|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
hyperponic 
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 112
Joined: Aug. 2000
|
 |
Posted on: Jan. 03 2001,12:53 |
|
   |
ok, i've promised myself that the next computer i get will have dual processors. so here's the deal: i'm planning on building a new computer next semester. sweet dual system, either pIII or AMD based. my problem: the dual AMD boards have (apparently) been pushed back to sometime in march, meaning they will be out who-knows-when. and even when they do come out, the initial line is sure to have problems, which == even more waiting. but i'd be able to run a dual 1.2 GH thunderbird system w/heaps of DDR ram  . or, on the flip side, i could just go out in the next month or two and put together a nice dual pIII system on top of an abit or MSI board. so...think its worth waiting for the AMDz, or should i go pIII? and, of course, there's the optional choice: that i'm a fucknut for not wanting to build a single-proc system...
------------------
It's not peer pressure, its just your turn.
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
Hellraiser
PH34R M3
Group: Members
Posts: 977
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 03 2001,13:32 |
|
 |
I'd say fuck it and go with a PIII dual system. If you're willing to wait till march, you might as well wait a few months more till the next generation of processors is out. Of course it's up to you if you want to go that way. Just remember, PIII's overclock much better than AMD's which means if you get to a point where your p3's seem a bit less cutting edge, you can push them a bit.In terms of absolute side by side comparison, it has been my observation that while PIII's are more expensive Mhz for Mhz, PIII systems make up for it in other areas such as stability and fewer compatibility issues, as well as the nice benefit of overclocking. AMD chips perform slightly higher on numbercrunching benchmarks, but PIII's blow them away in multimedia. Either way, you're not facing a choice between undesirable options, they are both great procs. Oh, and in my experience, Abit is slightly better than MSI. My next system is gonna be two of the fastest PIII's or P4's (if they're out) I can lay my hands on, with a Radeon or better gfx card. ------------------
Old farts never die, they just get blown away.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
askheaves
Ack!!!
Group: Members
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 03 2001,21:35 |
|
|
I'm a diehard ASUS fan... and I'll probably be that way for a while. I have a rock-solid system at home, and i'm overclocking over 16\% (up to 929), with a PIII and an ASUS board. Their dualie boards a bit expensive, but potentially worth it.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
hair
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 67
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,04:15 |
|
|
in my experience, abit is great.. i've built 4 systems based on their boards, and am happy with their performance. asus makes good boards, and i think gigabyte does too (can anyone confirm this?). that doesn't mean everything else is crap though. reading up on stuff and coming to your own conclusions is best. start at AnandTech.btw, what operating system(s) are you using/planning on using? and while its undoubtedly cool as hell to have a dual proc machine, two 1.2ghz chips do not give you a 2.4ghz computer. depending on the operating system, you may not even be able to take advantage of both processors, and if you can it will probably be something like 100\% from one, and maybe 50\% from the other. just warning you speaking of overclocking:
the computer i use the most is a celeron II 566 running at 800 on an abit bx133 raid. same coppermine core as the p3 (the p3's can get up there, especially the 600E from what i have heard), and i know of some people that have gotten them [566] into the 950-1 ghz range... not too bad.. of course i also know people who have their duron 650's running at a gigahertz so its kind of a dumb argument as to which can go higher. (as soon as i get a watercooling system set up i 'should' be in the 900's, but maybe my chip just wasn't from a good enough silicon batch to be able to. i guess im happy with it. ) edit: changed 600EB to 600E ------------------
If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. - William Blake This message has been edited by hair on January 07, 2001 at 09:45 PM
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
askheaves
Ack!!!
Group: Members
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,04:27 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by hair:
the computer i use the most is a celeron II 566 running at 800 on an abit bx133 raid. same coppermine core as the p3 (the p3's can get up there, especially the 600EB from what i have heard)
Quick clarification for you. The coppermine core is common, but I believe that the Celerys have less ondie cache (128?) and you might have trouble getting the 66Mhz FSB up to the 133 range. Also, the 600E is what you are referring to, since the EB means it is running at a 133 FSB, thus making it an 800. The PIII 600E is identical to the 800EB since they have the same multiplier, just different FSB settings (easy to bypass with the right board). I found this out after buying my 800EB, and was pissed at the extra ์ or so that I spent. Also cool, the Celery 800 is going to have the 100Mhz FSB (finally). Don't know what the ramification of this is, but it's awfully nice.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
hair
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 67
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 07 2001,02:40 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by askheaves:
Quick clarification for you. The coppermine core is common, but I believe that the Celerys have less ondie cache (128?) and you might have trouble getting the 66Mhz FSB up to the 133 range. Also, the 600E is what you are referring to, since the EB means it is running at a 133 FSB, thus making it an 800. The PIII 600E is identical to the 800EB since they have the same multiplier, just different FSB settings (easy to bypass with the right board). I found this out after buying my 800EB, and was pissed at the extra ์ or so that I spent.
i think you are reading what i said wrong... its you that needs clarification
my computer that i use the most is a celeron 2 566 overclocked to 800mhz. the motherboard is an abit bx133 raid (just the name of the mobo not the bus speed) the reason i talked about the coppermine core is because someone asked if the p3's can overclock well. i do not technically have a p3, but since the core is the same, i was trying to show that, yes, the p3 can overclock. you are right about the 600E, i was mistaken. i was thinking that the EB was the one with the 100mhz FSB yes, the celeron 2 has less (128K) of on dye cache than a p3. quote:
Also cool, the Celery 800 is going to have the 100Mhz FSB (finally). Don't know what the ramification of this is, but it's awfully nice.
unfortunately, this is not cool, since overclocking will be more difficult. it is cool as far as speed though because anytime you increase bus speed you increase the amount of data that can be transferred through in a given amount of time. edit (if anything i say isn't worded clearly, im sorry, but i was in a hurry) ------------------
If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. - William Blake This message has been edited by hair on January 07, 2001 at 09:42 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
