Why buying 754 could be a better idea

El_Jefe_77

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2004
141
0
18,680
I have been figuring and reading on this topic for 2 months now. 939 is only good if you dont care AT ALL about your spending or value.
1. 939 costs more
2. 754 does not have any known slow downs in the slightest for any game mentioned in any forum I have read.
3. 939 requires dual channel to be worth it, requiring more cash down for memory. You either get a gig or a 512 setup at first, either one isnt as fast as getting 2 gigs. 754 you could get 1 gig chip at normal latency and then another one in a year if needed, thats a lot of ram for 40% less cost.
4. the top chip is 3700 for 754, same as the 3800 just not dual channel, both are way over what you need, so in a year, if not enough speed, just get a 3700 for much cheaper than current.
5. One of the best current boards for speed is MSI. msi is problematic, any other board you have to OC it to up the mem to 1000 fsb, 754 has mature boards that are all even hitters.
6. You wont be sucked into the upgrade game, ditching your board for useless sli pci-e, ditching your board for ddr2 and ram as well, youll just chill and play your games at full speed.

Price difference between the two setups is a lot more than you would assume, cuz you want to get the better ram as well to make it really work nice.
 

pauldh

Illustrious
You could argue that S754 is the better value now. I agree. But there <b>is</b> a difference in upgradeability. The top S754 chip to be released is the A64 3700+ period, while Socket 939 already supports the FX53, and the FX55, A64 4000+ and 4200+ are all on the roadmap. Buying a cheap S939 now and upgrading later will give you a faster chip to go with, as well as probably better prices down the road. I suspect someday, the top S754 (A64 3700+) will be more expensive than the A64 3800+ S939, just because one is the max that all S754 mobos can use, while one will later be a midrange S939. That's my feeling anyway based on all the mobos/chipsets of the past.

Edit: Actually, FX57 and A64 4400+ are also mentioned for S939.


ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 1GB Corsair XMS 4000 Pro Series, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Pauldh on 10/03/04 09:02 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

trooper11

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2004
758
0
18,980
ok now ive heard it all. first it was s754 bashing , now its s939 bashing. lets tear down these walls of hate and come together :p

ok seriosuly, first of all, lets look at a few of those things you listed there.

1. s939 does NOT cost mroe then s754 now. Look on new egg, an s939 90nm 3000+ costs $169, right in line with the s754 model, so that debunks your first point.

2. now this is made on the conditions that we are talking about a clawhammer s754 vs a newcastle s939. in that case the cache vs dc memory does equal out and there is little performance difference, so i have no problem agreeing there.


3. now where did you get the idea that the price is a big difference here? let me give you an example:

1 GB Corsair Value Ram: $202 @ zipzoomfly
1 GB (2x512) '' '': $158 @ zipzoomfly

you see right there its cheaper buying the split pack, and since s939 boards have 4 dimm slots, you can add another 1gb kit down the road for less money then the single stick. i dont know what ram you priced that was more expensive for a dual channel kit.

4. that would make sense if you knew amd was goign to transition all those 3700+ over to 90nm as well, becuase in a year youll have not only 90nm from 3000+ to 3800+, but youll also have dual core, so s939 would have the edge on this point if your trying to say upgrading on the s754 is equal to s939.


5. ok i dont know what your talking about here. a person has to oc an s939 board to get it up to speed? where did you hear that? thats just nuts. in fact the Asus A8V Deluxe 2.0 is a great choice and performance is great for a via based board, and I wouldnt discount it only for being via, ive put this in alot of systems and its performed excellently, its not that far behind the msi board performance wise anyway.

now i dont know where you get that the msi boards for s939 are problematic, ive heard all good things about people's experiences and it has the best feature set around, its nota bad option. heck there is even a value option in the asrock s939 board that runs around 80, so if you are strapped for cash, its still an option. i dont knwo where you get this s939 board are unreliable and underperformers notion, but i havent seen that.

6. thats funny lol, why is going s939 being 'sucked into the upgrade game'? i could see that if the person already had s754, i wouldnt suggest upgrading if they had s754 already, but if they are new to it, s939 is no crime in the least, and that has ntohing to do with sli or ddr2, i dont know why you bunch those all together.


there is nothing that says ram performs differnet on s754 or s939 as far as the latency goes. so you dont have to buy low latency ram to take advatange of dual channel on s939.

i really see that now as 90nm parts have come, s939 is quickly becoming the choice for someone wanitng into the athlon 64 scene now. now of course for the very budget oriented, the option of a 2800+ or sempron on say the chaintech vnf3-250 for s754 is a great choice too. I dont think s754 is fianished, im just saying there sint relaly as much seperating the two as there was.
 

