For those building new systems

C

Coma

Guest
I have seen quite a few threads here about people building systems. Just thought I'd throw out a thread urging you to wait a few weeks. This spring / summer is going to be crazy in terms of cool new hardware coming out.

Even if you are not a bleeding edge buyer, when the new stuff is released, the current high end stuff will come down in price.

Here is some of the stuff I am pretty excited about:

- Athlon 64 3500 - AMD's new 939 socket CPU
- nForce 3 250 Ultra or K8T890 - AMD 64 chipset with dual channel memory and PCI Express support.
- ATI X800 Ultra (R423) (PCI Express version)

Point being wait a little bit and it will be the perfect time to upgrade.
 
Hmm...will the 754 socket mobo be worthless for new CPUs?
 
Yea it sucks for the people who bought the AMD 64's now, they have to upgrade both their board and cpu.
 
Here is a handy guide to let you know what the general timetable for hardware and software releases.

- New AMD socket 939 (couple of months)
- PCI Express (4 months or so)
- BTX Form Factor (6 months or so)
- DDR 2 Memory (9 months or so)
- The end of the world (12 months or so)
- Half-Life 2 (15 months or so)
- Duke Nukem Forever (give or take a millennia or two)

As you can see, it is nearly impossible to future proof your PC. If feel you can get a great deal on a PC, go ahead and and buy it. Otherwise you will still be in this forum 6 months later trying to figuring what PC componenets to buy.
 
you're not excited about the 6x00 series video cards? BTX form factor?

Fact is, everyhting is always changing. you can't sjut sit there and say "oh, i'll get the best when it comes out" cause in a few months or a year, there'll be soemthing newer and better.
 
blahblahblah said:
Here is a handy guide to let you know what the general timetable for hardware and software releases.

- New AMD socket 939 (couple of months)
- PCI Express (4 months or so)
- BTX Form Factor (6 months or so)
- DDR 2 Memory (9 months or so)
- The end of the world (12 months or so)
- Half-Life 2 (15 months or so)
- Duke Nukem Forever (give or take a millennia or two)

As you can see, it is nearly impossible to future proof your PC. If feel you can get a great deal on a PC, go ahead and and buy it. Otherwise you will still be in this forum 6 months later trying to figuring what PC componenets to buy.
Click to expand...

The impression I got from the latest roadmap is that these will be available much sooner ie Q2 and Q3 2004.
 
Coma said:
The impression I got from the latest roadmap is that these will be available much sooner ie Q2 and Q3 2004.
Click to expand...

I built my computer last July and my computer was supposed to be drastically outdated by the time January came around. Guess what? Delays happened. HL2 was delayed. New video cards were delayed. DDR 2 was delayed. PCI Express was delayed.

And I am still expecting more delays. Even if a new tech. like PCI express is succesfully introduced, it will take several years for it to become common place.

As for HL2 I am being pessimistic. Even if they do "finish" the game during the summer, they will pull a Blizzard and keep the game until it is perfect.
 
PCI-Express should hit in June, which is two months. BTX will be a relief, but isn't really that significant...it's a form factor... DDR2 isn't very exciting so far and won't be for probably around a year. DDR (1) is keeping up nicely so far, and with lower latencies.

The only thing I would say to wait for is for the GeForce6 series cards to hit the shelves and/or for R420 to be launched, which should only be a couple weeks (early May).
 
I've been a little confused :(

is PCI-Express a new port? or is it the same port but works better?
 
Socket 754 will be around for longer but not as you know it.
As you know it, it will be good up to 3700+ or 3800+.
But after 939 comes out and beyond the 3700+/3800+ models for 754, it will be around for lower end CPUs.
939 will be the mid to high end range with a 2 main different CPU specs both with dual channel memory (A64 + A64 FX).
940 will of course be around since it will be still there for the Opteron series.

Nothing is going away completely for Athlon 64's.
Athlon XP is dead at 3200+ on socket A.
Pentium 4's (Prescott) are dead on their current socket up to 3.6ghz. After that it is a new socket.
Pentium 4's (Northwood) are probably stopping with 3.4ghz (already out and in more supply than Prescott. Look up "Dell/HP switch back" news).

