Question about Athlon64

Intel182 · 01-11-2006, 05:08 AM

The other day, I bought a Pentium 4 3.2 ghz w/ HT. (1 GB RAM) I am a gamer and people are now saying to me that i should have gotten an Athlon64 or an AMD chip at least. What is the difference between a 32-bit processor and a 64-bit one? Isn't 3.2 ghz really powerful? And will 32-bit processors become obselete within the next 2 years? Because I am going to upgrade to an Athlon 64 3500+, but not for at least another 1 and a half years.

**Cromewell** · 01-11-2006, 06:26 AM

Basically 64bit CPUs can address more memory. A 3.2GHz P4 is powerful, an Athlon64 would be more so but your P4 wont game bad. I think some people will still run 32bit CPUs in 2 years but no more new ones will be sold/designed.

Intel182 · 01-11-2006, 11:03 PM

Ok, thanks Cromewell, I just hope I'm still able to play next-gen games on it

diduknowthat · 01-11-2006, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Intel182

Ok, thanks Cromewell, I just hope I'm still able to play next-gen games on it

that also depends on your graphics card. Amd 64's are better at gaming because they haev onboard memory controllers.

Intel182 · 01-11-2006, 11:27 PM

well, unfortunately, its only a 6200 TurboCache, but if I upgrade to, say a 6800 Ultra at least, it should be fine to run all future applications(I hope). Because at the moment, i can only run Call of Duty 2 on medium-high settings in 800x600 and I have a strong feeling that the reason this is happening is because of my 6200.

**Cromewell** · 01-12-2006, 01:00 AM

Yeah your 6200 is defiently holding things up.

Xycron · 01-12-2006, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Intel182

The other day, I bought a Pentium 4 3.2 ghz w/ HT. (1 GB RAM) I am a gamer and people are now saying to me that i should have gotten an Athlon64 or an AMD chip at least. What is the difference between a 32-bit processor and a 64-bit one? Isn't 3.2 ghz really powerful? And will 32-bit processors become obselete within the next 2 years? Because I am going to upgrade to an Athlon 64 3500+, but not for at least another 1 and a half years.

To your comment on 32.ghz being powerfull, When comparing AMD and INTEL, do not compare the ghz, the archetecture of the chip's are different a,d 2.0ghz could possibily beat a 3.4ghz intel...

Intel182 · 01-12-2006, 07:09 AM

uhhhh are you sure a 2 ghz CPU could beat an Intel 3.4 ghz CPU? Thats a bit of an exaduration. It would more likely beat 2.8 or 2.9 ghz Intel CPU, not 3.4. Because if you get a 2.6 ghz AMD chip (OC'd), thatd be the equivalent to about 3.9-4.2 ghz or more. And theres no such home desktop processor speed as of yet, unless its an ex-workstation computer.

**ceewi1** · 01-12-2006, 08:40 AM

Actually, it's quite possible. The AMD Athlon 64 3200+ has a clock speed of 2.0Ghz, and would rival a P4 3.4 Ghz in some games.

And yeh, it's the graphics card that's holding you up. If you've got the money, look for something like a 6800GS, or even a 7800GT. For something cheaper, the 6600GT is quite good.

Intel182 · 01-12-2006, 09:37 AM

Oh, great. Now you guys are making it sound like I wasted my money (even though i probably did). I need someone to say that my compy will last me at least 2 years before i switch to an Athlon64. You guys are making 3.2 ghz sound so weak (it probably is though).

01-11-2006, 05:08 AM	#1 (permalink)
Intel182 Bronze Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 33	Question about Athlon64 The other day, I bought a Pentium 4 3.2 ghz w/ HT. (1 GB RAM) I am a gamer and people are now saying to me that i should have gotten an Athlon64 or an AMD chip at least. What is the difference between a 32-bit processor and a 64-bit one? Isn't 3.2 ghz really powerful? And will 32-bit processors become obselete within the next 2 years? Because I am going to upgrade to an Athlon 64 3500+, but not for at least another 1 and a half years.

01-11-2006, 06:26 AM	#2 (permalink)
Cromewell Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Canada Age: 24 Posts: 10,085	Basically 64bit CPUs can address more memory. A 3.2GHz P4 is powerful, an Athlon64 would be more so but your P4 wont game bad. I think some people will still run 32bit CPUs in 2 years but no more new ones will be sold/designed. __________________ You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with 'til ya understand who's in ruttin' command here. I must plug a couple comics because they are good :D: www.ctrlaltdel-online.com www.userfriendly.org

01-12-2006, 01:00 AM	#6 (permalink)
Cromewell Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Canada Age: 24 Posts: 10,085	Yeah your 6200 is defiently holding things up. __________________ You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with 'til ya understand who's in ruttin' command here. I must plug a couple comics because they are good :D: www.ctrlaltdel-online.com www.userfriendly.org

01-12-2006, 08:40 AM	#9 (permalink)
ceewi1 Moderator Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Melbourne, Australia Age: 21 Posts: 5,184	Actually, it's quite possible. The AMD Athlon 64 3200+ has a clock speed of 2.0Ghz, and would rival a P4 3.4 Ghz in some games. And yeh, it's the graphics card that's holding you up. If you've got the money, look for something like a 6800GS, or even a 7800GT. For something cheaper, the 6600GT is quite good. __________________ CPU: Core 2 Duo E6600 / MOBO: Gigabyte 965P-DS3 / GPU: Gigabyte HD4870 RAM: 2GB G.Skill F2-6400CL4D-2GBPK / HDD: 2TB Total HDD / PSU: Antec NeoPower 480W Cheap PSUs - 2% of system costs, responsible for 28% of system deaths As Sealed Stick was removed, lost or damaged, it shall be out of warranty validity. - The "Warranty void if removed" sticker on numerous CoolerMaster PSUs. Useful PSU Guides Last edited by ceewi1; 01-12-2006 at 09:26 AM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-11-2006, 11:03 PM	#3 (permalink)
Intel182 Bronze Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 33	Ok, thanks Cromewell, I just hope I'm still able to play next-gen games on it

01-11-2006, 11:27 PM	#5 (permalink)
Intel182 Bronze Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 33	well, unfortunately, its only a 6200 TurboCache, but if I upgrade to, say a 6800 Ultra at least, it should be fine to run all future applications(I hope). Because at the moment, i can only run Call of Duty 2 on medium-high settings in 800x600 and I have a strong feeling that the reason this is happening is because of my 6200.

01-12-2006, 07:09 AM	#8 (permalink)
Intel182 Bronze Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 33	uhhhh are you sure a 2 ghz CPU could beat an Intel 3.4 ghz CPU? Thats a bit of an exaduration. It would more likely beat 2.8 or 2.9 ghz Intel CPU, not 3.4. Because if you get a 2.6 ghz AMD chip (OC'd), thatd be the equivalent to about 3.9-4.2 ghz or more. And theres no such home desktop processor speed as of yet, unless its an ex-workstation computer.

01-12-2006, 09:37 AM	#10 (permalink)
Intel182 Bronze Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 33	Oh, great. Now you guys are making it sound like I wasted my money (even though i probably did). I need someone to say that my compy will last me at least 2 years before i switch to an Athlon64. You guys are making 3.2 ghz sound so weak (it probably is though).