El_Jefe_77

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2004
141
0
18,680
first off:
"1. s939 does NOT cost mroe then s754 now. Look on new egg, an s939 90nm 3000+ costs $169, right in line with the s754 model, so that debunks your first point."
- This chip is SLOWER than the 3000 a64 normal, it goes at 1.8. you need the 3200 version, the 2.0 90nm chip to go faster and break away from old speeds.
- you dont need to bother with great fast memory on a 754 system at all, theres no point to it really, and it doesnt give any noticable advantage, so in the end, youll be spending more for the 939 system which takes use of it.
-also, you wont be upgrading that board, which is 40 dollars at least more than whatever in the 754 version is.
- when the new generation of chips come out, youll want SLI, pci-e, and ddr2. Nothing has it yet at all, and, on top of that, the current 3500 will be dirt cheap by then, youll want a new chip, youll want the new features, and basically, nothing on your board besides the old 1.8 ghz chip will be transfering to the new system, no point in it as nothing tops out the current 754 with a simple 2.2 ghz chip on it.

plus 90nm doesnt have its SSE things on it like its supposed to, plus it runs hotter for no reason at all.

I want people to realize that all they need is a simple setup, and a nice video card to take them a year till dual core comes out.

oc'ing an xp-m 2500 still is cheapest setup however, but for out of the box, the a64 3200 2.2ghz pimps things out.
 

trooper11

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2004
758
0
18,980
hotter for no reaosn at all huh?

<A HREF="http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/7417" target="_new">http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/7417</A>

the 3000+ is slower speed, but it doesnt perform worse, in fact the numbers are equal overall, so i dont knwo where your getting your info from.

you dont nee dot bother with great fast speed on s939 either, why do you keep harping on that? low latency is a plus sure, but regular value ram, tliek i posted, i actually gave oyu pricing to prove it, will work fine and sitll take advantage of dual channel the same.

i showed you prices, so you show me prices for ram, cause i dont see it.

upgrading the board when? a person choosing between s939 and s754 will have to buy a board either way. your 40 dollar thing is out there in left field, 40 dollars comapred to what? the chaintech vnf3-250 compared to an asus av8? of course, you knwo why, features....

compare say the msi k8n neo versus the k8n neo 2 in pricing
$110 - $135, so a difference of 25, not 40

asus k8v/a8v - $115 - $ 130, even less difference at $15

why will someone want sli when new chipsets come, is someoen forcing them to buy two cards? no, and its not like most average buyers would buy two cards anyway, so thats not much of a point.

why do you keep goign back wiht the upgrading things.

''nothing on your board besides the old 1.8 ghz chip will be transfering to the new system, no point in it as nothing tops out the current 754 with a simple 2.2 ghz chip on it.''

what does that mean? on an s754 board you cna at best go up to 2.4 ghz, while on s939 youll have the sky's limit, well above that, at the very least youll have 2.8ghz available to you, but we all know there will be more
 

pat

Expert
I'd rather go with socket 754 with simple mature boards than going with socket 939 with its problematics range of board. PCIe, SLI,..., are for sure nice tech but I rather give them some time to mature and get down in price.

For now, and for 2 years, socket 754 is a simple and inexpensuve way to upgrade. In two years, that will be another story. I'd rather have inexpensive parts now and upgrade them all that having expensive parts now and be forced to keep it even if there is better tech available only because I've spend that much on this hardware that it would be a waste of money to trash or sell them...

-Always put the blame on you first, then on the hardware !!!
 

gothgar

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2004
3
0
18,510
I say go with s754, because, honestly, when you upgrade your CPU to say a 4400+, even if it is a soc 939 still, the chipsets are going to be so advanced as to what they are now, you are going to upgrade the mobo too, so your argument about upgradablilty is completely nil

OMG WTF A64NC DFI LP
 

trooper11

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2004
758
0
18,980
what is the price difference? where is this coming from? i just spelled out that basically, for similar features, your talking $15-25 dollars difference.

and board reliablilty, where has this been? i would liek to know where all the complaints are for the s939 boards out now, such as the asus a8v rev. 2 and the msi k8n neo2. whats your definition of maturity? you dont count nforce 3 250 as being mature? you can say waht you want about value, but reliabilty is equal.
 

pat

Expert
mostly BIOS and install problems. No big deal for advanced users, but for simple users, that means something.

