Compatability Headache

[pr0digy]

I looking into building a new computer this summer, the only problem I'm running into is which processor/mobo to use. I would love to use a athlon fx-53, but it's just not feasible putting around $700-800 in a processor, because I'm at college. I've been drawn to the athlon 64 processors for a long time, but recently found out they they do not support dual-channel DDR. Bummer. At the time I am writing this, a 3.4 P4 will run about $415 and an athlon 64 3400+ is about $405. A friend of mine has a Athlon XP rig and I know he's running dual-channel ram in his rig and getting pretty good 3dMark and SysMark scores. My question is this. Which of these processors (3.4 P4, athlon 64 3400+ and athlon xp) produces the most "bang for the buck?" I would appreciate any help on this matter. It'd still be about a month before I get to ordering parts, so maybe prices will drop, but I can only afford to put about $1600 into a rig. Thanks in advance.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

socket 939 athlon 64's use dual channel ram...i think.

Not the Official Sicko of THG.

 

[addiarmadar]

Get the Sockect 939 chips if you can. They are not tied down to registered ram so you can get the faster ram without burining a hole in your wallet. That a64 3500 chip will work just fine for your future gamming needs.

Personally Id wait till the PCI express mobos come out and the PCI express graphics cards. Those cards will fully utilize the 64bit interface.

Mobile Barton 2500+ @ 2420mhz 11x220 1.7v
Asus A7N8X Dlx 440 FSB
1gb Geil GD pc3500 Dual Channel (2-3-3-6)
Segata 80gb SATA 8.5ms seek
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro to XT(420/730)

 

[Crashman]

Some will, others won't. The FX's will, the others won't. At least that's what I read.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[P4Man]

"dual channel" is just one of many possible ways to squeeze more performance out of a system, but what really matters is the performance in the end. Yes, the AXP can use dual channel, but since its front size bus is limited in bandwith to roughly half of what a dual channel DDR400 memory subsystem can provide, it makes almost no difference over single channel. Bandwith will be roughly identical, latency will be slightly lower, giving it *maybe* a 2-5% performance increase over single channel. Real world applications may well see an even smaller difference.

Yes, the A64 (socket 754) is "limited" to single channel, but since its memory controller in integrated on the chip, and therefore runs at core speed, it will provide *much* faster access to memory than any Athlon XP, dual channel or not. In short, its a non issue, unless you happen to know that you will be running an application all the time that is extremely sensitive to memory bandwith, and totally ignorant about access latency or CPU performance. In that case, you could either consider a P4 or a new socket 939 Athlon 64 both of which support dual channel.

BTW, on a P4 dual channel does make a significant difference over single channel, as it is not limited to a 400 Mhz FSB like the Athlon XP, but that still doesn't make it the faster platform compared to the S754 A64 (depending what apps you use to compare obviously).

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[SoDNighthawk]

ASUS makes supporting dual-channel for the AMD 64's as well as ABIT. Both companies have for some time now.

Barton 3200+ 400MHz
A7N8X Deluxe
Air Cooled 45C
2x512 Corsair DDR 400 PC3200
GeForce FX5900
Two Maxtor 40Gig 8MB cach 7200rpm
SONY RW 52x/24x/52x
SONY DVD 16x/40x