Socket 754 has the highest upgradability right now (except 940).

BTX is Intel backed and not needed except for those 3.6ghz+ Prescotts but it is a good setup anyway.
BTX was summer but I think it was pushed back a bit to end of summer or fall. (Q3 I think).

PCI Express is summer. Nvidia's PCI Express card is coming Q3 and I think ATI's is as well. A lot of mainboards with PCI Express will be popping up somewhere between May and July.
 
if i bought a new motherboard which supported pci-express, would is till be able to use my old processor in it? its a p4 2.8c
 
Willber123 said:
if i bought a new motherboard which supported pci-express, would is till be able to use my old processor in it? its a p4 2.8c
Click to expand...

I think I remember hearing Intel say they didn't have any PCI-E boards planned for socket 478 chips.
 
I don't get the point of PCI-X or e or whatever it is....isnt AGP already at infinite speed?
 
Willber123 said:
what a stupid con to make you buy their new processors :angry:
Click to expand...
Actually it's smart.
If they started introducing boards with PCI Express and AGP along with all BTX/DDR2 on the same platform do you know how many different products between all the vendors there would be on the market? How complex it would be to troubleshoot?
They are making it as clear cut as they possibly can so there are few problems.

What I do think is dumb is Intel's new socket design.

Foxtrot said:
I don't get the point of PCI-X or e or whatever it is....isnt AGP already at infinite speed?
Click to expand...
It doesn't really have a short name but it would be PCI-E if it did. PCI-X is taken. ;)
Don't only look at bandwidth but also at the fact that PCI Express can send data both ways at the same time (Full Duplex)
4GB/sec up- 4GB/sec down for 16bit GFX PCI Express.

There are several things that could use the bandwidth in PCI Express now. One example is HDTV capture. We will see how it helps games. Probably a few percent or more depending on how bandwidth intensive it is.
---------------------------------
Parrallel sends data in one direction at a time.
All of the traces on the board hold back how high they can clock the bus.
Plus they way they wait for their turn to talk is slow.

Serial sends data up and down at the same time
Point to point connection with low latency. All the PCI Express slots that will replace PCI will connect to a switch that determines who talks. Very fast just like a network switch.

PCI - Parrellel
33mhz
32bit desktops, 64bit for workstations/servers
133MB/sec for desktops, 266MB/sec for workstations/servers

AGP - Parrellel
66mhz
32bit
1x = 266MB/sec
2x = 533MB/sec
4x = 1GB/sec
8x = 2.1GB/sec

PCI Express - Serial
250mhz up/250mhz down
1,2,4,8,16,32bit (PCI Express for gfx will be 16bit while 1-4 bits will replace the common PCI slots for now)
1bit = 500MB/sec
2bit = 1GB/sec
4bit = 2GB/sec
8bit = 4GB/sec
16bit = 8GB/sec
32bit = 16GB/sec

AGP maintains 32bit while the signal is modified to reach higher speeds, hence 1x,2x,4x,8x. Similar to how P4's FSB of 200mhz is quad pumped to get 800mhz. Intel didn't change the mhz or the bit's but rather the signaling.

PCI Express does not mess with the signal but how many bits it can send at once. That's why I list 1bit-32bit rather than 1x-32x.
 
Ohh thanks Asus, very educational :)
How does 400 FSB on an AMD system compare to 800 on a pentium? Would it be half the speed?
 
Foxtrot said:
Ohh thanks Asus, very educational :)
How does 400 FSB on an AMD system compare to 800 on a pentium? Would it be half the speed?
Click to expand...
AXP:
100mhz FSB double pumped (samples 2 times in a clock cycle) = 200 rated speed
133mhz FSB double pumped = 266 rated speed
166mhz FSB double pumped = 333 rated speed
200mhz FSB double pumped = 400 rated speed

P4:
100mhz FSB quad pumped (samples 4 times in a clock cycle) = 400 rated speed
133mhz FSB quad pumped = 533 rated speed
200mhz FSB quad pumped = 800 rated speed

The core clock may be the same but then the total theoretical bandwidth is half.
Basicly 200mhz quad pumped or 200mhz double pumped is saying it is theoretically like a 800mhz or 400mhz bus that samples once each clock cycle. Both send 32bits at a time btw.