As for maturity..well nforce3 250 is built after 150 which was an immature chipset. Just like VIA with their "A" revision.

MSI was plagued with BIOS problems and still have some problems. And since there is not that much board for that socket, well options are limited and prices are still high compare to the wider choice with socket 754. What if you want just a plain board without any extras?

I'm not bashing socket 939. There is a demand for it and that good. But recomending it to everyone is not necessary. Having socket 939 is like having a sport car. That nice, but not that usefull to everyone.

Sometime, people recommends to others system that they dream to have. well, that always nice to spend other's money ..



-Always put the blame on you first, then on the hardware !!!
 

El_Jefe_77

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2004
141
0
18,680
Yes, Agreed.

I wanted to put a hault to the idea that people have to, or that it is best that they should go buy the latest and best for some particularly USEFULL reason.

There isnt any useful reason to use 939 over 754, as well, there isnt a game or app that goes too slow on a 754 system that anyone can seem to come up with. Some say farcry at big AA and resolutions, i say this about that: farcry is just a game to push systems, I havent heard of a ONE person at my computer store who plays it, and I talk about games all day long. That's just a side note observation though :)

Going back to what we were talking about, I agree also with the idea that chipsets are comming out for pci-e. Anyone noticed besides me that this just gives the vid-card the new bus? Kinda useless and immature, yes? Of course it is. agp isnt near being maxed, pci-e doesnt offer anything, all your expansion things are on pci, hd's, non-integrated ram so far, etc. No dual core, we all could go on.

THG is all about reviews, suggestions, clear perspective and help. We arent a 12 year old UBER HAXORZ place, if we were, I wouldnt have bothered writing this forum entry after a daily consideration and readings over the past 2 months now.
 

trooper11

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2004
758
0
18,980
well then those problems have been awfully isolated from all the boards ive purchased and isntlaled, known have had such bios issues. granted i never used any of the rev. 1 asus boards, but still, im not having the level of problems you are describing.

im just going by my expeirence, maybe ive just gotten lucky, but i doubt that if it was so widespread and immature.

if the nforce 3250 chipset is so immature, would you also say you wouldnt suggest anyone by the 250 chipset on s754? that would mean your saying the chaintech board isnt a good buy, and that board is excellent with its $80 price for value and performance.
 

trooper11

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2004
758
0
18,980
wow i cant belive you cant see any useful reason to go s939 at all, you must be missing a few things.

for the value system, s754 wins hands down. for the performance system, its equal, with s939 having a bit of an edge and since now prices are NOT a big factor, like ive stated several times in this thread.

you make it sound liek s939 is only good when pci-e is out, which i say is not true at all. heck, nforce 4 will even have an agp version, would you still debunk that as useless?

here is how i look at it. if a person right now is considering an athlon 64 system, then they are looking at s754 or s939. sure s754 isnt dead by anymeans, but i laid out how the pricing for compareable systems works out to minimal difference in price. now if thiere were 90nm parts on s754, youd have a good point that there is basiclaly no reason for most people, but thats nto the case.

90nm parts made s939 affordable almost overnight, since mtoherbaord prices are already very close to compareable s754 motherbaords and the ram prices will eb the exact same for the ram youd buy on an s754. i ask you to tell me a useful reason to buy s754 over s939 for the non value buyer.

Are you saying you base all this on 15-25 dollars? if so then ok, your intitled to make that a big deal and sure its possible it will come down to that for some people.

i dont think im crazy here in recommeneding s939 now that prices have come very much inline with s754. i dont think im doing it becuase its liek some dream system or somehting lol. i also think the whole s939 being the latest and greatest charge is abit far fetched considering its been out for several months and even more price cuts are coming by the 17th of this month with the 4000+ and fx55 coming.

