I've decided it's time for an upgrade. My small budget can stretch to either an Athlon 650 or a PIII 550. I can get either processor for the same price, I'm sure you guys would love to give your 2 cents worth
Cheers
Printable View
I've decided it's time for an upgrade. My small budget can stretch to either an Athlon 650 or a PIII 550. I can get either processor for the same price, I'm sure you guys would love to give your 2 cents worth
Cheers
I had the same situation. I ended up getting a Pentium III 667 (it would of been a 666 if Intel wasn't worried about the "Mark of the Beast" thing). AMD's are faster and cheaper, but they're trickier to set up and keep running. I didn't want the hassles I've seen with some AMD machines, so I got the good o'l reliable Pentium.
If you're willing to spend the time figuring out what will work with the Athlon, by all means go with the Athlon. I mess around with enough computers at work, so I want everything to go smoothly on my home PC.
-Paul
ive never heard about any programs nopt working on a p3...(trophy bass) heh....
Oooh, that was quick. I'm not worried about setup hassles, I'm buying a barebones system (must be getting lazy in my old age) so someone else can have the sleepless nights!
Dont do it !
Buy an Athlon man, I mean look at the benchmarks, properly setup an athlon will trounce all over a PIII and as for problems I find this is more down to the motherboard than the chip.
In the past two months, i have gone through two athlons... not because they are bad, because I love them. Better performance and better price than the Intel.
I bought a 70, then sold it and got an 800. Tricky to setup? Are you kidding? All you have to do is drop in the cpu and set the side pins. The motherboard does the rest....
It even autodetects the processor.
My MOBO is a gigabyte 7IX. Have also heard good things about MSI mobos. If the RAM you get is higher than 64mb (in one module), make sure to get CL2 memory. PC100 memory works fine as long as it is a 32mb or smaller module.
Problems with Intel come not because it is a bad processor. IT is because people are not willing to give AMD a chance. People like above who said programs don't work in AMD. It is because the program was made for Intel, and not AMD. One of Intel's way to squash competition was to offer kick backs to vendors for putting AMd on the back burner.
its not that im not willing to give amd a try. ive used one a few times and i liked it, but i didnt buy it. personally, i dont want to invest money into a board and processor only to find out that amd HAS been put on the back burner and that i cant run a specific piece of software..thats all.
i wasnt trying to knock AMD, i was just looking at the reality of things....
Do it right and get an Athlon. See if you can get the new Thunderbird chip that they are releaseing!
I have built many PC's both for corporate and home use with AMD chips and have had no problems with them.
For the cost and performance, you'd be stupid not to go with the Athlon. Also, I do have a tip for you if you go with AMD. Don't cheap out on the type of RAM you use. They can be a little picky, so go with either 6n's or 7n's RAM. I have heard (but never seen for myself) Athlons having problems 8n-10n RAM. Plus, you get better performance with the 6 or 7 anyway.
I have also found the AMD CPU's are not hard to setup as long as you can read your mainboard manual, you'll be fine.
AMD.
Just gone an ordered the Athlon! Thanks for the feedback
don't worry, you'll be fine. If you run into issues, we are here to help you.
Good luck, and keep us posted!
Honestly this is a no brainer. Not only was the over-hyped ZX replacement chipset defective, but Intel reluctantly recalled the 820 chipset. I had the displeasure of trying to figure this problem out at work before finally finding this fact out (by chance right here in windrivers). The Intel processors are HIGHLY over priced for their performance (as compared the the Athlons price). I would never have thought myself capable of saying such things, for years the quality of the Intel cpu's were unheralded! - nothing came close. As a technician that changed when i started running passmark performance test(insert trademark https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2000/09/1.gif on all Athlons and PIII systems i constructed. The majority of cpu performance tests were overwhelmingly in favor of the Athlon over the PIII in nearly all floating point operations ( equal Mhz ratings, i.e.-600 vs 600). I have a Microstar6167 here at home running a 850 Athlon. For 5 months- this system has NEVER frozen or locked up, in both windows98 and windows2k. All software runs excellent on the system.
Ultimately you must choose, but choose wisely https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2000/09/1.gif
Until very recently this was a no brainer. Intel. But with the release of the newer motherboards AMD does have a better bang for the buck (if it is under 800 mhz and not the thunderbird core. Sorry, but 300mhz for cache just does not cut it). But the first two generations of Athlon motherboards were buggy while Intel still had the BX to reply on. But with the BX finally getting too old to use for all the bell and whistles and the newer AMD boards out, well.... (and without a good motherboard all that faster processor is going to do is crash that much faster).
Now mind you, this is at the recomended speeds. Once you start overclocking then Intel kills AMD as far as ease goes. Pop the processor in, go to the bios and set it up and poof. A 550 PIII at 825mhz. With AMD it is a bit more of a hassle. The jury is still out on the thunderbird core though. It could make things very interesting.