The P4 is bandwidth hungry so when you bump the FSB up it will gain a lot of performance. Remember how the P4 finally took the lead when they went to 800FSB, compared to the 533, against the AXP.
The AXP does not need a lot of bandwidth to perform well and will only increase a little with a raised FSB compared to the P4.

Athlon 64's Hypertransport (replaced the FSB) is serial like PCI Express (Full Duplex).
1600mhz = 800mhz up/800mhz down
16bits up/16bits down
Same bandwidth as a 800FSB P4 (200mhz quad pumped) but more efficent since the P4/AXP can only send data in one direction while A64 can send in both. But memory bandwidth is off the HT link and on it's own direct link to the CPU, unlike the P4/AXP which have all data to the CPU going on the FSB (bottlenecked), which is key.

Socket 939 should have a 1ghz up/1ghz down HT (2ghz) @ 16bit up/16bit down.
 
Alright thanks, another quick question. Why is AMD(XP) cheaper than pentium(p4)?
 
because intel gouges their customers with inferior products.

its like asking why abercrombie and fitch costs more than some generic clothes.
 
Foxtrot said:
Alright thanks, another quick question. Why is AMD(XP) cheaper than pentium(p4)?
Click to expand...
Well Intel in general is more expensive. Isn't Sony?
But the 800FSB Pentium 4's have more performance compared to the Athlon XP's in a lot of applications. AMD adds a lot of value to that line by lowering the price since it is still comparable just not above the P4 800FSB line.
There are still apps where the Athlon XP shines, even over the P4 800FSB, but those are few. Games it can match (or pass, look at UT) a lot of times.

People still buy Athlon XP's because they like that platform as a whole (nForce2 boards with Soundstorm 6channel digital audio), the value or they like the OCing potential. The draw for OCing to the AXP Platform was that you could change FSB AND Multiplier while on a Intel system you could only change the FSB. AMD has since locked the desktop chips but people are now buying the Moble Athlon XP's since it's the same chip except picked out of the pile for their good properties for notebooks (they have unlocked multipliers and OC really well since they are the best of the pile for thermal properties).

Once Intel upped the 533 bus to 800, the P4 did very well.
But the 533 FSB P4's are still up there in price. Just don't look at the 533FSB models.

The Athlon XP and Pentium 4 platforms are very stable and mature.
Athlon 64 is not as mature but is doing very well for how new it is.
 
The technical reason lies in economics, but the real reason is that AMD is stupid.

The performance difference between AMD and Intel generally does not explain the price difference. The reason, is that AMD is trying to undercut Intel. They fail miserablely because people think that Price=Performance. Which is why AMD has a pretty difficult time turning a profit.
 
Is OCing worth it? Doesn't it void the warranty and shorten the life of your PC a lot?
 
It depends. Now of days, most gaming PC's are replaced within a couple of years so you will not notice the shorten life span of your PC.

Yes it voids the warranty.

You should only OC, if you 1) want to do it 2) Understand the risks involved 3) Know when to stop OC your rig 4) Don't complain if one of your components goes out.
 
Sounds like too much work/risk. What about softmodding? Does that void the warranty or shorten the lifespan?
 
AMD has had the same basic architecture for how many years?
5 years and still enough competition against Intel products.
Thunderbird, Palomino, Thoroughbred, Barton cores.
Athlon 64 is a different architecture but obviously all new architectures usually have elements from their previous ones that did well.

AMD has had the same socket allowing for upgradability for how many years?
5 years (Socket A) and that covers Durons and Athlons/Athlon XPs from 800mhz to 2.2ghz.

With each release, AMD's cpus run cooler and cooler.

I can say Intel is just about the opposite of AMD in those categories.

The reason is not because AMD is stupid but because AMD makes CPUs (and flash memory but that doesn't help here). Intel makes CPUs/Chipsets/Motherboards.
Intel has a very large R&D team that spends thousands and thousands.
And that AMD does not make very many CPUs in comparison to Intel. If they tried to market and sell their CPUs like Intel they would not beable to meet the demand.

