AMD ATHLON 64 3400+ Processor

[riTuaL]

I'm looking to get a new PC very soon for college, and for gaming , so I have been heading more towards AMD than Intel. Does this processor choice seem wise? I've been hearing that the AMD chips are not as fast as the Pentium chips. Could someone with a good knowledge of processors fill me in on wether AMD is a good choice and will this specific chip run my HL2 at peak performance?

 

[Asus]

AMD 3400+ is a good solid chip. I would suggest the 3200+ or 3000+ though. Save money on the CPU and put it toward other parts of the system if needed. Thats my opinion.

Any Athlon 64 CPU will fly in gaming benchmarks. Benchies

 

[riTuaL]

Thanks alot Asus, I'll take your word for it, you seem to be one of the hardware Gurus around here

 

[The Terminator]

Hes the man.

 

[downthesun]

AMD 3400+ is a good solid chip. I would suggest the 3200+ or 3000+ though. Save money on the CPU and put it toward other parts of the system if needed. Thats my opinion.

Any Athlon 64 CPU will fly in gaming benchmarks. Benchies

Don't recommend him the AMD Ahtlon 64 3000+! That thing only has a 512KB L2 cache as compared to the 3200+'s 1MB L2 cache. :hmph:

 

[gh0st]

They are both pretty equal. He's recomending that if price is an issue in regard with the other components, go with a 3000+. Its cache size is a non-issue.

 

[downthesun]

They are both pretty equal. He's recomending that if price is an issue in regard with the other components, go with a 3000+. Its cache size is a non-issue.

Cache size should be an issue for everyone. :stare:

 

[gh0st]

It should, but I think its better suited to people with a 5 line signiture of their computer specs

 

[downthesun]

It should, but I think its better suited to people with a 5 line signiture of their computer specs

Are you seriously going to hold that against me? :naughty:

 

[ACLeroK212]

Are you seriously going to hold that against me? :naughty:

signatures are only supposed to be four lines. not that i care, but just letting you know before one of the mods do.

 

[Daegon]

I think you can probably clean up your sig by removing some of the sundry information you copied and pasted from newegg. Lovely box by the way, your case is uglly tho.

 

[blackeye]

Asus on your benchies it shows that the athlon 64 3000 is faster then the pentium 4 3.4ghz. Would i be able to put a x800 xt in there and still be able to play at higher resolutions? Or would i not notice a difference from the x800 pro because its cpu limited? Just wondering becuase people have ben saying that you need a 3.4ghz cpu to use the x800 xt.

 

[Alig]

I would'nt say you need a 3.4ghz cpu to use an x800. Im using a 2.6XP+ @ 2.2ghz and with my x800pro and id hardly say 50fps in farcry at 6x aa 16x af is bad

@ downthesun : http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjI5 Theres your 512k cache A643000+ for £150 almost beating a £500 cpu with a bit of overclocking and cooling

 

[Asus]

This review may help.

My Athlon 64 3000+ can OC to 2.4GHz on stock cooling and voltage btw.
I recommend the A64 3000+ over the 3200+ because the extra money for the cache is not worth it IMO.
The cache does not give you a full 200+ rating over the 3000+.
IMO the 3200+ does indeed perform like a 3200+ part but I think the 3000+ performs like a 3100+ part so why pay extra when I can put that into my video card or memory?
They run at the same 2GHz with the only difference being 512KB vs 1024KB L2 cache. Clock speed is more important and if the 3000+ was a 1.8GHz part with 1MB L2 cache I wouldn't be saying this.

The 3400+ is a great unit. Just if you need to save money then you have other options.

 

[blackeye]

well i just put in my order today for the a64 3000 and a x800 pro. the x800 pro overclocks well so im not to worried the amount of pipelines. Besides ill probably upgrade summer 2005 when PCI exspress is performing well.