I just think s939 can be a mainstream choice now that cpu prices have fallen, that was always the big draw back. but, having said all of that, a person that does buy s754 wont be sad or dissapointed at all, im just pointing out that s939 has reached a level that it competes directly with s754.
 

aLawLz187

Distinguished
Feb 21, 2004
118
0
18,680
problematic boards? msi k8n neo2 platinum is a problematic board? maybe for u it is but mine is rock solid. plus 939 > 754 and 939 looks cooler than 754... oh and everything trooper said ;-)

AMD Athlon 64 3500+ | MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum | 1gb Kingston HyperX PC4000 [2x512] | ATI 9600 Pro [upgrade soon] | Sound Blaster Audigy LS | Samsung 120gb hd
 

DonnieDarko

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2004
653
0
18,980
i built my computer when s939 wasn't out for quite a few months. Do I think I should of waited? Possibly. So far I haven't been held back at the least. and probably wiln't for awhile. I figure I'll eventually update my gfx card and processor(probably when 3700+ drops a few hundred :wink: ) sometime next year and i'll be set for awhile. Would I recommend s754 for a gamer right now? probably not. I will get in total of good 2-3 years out of this pc while people building a s754 system now would only get 1-2. I think if I were to build a new system now, I would probably wait for the nforce4 chipset for s939. Then I would have the best future proof available.

Watch out for the <b><font color=red>bloody</font color=red></b> Fanboys!

AMD64 2800+ :: MSI Neo-Fis2r :: 1024mb Kingmax ddr400 :: Sapphire 9800pro 128mb :: 10K WD Raptor

Addicted, finally.
 

El_Jefe_77

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2004
141
0
18,680
The current gains are tiny from pc to pc, dual core is going to change that, its goign to be p3 700 to p4 1.8
although, my is better than both, but that doesnt count into predictions as amd only puts out a crap chip as the newly modded value line chip. (sempron)
 

Cybercraig

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,058
0
19,780
farcry is just a game to push systems, I havent heard of a ONE person at my computer store who plays it, and I talk about games all day long.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Where is your store, Patagonia? FarCry has some of the best graphics I have ever seen in a FPS. Better than Doom3. Stress? The nephew's A64-3000 runs it well with a 9600XT. It hasn't been pushed like Doom3, but it will push your rig just as hard. Love it!

Abit IS7 - 3.0C @ 3.6ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
 

pauldh

Illustrious
I disagree that S939 doesn't have upgrade advantages over S754. Much faster chips are planned, and as i said, I would wager that in the future a 3800+ will be cheaper than a 3700+ because the top chip always stay up in price over a midrange. The fact that much faster S939 chips are coming makes it a definate the 3800+ will drop. Meanwhile all A64 2800+ - 3200+ S754 owners will be trying to grab the remaining 3700+ upgrades, so prices will stay a little higher.

Anyway, it's funny you say this:
the top chip is 3700 for 754, same as the 3800 just not dual channel, both are way over what you need, so in a year, if not enough speed, just get a 3700
when in another thread you said this:

I have to disagree with the guy who thinks that you can ever have a computer thats fast enough for a fps.
Which is it? Can't have a fast enough computer for FPS (Pro A64 comment made in the HL2 discussions meant to mean forget a Pentium 4 even though it scores = fps at gaming resolution's), or A64 3700 and 3800+ are way over what you need, so just upgrade to a 3700+ when you need that kind of speed. (why S754 is better to go with than S939 because of plenty of speed for the future either way)

I can say that you are entitled to your opinion either way, but you can't claim both at the same time. "Never have a fast enough...way over what you need" These two can't exist together.



ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 1GB Corsair XMS 4000 Pro Series, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt
 

endyen

Splendid
Which is it? Can't have a fast enough computer for FPS (Pro A64 comment made in the HL2 discussions meant to mean forget a Pentium 4 even though it scores = fps at gaming resolution's), or A64 3700 and 3800+ are way over what you need, so just upgrade to a 3700+ when you need that kind of speed. (why S754 is better to go with than S939 because of plenty of speed for the future either way)
Gees Paul, be serious. I got an A64 3200 a short time ago. There is no way I would have spent an extra dime to get the 3500, and anything above that is just too screaming expensive. ( by my standards that is) I buy the most fps I can with the $ I have. This is a universal truth, I think. Are you saying that to exclude a statememnt to that effect makes you a liar?
 

pauldh

Illustrious
<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18887" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18887</A>