I actually think that Intel is 'stupid'. And this is why I don't buy from them unless they actually have a product that stands out for my use.
They spend enough in R&D and sell enough through Dell,HP,Compaq etc to make up for it.
Look at Itanium (Itanic), P4 with it's high clock/poor performance increase and heat issues (which increases with each new core), and a number of other incidents along their history (E.I. Rambus).
I like Intel's manufacturing teams but their Management/Marketing/Design teams are terrible (except the P6 design which is the Pentium Pro and in the basic design for Pentium 3).

I like this Quote and it's talking about the Itanium. If I didn't know better I would have thought it was about the P4. hehe
Was from Bob C. who is the ex-head of the design team for the P6.
"Pick your vision and then chase it. You can't pick everything as your vision - that's a recipe for mediocrity.
If you can't pick your targets you're not going to hit any of them."
 
OC depends on how much risk you want to take. For the most part OCing can be safe if you do it right. But I personally don't OC because I can't afford my computer to stop working all of a sudden.

Softmodding I believe voids your warranty because you are changing the functionality of the hardware. I can't imagine OCing or soft modding would shorten the lifespan dramatically if you take proper cooling measures.
 
Yeah.
I'm not a big OCer. I OC just enough to remain stable with out having to change voltages.
The flexability to buy a 2500+ moble chip and flip the multiplier and FSB from 11x166 to 11x200 (2.2ghz 3200+) is great.
Most of the time you can do that without increasing voltages, especially with the moble version.

Any OCing does compromise the stability of your system.
Changing the voltage will make it even more unstable. Memory errors, crashes (system rebooting), or system life expectancy.
 
Asus - You are looking at it from a pure technological point of view. I am an accounting major in college, come to my side of the fence.

There is no doubt that Intel could crush AMD if it wanted to, but that would create a monopoly and you see what a PIA that is for Microsoft. AMD is shooting itself in the foot everytime they cut their prices on their processors. The average person thinks Price=Performance. Hell, I still think that a P4 @ 2.8 is faster than my Athlon XP 2800 just because it costs more money (even though they are equivalent).

I think intel is just playing dumb because they don't want to accidently kill AMD. Meanwhile AMD is doing its job of trying to commit suicide.
 
I agree.
AMD and Intel knows Price = Performance. No secrets.
Which is why AMD couldn't let their Athlon XP's be priced any higher and why they are holding their Athlon 64 prices high. ;)

Intel is not in danger of a monopoly (they were a few years back though) because they do not have the same practices as Microsoft and they can not 'crush' AMD.
Link

/goes off on a tangent
BTW Intel is basicly going to switch everything about their platform from what you know now. Intel knew their P4's high clock rate was basicly marketing since it didn't yeild enough performance increase and now it has to switch it around since they have hit a barrer with their design and heat.
P4 high clocked CPUs? gone traded for lower clocked, high IPC CPUs. Basicly the futures versoin of a P3 but with more bandwith.
Intel is scrambling to get out a X86-64bit version of their Xeons for Workstations/Servers.

Dell (Only sells Intel) is feeling the heat from the industry to sell AMD systems or at least parts since everyone, Sun,IBM, other vendors and even HP are selling AMD A64 desktops/Workstations/Servers are top of the line.

(AMD and IBM are in a partnership to share technology. AMD has built a new FAB to increase production and IBM is even manufacturing AMD CPUs.
AMD's current manufacturing proccess is it's own but the future .09 micron CPUs will be technology AMD and IBM jointly created to lower heat dissapation. IBM offered the same deal to Intel but Intel turned it down and now look at their heat issues. IBM trades technology rather than charging and Intel doesn't want to give IBM any more secrets since they are competitors in the Workstation/Server markets.)

Intel, in the future, is moving to a serial bus to replace the FSB and put the memory controller on the CPU...like the Athlon 64.

Athlon 64 gave Intel a run for their money. They are not going anywhere (Like 3DFX). But they do have to scramble to minimize market share loss. It will take more than a year to purpose a competitive line-up and longer to get it in production and on the shevles.

BTW how do you think they will explain to the average joe that the new CPU has lower mhz but higher performance? And with their new confusing model rating system based on numbers that mean nothing except low (300's), mid (500's), high (700's)...while Athlon still has a mhz based model rating.

