel wont even have read write advantage because of the supior memory ability. If anything an Intel Chip is more likly to bottleneck a system than an AMD chip, simple as that. Intel is relying on older technology. And the other problem with an Intel is I live in Texas and its hard enough to keep the house cool in the summer.

[ctjoyce]

Most of that are things I already know. And what I have to say to most of them is wate for Conroe. Intel's new core is suppost to put AMD back in its place. Also rember that many OEMs are switching not to offer the best product they can, but the most cost effective one.

Cheers
Cameron

[candle_86]

I dont think the new core will get them on good standing with the gaming community. Intel in my opion is no longer a viable leader in the CPU market. AMD is faster than intel all around, and most ppl are realizing that. One more thing to add you did insult what im buying, its not a dell or any other OEM POS i wouldnt touch OEM. Its a whitebox bearebones system, im taking alot of the parts from my current one.

[congo]

For one i have been bulding computers sense i was 12............. I dont know what you are smokeing dude........... If you want to know why I don't have my other system it was lost in a fire...........I know what a gaming system is, but I have other things to blow cash on. The only reason im getting a Sempron 64 is because its a gift. Otherwise I'd prolly get an older 462 with a Sempron 2200 in it, and a 5200.

OMG!



Dillitante - "one who has a half arsed interest in a subject" or "a lover of the arts".

Which one are you?

Sorry to hear about the fire, that's aweful!

[ctjoyce]

Again congo thank you for stepping in here.

Cameron

[candle_86]

it only got the computer, it was my PSU, it shorted out and caught the whole thing on fire right after i got done painting it and reassembling. It was modded sweet and that freash paint and its fumes spread the fire like mad before i could do anything