NEW PC PENTIUM 4 ,2.53Ghz or AMD ATHLON 2700
NEW PC PENTIUM 4 ,2.53Ghz or AMD ATHLON 2700
Author
Discussion

sb930turbo

Original Poster:

3,372 posts

290 months

Sunday 12th January 2003
quotequote all
What would you recommend chaps,for allround Home/Business,gaming use?
Steve

chris watton

22,547 posts

287 months

Sunday 12th January 2003
quotequote all
Hi Steve,
I work from home on my PC, mainly CAD stuff, and rendering. I opted for an Athlon when I chose the specs for my new PC as they do seem to perform better than the Intel chips.
It may be worth specifying 512 MG of DDRam, coupled with at least a good 64MB DDram graphics card and at least a 60GB hard disk. With that set up, you can't go far wrong.
I had mine made up by Campus Computers in Bromsgrove, and the price was very good, at least £200 cheaper for any other similar spec'd PC.
As I said, it's used mainly for work, doing at times, complex CAD jobs, and thus far it has been excellent.The games are great too,,, especially medal of honour!!!

Chris

prince_charming

2,646 posts

296 months

Sunday 12th January 2003
quotequote all
I think either of those is going to be great for many years to come. Personally if I was buying now I'm not sure I would buy brand new as it's a gutting feeling when your PC is out of date in a few months time. It also seems that the hardware is way ahead of software in terms of performance, so that even my year old PC (Athlon 1.33GHz) is still plenty powerful enough for the latest games.

Bloody Medal of Honor - can't get up that Omaha beach....

chris watton

22,547 posts

287 months

Sunday 12th January 2003
quotequote all
You are right Prince, about the power of the PCs and software requirements. Even the cheapest are more than powerful enough for most home use tasks.
I too was stuck on Omaha Beach for a while, you need to run and hide under the tank traps until the shooting stops. Once it seems quiet, run to the next tank trap, and so on, until you reach the end of the beach,. The next stage however is a bitch too!!! But after that, it's a lot of fun!! How old am I!!!!!! lol
Oh yes, I have just completed the add on, Spearhead, that was good, but not worth £20 for 4 hours gaming!!

Right back to my accounting for the year!!!

Chris

dcb

6,053 posts

292 months

Sunday 12th January 2003
quotequote all

What would you recommend chaps,for allround Home/Business,gaming use?
Steve


All you tell us the processor speed and type.
Hardly enough to make a rational choice.

On that basis, I'd go for the Athlon.

My golden rule of shopping is:

Never every buy the most popular product.

Always buy the 3rd or 4th most popular,
to avoid suppliers creating a monopoly.

sb930turbo

Original Poster:

3,372 posts

290 months

Sunday 12th January 2003
quotequote all

dcb said:

What would you recommend chaps,for allround Home/Business,gaming use?
Steve


All you tell us the processor speed and type.
Hardly enough to make a rational choice.

On that basis, I'd go for the Athlon.

My golden rule of shopping is:

Never every buy the most popular product.

Always buy the 3rd or 4th most popular,
to avoid suppliers creating a monopoly.



dcb,
120 mb HDD,512 ddr memory,Nvidia 128 graphics card.


kevinday

13,766 posts

307 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all
Nvidia Geforce 4 is a must, but better the Geforce 5 when available. As to the rest of the spec, looks good, either processor will be fine for most purposes.

plotloss

67,280 posts

297 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all
If the vast majority of your PC work is leisure and general computing but the odd business task of Word or Excel or a database too then the Athlon wins hands down.

The only percieveable increase in performance you are going to get is certain business applications that have been compiled to take advantage of the Intel extended instruction set. Whilst this technology does exist and has done for a while very few companies actually do it because they dont want to tie to a platform. Autodesk are one of the only companies to compile for performance on Intel chips.

HTH

Matt.

andyf007

863 posts

285 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all

120 mb HDD,512 ddr memory,Nvidia 128 graphics card.



Could do with a larger HDD

Generally matching the motherboard and processor is the key to performance. AMD or Intel on the wrong board means poor performance regardless.

Andy

neil_cardiff

17,113 posts

291 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all
Has anyone got a ATI Radeon 9700 Pro, and if so how good are they really supposed to be?

I'm getting one to go with my GeForce 3 Ti500 - even though I know it's still a top notch card.

plotloss

67,280 posts

297 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all

neil_cardiff said: Has anyone got a ATI Radeon 9700 Pro, and if so how good are they really supposed to be?

I'm getting one to go with my GeForce 3 Ti500 - even though I know it's still a top notch card.


Its supposedly quicker than a GeForce4 Ti4600 by all accounts.

