Help! A64 (754) vs. Athlon mobiles

anitract · Apr 4, 2005

I am building a SFF system as a second rig. It will be used as an emulation machine. I really like the Biostar IDEQ's and right now there is a good deal on the 210P at newegg (a 754-based machine). I DO NOT want to spend a lot on this, so 939 machines are out (processors are too much right now, and SFF systems are not out yet). So my other choice would be an athlon-based system.

Anyway, here is what I need from you....convince me either way...why the heck should I or shouldn't I choose the 754-based system over an athlon-based one? Is it worth spending a little more? Will the performance increase be that much better if I get the 64?

crimedog · Apr 4, 2005

don't fall into the trap of thinking 754 sucks because it's not 939. the mobile 3400+ is beating almost all the winchester chips around it's price. this is because lately the winchesters have been overclocking very poorly. i've seen 2.8ghz air cooled, 2.9ghz water cooled with the very good steppings (which i'm trying to get ahold of.) the only thing winchester has over newcastle is dual channel memory, but newcastle has twice the l2 cache to counter that.

especially on a SFF system where heat is a major issue, i'd get a mobile 3400+. you should get a solid 2.4-2.6ghz out of it.

that's all if you're buying right now. the venice (939 90nm with SSE3) and turion (754 90nm SSE3 low power) are coming out. this should drive down the prices of winchesters and newcastles, but they both look like amazing chips. the turion in a SFF could be awesome because of it's low heat characteristics. i'd recommend you wait for these to be out

as to barton vs newcastle, i honestly can't tell much of a difference in games clock for clock. that's because i have a powerful graphics card. you'd notice a much bigger difference with a less powerful one. i do notice that everything moves faster though

Vengance_01 · Apr 4, 2005

Its kinda funny your secondary rig will be faster than your main :santa:

Anyways only gripe about A64 on the Socket 754 is it upgrade path. Amd has demoted the 754 line to buget chips. But who says you can get a cheap newcastle now and grab a 3700 Claw down the road. But for emulation, even an A64 will be over kill.

rseven · Apr 4, 2005

From the prices I've seen you hardly have to pay extra for the A64 754. They also overclock well. A64's are about 25% faster than an XP at the same cpu clock. Everything runs better on an A64 system and much cooler and quieter as well. To me. it makes no sense spending money to build an outdated system like the XP, but that's my take on it. Good luck with whatever you decide to build.

Vengance_01 · Apr 4, 2005

crimedog said:
don't fall into the trap of thinking 754 sucks because it's not 939. the mobile 3400+ is beating almost all the winchester chips around it's price. this is because lately the winchesters have been overclocking very poorly. i've seen 2.8ghz air cooled, 2.9ghz water cooled with the very good steppings (which i'm trying to get ahold of.) the only thing winchester has over newcastle is dual channel memory, but newcastle has twice the l2 cache to counter that.

especially on a SFF system where heat is a major issue, i'd get a mobile 3400+. you should get a solid 2.4-2.6ghz out of it.

that's all if you're buying right now. the venice (939 90nm with SSE3) and turion (754 90nm SSE3 low power) are coming out. this should drive down the prices of winchesters and newcastles, but they both look like amazing chips. the turion in a SFF could be awesome because of it's low heat characteristics. i'd recommend you wait for these to be out

as to barton vs newcastle, i honestly can't tell much of a difference in games clock for clock. that's because i have a powerful graphics card. you'd notice a much bigger difference with a less powerful one. i do notice that everything moves faster though

I beg to differ, in games like UT2004/HL2/Far Cry and probally more to come, the A64 stomps the Barton B/C these are hugely cpu bottle neck. To me the A64 is night and day compared to my old moblie Barton and I am only using a lowly [email protected]

crimedog · Apr 5, 2005

rseven said:
A64's are about 25% faster than an XP at the same cpu clock.

15-20%

Vengance_01 said:
I beg to differ, in games like UT2004/HL2/Far Cry and probally more to come, the A64 stomps the Barton B/C these are hugely cpu bottle neck. To me the A64 is night and day compared to my old moblie Barton and I am only using a lowly [email protected]

i play a lot of cs:s and i have played ut2k4 at recent lan. i didn't notice an increase in speed. i run 1280x1024 full eye candy 4x/8x.

anitract · Apr 5, 2005

Good insight. I think I am convinced to go the 64 route.

The turion chips do sound nice. Anyone know if they will have heat spreaders (I ask because I am unsure if non heatspreader chips will work with the 210p)?

crimedog · Apr 5, 2005

i doubt they will, being mobile chips. however the die should be smaller (more chance of cracking) so it's a possibility...

Vengance_01 · Apr 5, 2005

Well a good example is UT2k4 in Onslaught mode. When playing on singleplayer, on my old XP system even at low res, IE 800-600 and 1024 fps would hover around 45-50 max and on my A64 they are up in the 80-90's and when there was heavy action, the Barton would drop the 30 FPS which is quite bad in UT2k4. This just one example. Also with 6800ULtra and X800XT cards in alot of games these cards score much better at higher res and with AA and AF on an A64 vs a barton. At this point there is no reason in my mind to get a Moblie barton setup. A64's run cooler, and at lower clockspeeds A64's have a much better advantage.

Vengance_01 · Apr 5, 2005

anitract said:
Good insight. I think I am convinced to go the 64 route.

The turion chips do sound nice. Anyone know if they will have heat spreaders (I ask because I am unsure if non heatspreader chips will work with the 210p)?

be carefull as the support for these new Moblie turion is un-known. If you were getting the system now, I would get a cheap 2800/3000 Newcastle and then play the waiting game.

Camacho111 · Apr 5, 2005

I moved my newer gaming system to s754 from XP. I can tell a great deal. Loads a alot of crap faster. Although my XP's were doing 2.3-2.4ghz respectfully, even at stock a64 performance was well worth the upgrade. Runs alot cooler too.

anitract · Apr 5, 2005

Yeah...true. What stinks the most is that most of the 1mb l2 cache processors are DTR chips...and I don't think they'll work with the 210p...

Well, the 2800+ newcastle is cheap ($109 @ newegg)...I guess that would still be a step up from an overclocked athlon.

Vengance_01 · Apr 5, 2005

Newegg still has 3200 claws, 3400's Claws and 3700's. They are bit more money, but just get the 3000/2800 and O/C as much as you can.

anitract · Apr 5, 2005

If the turion chips are too much or non-compatible, I will probably get a 2800 since I'm on a bit of a budget.

Help! A64 (754) vs. Athlon mobiles

anitract

Member

crimedog

Member

Vengance_01

Member

rseven

Member

Vengance_01

Member

crimedog

Member

anitract

Member

crimedog

Member

Vengance_01

Member

Vengance_01

Member

Camacho111

Member

anitract

Member

Vengance_01

Member

anitract

Member

Similar threads