The possitions will remain the same but the market share and strength will change for each company.
AMD will be second and Intel will be first for volume,marketshare and profit.
Neither will go away but AMD will be stronger and in all market segments (Moble,Desktop,Server,Workstation). Intel is the follower, for now.
 
Asus said:
I agree.
AMD and Intel knows Price = Performance. No secrets.
Which is why AMD couldn't let their Athlon XP's be priced any higher and why they are holding their Athlon 64 prices high. ;)

/rant
BTW Intel is basicly going to switch everything about their platform from what you know now. Intel knew their P4's high clock rate was basicly marketing since it didn't yeild enough performance increase and now it has to switch it around since they have hit a barrer with their design and heat.
P4 high clocked CPUs? gone traded for lower clocked, high IPC CPUs. Basicly the futures versoin of a P3 but with more bandwith.
Intel is scrambling to get out a X86-64bit version of their Xeons for Workstations/Servers.

Dell (Only sells Intel) is feeling the heat from the industry to sell AMD systems or at least parts since everyone, Sun,IBM, other vendors and even HP are selling AMD A64 desktops/Workstations/Servers are top of the line.

(AMD and IBM are in a partnership to share technology. AMD has built a new FAB to increase production and IBM is even manufacturing AMD CPUs.
AMD's current manufacturing proccess is it's own but the future .09 micron CPUs will be technology AMD and IBM jointly created to lower heat dissapation. IBM offered the same deal to Intel but Intel turned it down and now look at their heat issues. IBM trades technology rather than charging and Intel doesn't want to give IBM any more secrets since they are competitors in the Workstation/Server markets.)

Intel, in the future, is moving to a serial bus to replace the FSB and put the memory controller on the CPU...like the Athlon 64.

Athlon 64 gave Intel a run for their money. They ain't going anywhere (Like 3DFX). But they do have to scramble to minimize market share loss. It will take more than a year to purpose a competitive line-up and longer to get it in production and on the shevles.

BTW how do you think they will explain to the average joe that the new CPU has lower mhz but higher performance? And with their new confusing model rating system based on numbers that mean nothing except low (300's), mid (500's), high (700's)...while Athlon still has a mhz based model rating.

The possitions will remain the same but the market share and strength will change for each company.
AMD will be second and Intel will be first for volume,marketshare and profit.
Neither will go away but AMD will be stronger and in all market segments (Moble,Desktop,Server,Workstation). Intel is the follower, for now.
Click to expand...

I like this, you actually make some decent points. :cheers:

The AMD 64 has a decent performance advantage over the P4 but fails to charge a higher price for that extra performance. I think the new AMD 64's could easily demand a $50 premium just because it has the 64 bit in its name.

I think Intel is switching it up their number system to allow for the Pentium M to become more acceptable. Plus, they are moving some of the features of that chip on to desktop versions to reduce heat. The new numbering system that is going in place will cause some confusion. But, I expect some sort of new "intel backed" benchmark to come out to allow for comparision of performance.

Also, most people do not understand what is up with Intel and Dell. Basically they share very sensitive data to help plan for what processor and motherboards they need. This helps Intel and Dell keep inventories low and keep prices down as well. Intel would never allow AMD into the agreement because Intel would be worried that AMD would get sensitive information regarding discount pricing and other information.

I think Intel currently dominates the mobile and desktop environments. I think AMD is only gaining ground on the Server/Workstation areas because Intel is waiting for the Xeon to completely run out of gas.
 
blahblahblah said:
I like this, you actually make some decent points. :cheers:

The AMD 64 has a decent performance advantage over the P4 but fails to charge a higher price for that extra performance. I think the new AMD 64's could easily demand a $50 premium just because it has the 64 bit in its name.
Click to expand...
AMD probably could demand a 50$ premium. Obviously those who build systems for themselves wouldn't like that especially when Windows XP 64-bit edition isn't even out. But that hardly matters since they sell more to OEM Vendors.


blahblahblah said:
I think Intel is switching it up their number system to allow for the Pentium M to become more acceptable. Plus, they are moving some of the features of that chip on to desktop versions to reduce heat. The new numbering system that is going in place will cause some confusion. But, I expect some sort of new "intel backed" benchmark to come out to allow for comparision of performance.
Click to expand...
That could be. I think it has a little more to do with preparing customers with the system for when they switch to lower clocked parts. To get away from mhz as a rating and away from being compared to AMD's rating system.
But you are right. It's also a big plus since it separates different levels for their platforms.
But it's just plain confusing until people get used to it.