Having built systems with both chips, I've got to say you made the right decision with AMD..just make sure your power supply is AMD approved, and you have enough cooling and you should have no problems..the comment about memory is right on track..get the fastest and best you can afford, and get a good mb..I've had no problems at all with any business, game, or home program not running on these machines, and I've built a lot. My home computer is an 800mhz Athlon, and it wouldn't be if it gave me any problems.
Hi!
I would prefer Athlon.
But last word have to say ordinary customers.
From theirs decision depend, win AMD this unfair competition or lose position
for long time.
And we have to help whem to make right decision.
Well I'm about to build an Athlon system. I'm prob. gonna go with an 850 or 900 CPU and the ABIT KA7-100 mobo. Now I would like to ask about memory, I was looking at getting PC-133 dual 128mb SDRAM. This should do the trick right? I will be getting a 300 or 350 watt power supply just to make sure the system runs ok. I heard in a PC Gamer and some websites how the Power made a big diff. in most Athlon systems. And that some Micron memory modules are kinda buggy. I don't know if that's true or if it was just the early K7 chipsets at the time doing this. But I'd like to know what any Tech would recommend as far as mem is concerned. Any other comments would be greatly appreciated to further help me with my dissicion for hardware. I will have both Win2k and WinME (when it releases). I'll have a GeForce2 GTS 32MB for my video. I can't seem to decide on a sound card though, can you guys post your comments? I was thinking about either the SB LIVE, Diamond MX400 or the Aureal Vortex2.
[This message has been edited by hive-mind (edited June 28, 2000).]
Hive mind....
As for the sound card I would recommend either the SB Live or the MX300 from Diamond. I have the MX300 and wouldn't trade it for the world.. I have read the reviews of the MX400 (seeing that it Just came out when I got my 300) and every one of them said the same thing.... the MX300 kicks the MX400 in the BUTT... as for the memory problems... I have not heard of any Micron memory having problems... I would def get the best and the fastest...
OHHH YEAH BTW AMD ALL THE WAY!!! Nice to see the underdog kick some BUTT!!!!!
[This message has been edited by Spitfire650 (edited June 28, 2000).]
I've worked with both AMD Athlon 650 and 700's. I had no trouble with setup at all.
I've used Microstar MS7195 motherboards and setup was very easy. For price and quality the Athlon chips ran extremely well.
I beg to differ about your comment. Again, I was wondering which CPU to go for, but I went for the AMD Athlon 700 becuae it was cheaper (about £150 - 200 cheaper!). I found it VERY EASY to build the system, and I have no problems. The system booted first time, and I know that hte AMD Athlon will out preform a simialer setup with a PIII 700...
Overall, I am very happy with my system.
Have someone ever work with PCChips MB
for Athlon (with sound on-board and modem).
Please,share with information about.
Sure, go for the AMD. Then make sure your old AOL account is still loaded on the P75 you just retired. You'll need it to post on this forum. Why? When your new spiffy Athlon system is locking up in a sea of blue screens and a desert of illegal operation errors, you'll need help to work out all the conflicts and download all the updated device drivers.
AMD = Always Malfunctions Daily.
Ribbon Cable> Obviously the words of a high school drop out that can't figure out how to install his RAM and get his video card installed under windows 95.
BTW, the CPU goes in the segregated slot on the mainboard. Not the one that says "SIMM 0" beside it.
What is this rubbish about AMD's not running software they are 100% Compatible, AMD bought the rights to the 386 processor ! there is no issue with software I have used AMD's from their 486's throught the k5 and K6,K6-2,K6-3 and the now the Athlon. The K6's couldn't hold a candle to a pentium in games because of the FPU but now that problem is fixed and now better than Intel's offering people try and claim they have compatability problems like Cyrix processors ! They aren't ! AMD have no issue's with software. Oh yeah and the comment about Athlon's being harder to setup is load of rubbish too. I bet all you Intel lovers are using VIA chipsets because of Caminogate ! The Athlon VIA chipset is practically identical. Memory, IDE and the AGP controller are all the same ! Please people just admit that the Athlon is king for now.
The new T-Bird and Duron are both very impressive. I'm a little surprised that AMD didn't deliver a bigger "final death blow" to Intel by making the T-Bird with a full 512K of full-speed cache and the Duron with 256K of the same. Then you couldn't even put the benchmarks on the same screen. Intel has been floundering lately; the latest "castrated" Celeron chips (with half the cache disabled) is a great example of the kind of convoluted thinking over there. (reminds me of the 486SX with present but disabled math coprocessor. You do not handicap one of your products just to make another one look good unless you are really pathetic. Intel has become pathetic.) Intel hasn't really come up with an innovative new processor design since the Pentium Pro.
