Log in

View Full Version : Prescott or Athlon 64...which one is better now? Which one is a better investment for the future?


Prevost
01-07-2005, 07:36 PM
I've been busy researching for how to build my own PC in this year. However, I remain uncertain concerning what is perhaps the most important decision I must take in this regard: going Prescott, or Athlon 64.

What are the main points I should consider to evaluate my needs, and my future updating options with each one of them?

Darius Wey
01-08-2005, 02:42 AM
Prevost, it's very hard to compare the two. One is a 32-bit processor, the other is a 64-bit processor. Also, there are many things outside of the model name that you have to consider. Clock speed, L1/L2/L3 cache, etc.

Intel are targeting 64-bit processors in the coming months, so that will provide severe competition in the near future. 64-bit processors will in a sense future-proof your PC, but not by that much. Also, a 64-bit version of Windows XP is still a working concept, and unless you run Linux, you won't be able to take full advantage of the full processing power of a 64-bit processor.

Personally, I'd stick with the P4, and when 64-bit becomes a major hit in the market, then you can make the move and decide between the newer variants of the 64-bit processor class. It's still very much a new concept otherwise, and you'd probably appreciate having a greater range to choose from in the near future.

Prevost
01-08-2005, 03:04 AM
So, 64-bit XP is going to replace 32-bit XP...in certain time into the future, isn't it ? Obviously, is not going to happen so soon I guess.

Darius Wey
01-08-2005, 03:08 AM
So, 64-bit XP is going to replace 32-bit XP...in certain time into the future, isn't it ? Obviously, is not going to happen so soon I guess.

Not necessarily. 32-bit will still reside for quite some time, but the expected plan is for a gradual move to 64-bit within the next few years ("few" being a subjective quantity because no one knows). Also, when the new Windows version comes out (Codename Longhorn), we may start to see these changes occurring, but the point is, for the standard lifespan of any processor, you won't see many changes at the moment, which is why I'm suggesting it may not be the best move to start getting into 64-bit right now. It can wait, and you'll have more range to choose from in the future (with improved technologies too).

maximus
01-12-2005, 12:12 PM
Not necessarily. 32-bit will still reside for quite some time, but the expected plan is for a gradual move to 64-bit within the next few years ("few" being a subjective quantity because no one knows).

Just to add a bit, by the time 64-bit is the de-facto standard in computing, there is a possibility that the currently available athlon-64 will be outdated in term of speed. There might be 20 ghz processors at that time, and the temptation to build a new PC will once again be irresistable :)

Prevost
01-12-2005, 12:59 PM
Just to add a bit, by the time 64-bit is the de-facto standard in computing, there is a possibility that the currently available athlon-64 will be outdated in term of speed. There might be 20 ghz processors at that time, and the temptation to build a new PC will once again be irresistable :)

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :roll:

Well, not sure if 20 GHz will be attainable in just a few years, but I guess everyone hopes it so...although prices will be accordingly don't you think?

Anyway, I've been reading that picking the right memory modules for an Athlon 64 processor is a bit tricky, or at least trickier than for a Pentium 4...

On the other side, it looks to me that, FOR SMALL SYSTEMS (like those using mini ATX cases - with four expansion slots) probably an Athlon 64 could be a better choice for the thermal dissipation amounts of a P4, an issue that at this time looks as being handled better by Athlon 64 processors and motherboards. Have you any impression on this matter?

Darius Wey
01-13-2005, 03:52 AM
On the other side, it looks to me that, FOR SMALL SYSTEMS (like those using mini ATX cases - with four expansion slots) probably an Athlon 64 could be a better choice for the thermal dissipation amounts of a P4, an issue that at this time looks as being handled better by Athlon 64 processors and motherboards. Have you any impression on this matter?

Are you looking for a mini-case? In short, I wouldn't let thermal dissipation be a deterrent. (1) You honestly will not see the added benefits of an A64 at this stage, especially from an end-user perspective. (2) The original A64 is already a dead heap. The raw power in 64-bit AMD processors are now seen in the FX range, so the original range is effectively "old" stock already. So you would have to question whether the amount of money that went into the purchase of the A64 was really worth it. (3) ATX itself is being phased out, so choosing an ATX mini-case and bringing the A64 and its thermal dissipation arguments into the equation is kind of a lose-lose situation. How long a lifespan would you get out of it? Not a lot. BTX will replace the current ATX standard. The A64 would be a little redundant, and that's a worthy investment down the drain. Sure enough, in this computing world, you can never stay "up to date" per se. But my point is, you've reached the point when we are about to see mass changes in computing architecture, both at a software and hardware level. Keeping that in mind, it's probably not worth investing in a "power-system" now since you can opt for a "general" one for now, and then when the critical moment is reached when processors/chipsets start showing their true colours and take advantage of SLI technologies and what not, then you can consider going all out for a "power-system". Again, I'll stipulate, unless you intend to use Linux, you won't take advantage of the full 64-bit power of the A64, since the 64-bit version of Windows is still pending.