blahblahblah said:
Also, most people do not understand what is up with Intel and Dell. Basically they share very sensitive data to help plan for what processor and motherboards they need. This helps Intel and Dell keep inventories low and keep prices down as well. Intel would never allow AMD into the agreement because Intel would be worried that AMD would get sensitive information regarding discount pricing and other information.
Click to expand...
I think Dell is going to hold back from going with AMD because having another CPU series in the mix can really mess up their parts list. Too many products to keep track of and having one line (Intel) simplifies everything allowing them to price their systems very low.
They might sell AMD parts but I doubt, even with all the pressure, they will sell AMD systems.


blahblahblah said:
I think Intel currently dominates the mobile and desktop environments. I think AMD is only gaining ground on the Server/Workstation areas because Intel is waiting for the Xeon to completely run out of gas.
Click to expand...
Intel will hold their moble and desktop market a lot better compared to their servers/workstations. The average joe could care less what's in it (E.I. Celeron, more on this later) but just wants a solution that does what he needs with no hassle at a good price (solid system tested and put together by an Vender). I usually look at all Intel or AMD products rather than just the consumer market. Which is why I have said AMD take back a solid portion of the market share.

But Intel WAS hopping to let Xeon die off and give Itanium even more market share by bringing it down into the workation segment as 64-bit is needed.
But then AMD brought in their X86 64Bit version and recked that plan.
HP, IBM and Sun are pushing Opteron CPUs. There is just about nothing better in the low to mid range Server market. About the only thing Xeon can compete with Opteron in the Workstation segment is 3D rendering and even there it is give and take.

With Intel reverse enginering AMD64 technology and putting that into their Xeon's, they have to leave Itanium in that niche market.

Remember when I said Intel is switching it's whole thinking?
Well, Itanium and other Intel CPUs will soon share the same socket. In a few years. When that happens they will have an easier upgrade path from 32bit to 64bit. Opteron will still shine in it's areas though.

*While Celeron is good enough for the average joe, my problem with Celerons is that they are over priced.
Why should the average joe spend the same amound of money for a Celeron based system than a Athlon XP system?
Why would you buy a car with a 4 cylinder engine if you could buy a car with a V6 for the same price? That's a rhetorical question just to get the point across.
 
Asus said:
I think Dell is going to hold back from going with AMD because having another CPU series in the mix can really mess up their parts list. Too many products to keep track of and having one line (Intel) simplifies everything allowing them to price their systems very low.
They might sell AMD parts but I doubt, even with all the pressure, they will sell AMD systems.
Click to expand...

The rest of your post I could generally agree with. But you (and most people) are confused with Intel's relationship with Dell.

Intel and Dell probably use something called CPFR (Collaborative Planning, Forecasting and Replenishment). Basically, Intel and Dell share loads of information between each other. This allows Intel to better determine how many processors to produce, what prices to set them at, and to gather detailed information on what consumer buying habits are. Dell on the other hand has less inventory to worry about while having lower prices (because of less inventory, better price breaks).

Dell would have no problem what-so-ever if AMD wanted to join in some sort of CPFR agreement. Dell would probably get more customers, which would increase Dell's profit. Intel would never have that because they would be afraid of corporate espionoge and be worried that AMD would truely be able to undercut Intel. Also, it would be easy for Dell to implement because Dell is such a modernized company.

Dell will never sell AMD systems because of the heavy price breaks Intel gives Dell on its PC's. If Dell looses that, they become another beige-box builder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Unfocused
Building a new PC
Replies
24
Views
4K
Higlac
Higlac
H
Building new rig
Replies
8
Views
1K
Tyguy
Tyguy
Musk
So I'm finally buying a new computer
Replies
3
Views
693
`Vio
V
Raziaar
So umm... new computer specs thread.
Replies
3
Views
705
Ennui
Ennui
bigburpco
Help for building PC
Replies
16
Views
1K
Asus
Asus
Back
Top