I can't wait for them to make a dual Duron board. With Win2K's SMP feature, I'll be building myself a small supercomputer with over 1 GHz of processing power, really cheap! If they just get around to that Dual Socket A solution SOON.....
My advice is to buy an AMD from a company that is by far the new market leader in R&D and innovation. Intel has been sucking rocks for too long.
I used Amd for 2 years no problems. I even overclocked them with excellent results. Recently I built myself a Pent II 300 mhz (SL2W8 oc'd to 504 mhz) I'm well satified with this as well as the Amd systems I used to own. This system does however outperform my previous (K62 400 oc'd to 475).
Mobo selection I feel is very important.(I am using an Abit BE6 Rev 2) What good is a 800 mhz system if you bottleneck it with a cheap board.
PC CHIPS are junk. Stay away from them. go with gigabyte, MSI, or even ABIT.
Read the RMA topic in the TECH TO TECH and see all the posts....
I recently built an Athlon system w/700 cpu using an Abit KA7-66 mobo w/Kingmax pc133, cas2 memory at 128mbs. I had trouble with the Aureal sound card, so I got a Soundblaster Live and vouille' it works great. With the Abit mobo the bios does everything for you from fsb settings to voltage settings and doing the laundry if you sweettalk it!!!
I recently built an Athlon for myself. No problems whatsoever. So amazingly smoothe. I've never owned owned an intel chip but I worked for a computer shop that was nothing but intel. Intel networking and processors and mainboards OH MY!! I'll admit, Intel stuff is great but not worth the extra money. And Ribbon Cable, is that your opinion about the Athlon or someone else's? Sounds like someone else's.
------------------
Tony
I can understand that sometime when people get burned by a bad product, they swear off of it. Ribbon Cable, have you ever even built an athlon system?
First build one, and then state any problems..... and we'll see which are actual hardware and which are user problems.
If you are going to make such a bold statement, have some facts to back them up.
It sounds to me that Ribbon Cable is one of those so call "techs" who replaces a card because he thinks that it bad and never tries to figure out the real problem was. I have work with system that used Intel, Cyrix and Amd. The Celeron is just a water down version of a pentiumn, just like the 386sx was a water down version of a 386. As far the programs not running on an Amd, I have never had any problems with any of them (windows 98, Office 2000, Netzero, etc.). I think blue ribbon has been on the intel site far to long. Wake up and see the light, Amd gives you more for your money.
Quote:
Originally posted by cki tech:
I can understand that sometime when people get burned by a bad product, they swear off of it. Ribbon Cable, have you ever even built an athlon system?
First build one, and then state any problems..... and we'll see which are actual hardware and which are user problems.
If you are going to make such a bold statement, have some facts to back them up.
Yes of course AMD rules the scene now and prob. for a long while, i mean the Duron (Celeron Killer) just released, and the Thunderbird and Spitfire are on there way. Even now there are talks of 2GHZ AMD CPUs that will be runnin @ 64-bit. But of course people are saying why do people need 64-bit on a desktop. Well I say the same reason we needed people like nVIDIA to come out with the 256-bit GPU that has now takin over the graphics scene for the PC. Yesterday it was Intel and 3dfx/S3 running the scene. Now it's AMD and nVIDIA doing it, and not only are they on top but they've outdone them selves and the competition which is good to see finally. SOME REAL Friggin` competition in the PC World!
I am currently using an Athalon 800 at my office with a quad boot configuration.
98, NT, 2000pro, and Red-hat 6.1 all perform excellently. I have yet to have a problem with the system. For years I have been strictly Intel.. I have had AMD machines for the past two years. Even overclocked they run solid. Just like Intel you will need to make sure you have a solid chipset.
------------------
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. -- Albert Einstein
It said 'Insert disk #3', but only two will fit. -- The average customer.
[email protected]
ICQ 182999
Don't knock PC Chips. In fact they made AMDs recommended MB list for the Athlon CPU.
I've setup lots of sysems with PC Chips boards and while they're not going to give you killer performance on games and things they make good budget boards even if they are sometimes finicky setting them up.
They make good bottle necks and money makers they go bad you can sell the customer a new one $59 wholesale and retail it for $99 good deal NOT!Quote:
Originally posted by bdunn:
Don't knock PC Chips. In fact they made AMDs recommended MB list for the Athlon CPU.
I've setup lots of sysems with PC Chips boards and while they're not going to give you killer performance on games and things they make good budget boards even if they are sometimes finicky setting them up.
For about $225 you can get an AMD Duron 600 and and ASUS Socket A motherboard and have the ability to upgrade to a Thunderbird when the prices come down.