As an alternative though Novatech have just started selling a 4800 based card which is quicker again than the 4600 and at 128mb its only £174 which seems like a bargain...

Matt.

Bodo

12,557 posts

293 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all
Steve, never buy the latest hardware, as it is the most expensive. Not only absolute, but relative, too.
Let me draw an example on AMD Athlon XPs:

2800 is €480; €0,21/MHz
2700 is €390; €0,18/MHz
2600 is €309; €0,14/MHz
2400 is €190; €0,09/MHz
2200 is €150; €0,08/MHz
2100 is €100; €0,06/MHz
2000 is €85; €0,05/MHz
1900 is €80; €0,05/MHz
1800 is €70; €0,05/MHz

As you can see, they're divided into three groups:
1) the €0,05
2) the <€0,10
3) the >€0,10

Whereas group one is best value (performance) for money.

I'd take the 2100, because the differences below are only minor between the different models (€5...€15) and very high above (€40...€90).
It took only eight months for the 2100 to drop from €370 to €100; and so are (will be) all others.

Bodo

neil_cardiff

17,113 posts

291 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all

plotloss said:

neil_cardiff said: Has anyone got a ATI Radeon 9700 Pro, and if so how good are they really supposed to be?

I'm getting one to go with my GeForce 3 Ti500 - even though I know it's still a top notch card.


Its supposedly quicker than a GeForce4 Ti4600 by all accounts.

As an alternative though Novatech have just started selling a 4800 based card which is quicker again than the 4600 and at 128mb its only £174 which seems like a bargain...

Matt.


Ahem cough...

This is a 'minor' configuration change on a pc I'm setting up so it's not costing me a thing - I was just wondering whether anyones fiddled with one - apparantly they suck so much juice they need their own power supply!

If anyone is interested in a GeForce Ti500 I may swayed to let it go for a sensible price...

neil_cardiff

17,113 posts

291 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all

Bodo said: Steve, never buy the latest hardware, as it is the most expensive. Not only absolute, but relative, too.
Let me draw an example on AMD Athlon XPs:

2800 is €480; €0,21/MHz
2700 is €390; €0,18/MHz
2600 is €309; €0,14/MHz
2400 is €190; €0,09/MHz
2200 is €150; €0,08/MHz
2100 is €100; €0,06/MHz
2000 is €85; €0,05/MHz
1900 is €80; €0,05/MHz
1800 is €70; €0,05/MHz

As you can see, they're divided into three groups:
1) the €0,05
2) the <€0,10
3) the >€0,10

Whereas group one is best value (performance) for money.

I'd take the 2100, because the differences below are only minor between the different models (€5...€15) and very high above (€40...€90).
It took only eight months for the 2100 to drop from €370 to €100; and so are (will be) all others.

Bodo



Dontcha just love Moore's Law!

pdv6

16,442 posts

288 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all

neil_cardiff said:If anyone is interested in a GeForce Ti500 I may swayed to let it go for a sensible price...


Is that a GF3, Neil?
{edited to add:} DOH! Just re-read the previous post. Ignore the question please! (I'm on the look-out for a cheap GF4ti)

BTW, GeForceFX due out soon. Apparently should wipe the floor with the Radeon9700 (4Gpix/sec as opposed to 2.6Gpix/sec).

>> Edited by pdv6 on Monday 13th January 14:07

pdv6

16,442 posts

288 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all
Back to the original question:

I'd go for the Athlon, personally.

Also, for 'all round home/business use' its not worth paying for the top-of-the-line kit.

If you really need that model, wait a month or 2 and save £100's.

If you really need the PC right now, buy the best you can afford (i.e. not the best that money can buy).

Fatboy

8,267 posts

299 months

Monday 13th January 2003
quotequote all

I opted for an Athlon when I chose the specs for my new PC as they do seem to perform better than the Intel chips.

Funnily enough I've noticed (for real number crunching under Linux)) that the intel chips are way ahead of comparably clock speed Athlons... but not many people use that sort of number crunching software at home. For general Office/windows apps I've not really noticed any real difference..

outlaw

1,893 posts

293 months

Tuesday 14th January 2003
quotequote all

Fatboy said:

I opted for an Athlon when I chose the specs for my new PC as they do seem to perform better than the Intel chips.

Funnily enough I've noticed (for real number crunching under Linux)) that the intel chips are way ahead of comparably clock speed Athlons... but not many people use that sort of number crunching software at home. For general Office/windows apps I've not really noticed any real difference..


go for a 2200 amd and unlock it
get one with the newest date on it you can
and plenty of fast mem 512k plus

and for serous number crunching if you douning it on a single chip pc your wasiting your time.