Price cuts are coming and S939 and S754 are priced identical for the affordable chips. We shall see if this carries over to the consumer also.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 1GB Corsair XMS 4000 Pro Series, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
1. 939 costs more
It performs better.
2. 754 does not have any known slow downs in the slightest for any game mentioned in any forum I have read.
Does S939?? Oh yeah, S939 is still faster.
3. 939 requires dual channel to be worth it, requiring more cash down for memory. You either get a gig or a 512 setup at first, either one isnt as fast as getting 2 gigs. 754 you could get 1 gig chip at normal latency and then another one in a year if needed, thats a lot of ram for 40% less cost.
512x2 costs less than 1024x1 and performs a lot better. Not to mention you can upgrade to 512x4 later and still outperform 1024x2 (for a lower price).
4. the top chip is 3700 for 754, same as the 3800 just not dual channel, both are way over what you need, so in a year, if not enough speed, just get a 3700 for much cheaper than current.
3700+ is THE top chip for S754 (for forever)...FX57 is THE top chip for S939 (dual cores might make it to S939...so might an FX59).
5. One of the best current boards for speed is MSI. msi is problematic, any other board you have to OC it to up the mem to 1000 fsb, 754 has mature boards that are all even hitters.
Or you could wait a few weeks for a PCIe board...or for the S939 DFI board that has the same abilities and features as their S754 board...or you could go with the MSI and be problem free (if you aren't a n00b).
6. You wont be sucked into the upgrade game, ditching your board for useless sli pci-e, ditching your board for ddr2 and ram as well, youll just chill and play your games at full speed.
If you're that worried about money, you PROBABLY aren't concerned with the top of the line S939 systems....however if you get one of the new lower price S939s, it allows you upgrade to a 4200+ in the coming months. BTW, SLI isn't useless and DDR2+A64 is a very bad combo (A64s don't need bandwidth now [dual cores might], they need the lowest latencies possible).
Price difference between the two setups is a lot more than you would assume, cuz you want to get the better ram as well to make it really work nice.
Yeah...but even a bad RAM'd S939 system will still outperform an S754 (it does want more bandwidth than S754 can provide, but it doesn't need the full DC DDR400).

Anyway, IMO, S939 is definitely the way to go if you aren't looking to build a budget-system-with-no-upgradable-future. If you are, though, S754 (especially the Semprons) are probably the way to go.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

pauldh

Illustrious
Where in the world does the liar statment come from? I am honestly not following a word of what you are saying. You must not understand the situation. Where does your A64 3200+ fall in line? I would rather have an Socket 939 A64 3200+ now over a S754 3200+ if prices are about the same. Would't you? Which would give you the better upgrade path if you ever want more speed? It's quite obvious. 3700+ vs. FX55 or 4400+


Anyway, this is all beside the point. I am just pointing out a complete contratiction made by the same person that has nothing to do with your A64 3200+. Yet both were made to back up his particular position at the time. He said in a post responding to something I said that you can not have a fast enough system for fps(first person shooter) games. Anyway, Then he goes on to say here that A64 3700+ is overkill now and plenty of upgrade room for the future. As if FX55 or A64 4400+ are basically no reason to think S939 is more upgradeable in the future.

All I am asking is how can you state both of these things when they completely contradict each other. It's like saying you can't have enough horsepower in a sportscar, and then saying who needs the 300HP V8 in the new mustang when the V6 is overkill.

You be the judge:
Read <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=190512#190512" target="_new">THIS</A>
and #4 in
<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=190538#190538" target="_new">THIS</A>, and tell me if they can exist together?

Never mind, the easy obvious answer is no.

I am wondering how you can 1)never have a computer that is fast enough for firstperson shooters, AND 2)think that A64 3700+ is way more than what you need, AND That 3) in one year the 3700+ will still be plenty of speed to not warrant that S939 has more to offer down the road.

If you can't have a fast enough system, then nothing can be considered way more than you need, and 3700+ can't be considered enough a year from now if "you can never have a fast enough system for fps games".

Following this? :smile:


ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 1GB Corsair XMS 4000 Pro Series, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt
 

El_Jefe_77

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2004
141
0
18,680
The rediculous impulsive urge to have more speed can never be satiated by common sense. Therefore, you can never have enough fps in a fps. (ironic how its called the same, hm.)
If you have this issue in life, thats ok, explain to others how they do not need to spend their cash so randomly and without reasonable cause. I say again, this is supposed to be a suggestion place, not a place where people use terms like n00b and such.
ALL of the top end chips for amd64 go at EXACTLY the same clock speed. its just a matter of dual channel memory then, which doesnt make or break any system ever, whatsoever, not in the slightest. If the bottleneck is there, you need to do a much bigger upgrade than faster ram. Telling people to get a 90nm 939 OMG!!! ITZ SO UBER!!! is like um yeah, not a good thing, it's not even a complete chip yet. They will be wasting money possibly (seems like difinitely) on a 90nm that is about to undergo another revision.