Prevost
01-13-2005, 01:43 PM
Thanks Darius.

When is BTX expected to replace ATX? Right now I don't see a lot of motherboards made for this new standard, nor PC OEM's are selling this kind of system but Gateway...at an steep price BTW.

Now, about getting phased out or having a short lifespan from certain processor, I think that this is more a matter of the software you want (or need) to use for your activities. For example, I am writing this on a Celeron 700MHz on a mobo with the 810E chipset and ATA/66 hard drive...probably outdated in terms of hardware (basically impossible to upgrade without making it new from the motherboard), but still funtional for what I do normally, given the fact I run still Windows 98SE, no software updates that could crash it, and obviously the software disadvantages of having no service or new possibilities for entertainment, more powerful packages, and so on...though I don't suffer too much perhaps I am accustomed to work the way I do.

But now from your words I see the lifespan of the processor can be given by the upcoming foundation changes both in hardware and software; I agree with this...as I am sure you agree it's not a bad idea to upgrade from my current PC despite it is running fine (In fact, my main concern is getting burnt...literally! - it is three years old).

In another order of ideas, I'm not so sure now that you mention it, but the difference in price in making a "power" and a "general" system in a comparable level of component's quality is about 100 dollars (american ones :wink: ) - only adding things like video, sound, tuner cards or so just to the system intended to be the "power" one would rocket up the difference. And this is good for Athlon 64 systems too if I compare those to the Prescott systems I could build.

Now, do not think I am making defense of the Athlon...actually I'm just learning. And also there is the Celeron D...but as I said, going from Celeron D to Prescott can be less than 100 dollars so it is something to think about.

Darius Wey
01-13-2005, 02:12 PM
When is BTX expected to replace ATX? Right now I don't see a lot of motherboards made for this new standard, nor PC OEM's are selling this kind of system but Gateway...at an steep price BTW.

Not yet. It's still a new-ish technology, so give it a couple of years.

yslee
01-13-2005, 03:33 PM
P4s if you need pure raw horsepower. Athlon 64s if you're a gamer. Beyond that, pick the best bang for buck. If you're buying the Athlons, make sure it's a socket 939.

maximus
01-14-2005, 01:42 AM
Here here. The Processor Handbook :)

From 1995 To 2005: 111 CPUs From 100 MHz To 3800 MHz

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041220/index.html
and
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/index.html

And the benchmarks start at this page :

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/cpu_charts-13.html

Personally I am recommending P4. Excellent for multimedia processing (divx, mpeg4, ogg, mp3, etc.), and very good at playing games. But if you need 200+ fps on your games, then you should go with athlon64.

If you can delay building a new PC for another 1-2 months .. then maybe you should wait. PCI Express is definitely the way to go.

Prevost
01-14-2005, 12:51 PM
If you can delay building a new PC for another 1-2 months .. then maybe you should wait. PCI Express is definitely the way to go.
Hahaha...classified information Maximus?

So...what I should expect to find in 1-2 months in the future ? :mrgreen:

yslee
01-14-2005, 11:31 PM
Mmm, that link makes me feel pretty good about the price I paid for my Barton setup 6 months back. =D

maximus
01-18-2005, 01:49 AM
If you can delay building a new PC for another 1-2 months .. then maybe you should wait. PCI Express is definitely the way to go.
Hahaha...classified information Maximus?

So...what I should expect to find in 1-2 months in the future ? :mrgreen:

Not really. You will see more motherboards with more stable implementation of PCI express. More items to choose from :)

But personally, if I am to build a new PC right now, I will get a motherboard with 925 chipset and a whole lots of PCI express slots.

Prevost
01-18-2005, 02:08 AM
You will see more motherboards with more stable implementation of PCI express. More items to choose from :)

But personally, if I am to build a new PC right now, I will get a motherboard with 925 chipset and a whole lots of PCI express slots.In which sense "more stable"? Are those "unstable" now? :?

Concerning chipsets, probably I'll settle for a 915G...925 sounds more state of the art than what my needs are.

maximus
01-19-2005, 01:57 AM
In which sense "more stable"? Are those "unstable" now? :?


I was referring to a state where it is being adopted by more manufacturers, more hardware using it, etc. Basically the state when we can find the PCI express version of all PCI/AGP peripherals.

Prevost
01-19-2005, 03:07 AM
Oh, I see. Yes, since I still have to see any expansion card made for the PCI-e x1