Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary. Now with pictures!
- Posted on
- AMD cpus
- dilbert firestorm
March 9, 2005, 9:02 am
rate this thread
I haven't been following the computer tech stuff too much the last few years.
what's the pecking order on those AMD CPUs? It does seem that AMD is not
following the Intel convention as they used to or am I wrong on that
I'm seriously thinking about upgrading my main case from a pentium 3 system
to an AMD system.
in the mean time, once I know the status on the pentium 3 system which is
now back at another shop that has a socket 370 board to test with to see
whether the pentium 3 cpu or mobo is still any good. I've been informed by
some that suggest the mobos are more likely to fail than cpus do. taking
with that info in regard, I may build a new atx mini-tower system with
pentium 3 cpu if its still good and give that one to my parents.
Re: AMD cpus
For number crunching stuff, not graphics or game intensive,
Celeron 300 to PIII 600 gave me a bit less than 2x increase in speed
PIII 600 to AMD Athlon 2000 gave me a bit more than 2x increase in speed
Athlon 2000 to AMD 64 3200 is predicted to give me a little less than 1.5x gain
The graphics and game folks can probably provide their own measurements
Re: AMD cpus
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 01:02:21 GMT, dilbert firestorm
Best mainstream "PC" CPU is Athlon 64. Buy what the budget
Had you suspected the power supply? Most often it's either
motherboard or power supply (unless something really basic
like overheat from dust buildup or fan failure).
Not just more likely, it extremely rare for a CPU to "just
fail", without some external force causing it, whether that
force be the motherboard failing, the heatsink falling off
or fan dying, etc. CPUs in (otherwise working) systems
don't just die, not within the lifespan of the other parts
at least, it'd be many years before CPU reached it's
Sounds good. Don't try to economize TOO much though, for
example integrated video- is not bad for typical 2D uses
with modern DDR memory but back in that era the PC100/133
memory made integrated video just sluggish enough at 2D to
be perceptible, and slow down any tasks that were
memory-intensive. IOW, finding an old $5 AGP card is
worthwhile as even a typical '98 era card will make a large
Re: AMD cpus
I thought it was the power supply. I had the same set of symptoms with the
computer last year (difficult to reboot and then finally won't reboot at
all - monitor stays dark, but has power to drives). the first shop took
every thing on my mobo out and put in new ram, video & psu, as a result it
rebooted intermittenly. they didn't have a socket 370 mobo or cpu to
narrow it down further.
interesting. whats the shelf life of a cpu, intel & amd?
is there any advantage in having lan, video, ide and/or scsi support built
in on some of these mobos that I have seen?
Re: AMD cpus
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 03:31:29 GMT, dilbert firestorm
People used to claim 10 years, but it's been 10 years and
the CPUs still work. I could see if some had minor
imperfections that they'd die earlier than others, but it's
certainly not akin to a light bulb where it's expected that
you'd have to replace it several times to keep getting same
result, rather than performance changes or other factors
prompting a different CPU.
As I wrote, due to the PC100/133 memory the video is
relatively slow, but could still be sufficient for 2D use if
low cost is most important. They all have the integral IDE,
SCSI isn't so useful for a box remade out of old technology
unless you happened to have some old-but-not-too-old SCSI
drives lying around.
I dont' care for (inherantly noisey) integrated sound but
some people don't even have speakers or poor ones and can't
tell (or don't care) about the difference. Integrated lan
is typically the same as you'd get with a generic $5 NIC,
back then it was PCI-bus based or nothing. It's quite
sufficient for typical uses but a tad slower, uses more CPU
time than higher-end cards from 3Com, Intel. Overall not
much of a tradeoff except for someone moving huge files
around a lot.
Mainly you'd have to decide how many free PCI slots you
need, as you can always disable onboard features and use a
card if you have the slot(s) for them.
Re: AMD cpus
AFAIK, there is no "shelf life." It is only a matter of performance vs
economics. A CPU is viable until it can no longer perform the tasks demanded of
it in the time required/desired.
Depends on what you want/need...
Virtually all MoBos have IDE built in, because virtually all users attach HDs
and CD/DVD devices that use the IDE interface. Current desktop MoBos have SATA
RAID controllers on board because SATA is the current "hot item" for HDs. There
is little reason to NOT use SATA, and a few reasons for which it is advantageous
to do so (bandwidth, performance, number of total HDs supported...). Onboard
LAN is almost without question a "good thing" because of the proliferation of
home LANs and the ability to save a PCI slot; same with modems for laptops
(PC-Card instead of PCI).
On board sound and video are more a matter of individual preference/use. Anyone
who wants the latest or best performance in either one will be better off with a
dedicated GFX/sound card, but the on-board version may do in an emergency or for
less demanding users.
Finally, SCSI is something only the most demanding home user or an office user
will need/want. Even then, it is more likely such a user will want/need a
high-performance RAID controller. IMO this is the least "valuable" of on-board
In almost all cases (SCSI excepted), these on-board systems add little to the
cost of the MoBo, and will cost much less than add-on cards with equal