I stand by my case that 939 is a useless luxury that offers no upgradability as the boards have to be completely overhauled, and by that time, a 939 2.2 or 2.4 ghz chip will be fairly inexpensive. The ram will be as well, and, it will outperform whatever anyone buys now, and be cheaper overall. I know that sounds like just an example of how things go in tech world, but really, they dont. Intel478 works awesome for a few years now, sometimes, things mature and all one needs is a slightly new processor and video card to get up to max speed, vs a whole new system thats basically in a beta stage.
I dont see anyone complaining about their kv8 pro Abit board in forums, yet more people have them than the MSI's, the ones people are complaining about.

"Where is your store, Patagonia? FarCry has some of the best graphics I have ever seen in a FPS." I have no idea where this is, oddly. I work in New York City, and yes, not a soul plays farcry besides testing their system if they enjoy nvidia products. Doom, sims, vietnam, quake, unreal, thats about it, then rpgs and sports games. madden of course.


Well I am done with this thread, I just tried to empower some people reading this to not fret and just buy 754 as well, its faster than anything affordable in an intel comparison, and anything in that comparison is more speed than needed for anything out there.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by el_jefe_77 on 10/06/04 01:17 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

endyen

Splendid
W ell, I have the socket 754 3200. I chose to get that, because I like first person shooters, and it gives the best framerates for my $. That I could not have gotten a socket 939 board and chip with that money was an important factor. That the closest perf chip, in 939 would cost 2 day's pay, for 0 better perf in game was a biggy. The difference between my 3200 @ 2.45 and what I could get from a 3500, is nil.
In Cananda, 939 boards cost 25% more than 754.
What I am saying is, I bought my chip for max fps in fps.
Now it is true that, in the near future, I will pass this system along, and go socket 939, but for what is available, right now, right here, and for those $, the 754 and 3200 are the best choice. (by the way, afaik 3200s for socket 939 are due to be released in about 10 days, they will not likely OC as high as the 754 edition, nor perform as well in games)
According to this <A HREF="http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_9487%5E9500,00.html" target="_new">http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_9487%5E9500,00.html</A> the difference between 3400 to 3500 and 3700 to 3800 is <1%. Not the price though.
What else do I have to look forward to ?
PCI-exp? More intel crap being jamed down my throat ala RIMM.
SLI? I cant bring myself to buy a high end graphics card, and you want me to buy 2.
Dual core? That should slow down gaming for a year or 2.
Faster chips? I'm at 2.45 now, can probably get to 2.6, with a decent hsf, if I loose the amd TIM, and add a little to the 1.49v I'm running at now. When will Amd catch up?
Dual channel? Check the Doom3 scores comparing DC impact on Amd chips. Doom loves mem bandwidth.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by endyen on 10/06/04 05:05 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

pauldh

Illustrious
I think you are getting defensive about your own system. And you know what, you made the same choice I would have. No way would I have bought the 3500+ over the 3200+... too much money. I look for value like you. Even now I wouldn't personally hesitate to buy a neo platinum or DFI Lanparty S754 and an A64 3200+. However, now that slower/cheaper S939 chips are out and not just a 3500+, S939 is looking better and better to even value minded people. I think this whole topic started here is off track. No reason to buy S939 unless you care nothing of value? That's his opinion fine, but it's not mine and is worthy of challenging. Remember, that is the reason I posted in the first place.

But see, my beef wasn't with you or your system, or even with an A64 3200+ NOT being fast enough.(actually I stated the opposite) Go back to the other link(thread) I gave and we were talking about how the P4's basically scored identical in HL2 as the A64 when set to playable settings. Although they benchmark higher at 800x600, they won't game higher when reslutions and details are set to how we will be gaming. Also mentioned was how an Athlon XP can remain totally playable at 1600x1200 8X/4X. He jumped in to disagree and state that you can't have a fast enough system, despite scores showing you can. Anyway, It was with contradictory statements by someone else, basically that I took to say P4 isn't fast enough for first person shooters... you can't have enough speed. Then on to say the opposite here. It had nothing to do with your A64 3200+ not being fast enough, nor the best high end buy. It was a great choice and I would make the same. But nonetheless, back to the point...I can't believe you still don't see the contradiction or just chose to stay on your own agenda to defend your system instead. When the truth is, I doubt I'd build a faster setup than yours now because I too am value minded.


ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 1GB Corsair XMS 4000 Pro Series, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt