Athlon 64 3400 vs Pent D

chewychewy Michigan
edited April 2006 in Hardware
Hi, I'm new to the forum and searched but didn't find the specifics I'm looking at...

I'm looking at getting a new motherboard/cpu bundle for my partime business. Now I want something that I can play the new games on as well as be able to run a couple security cameras and such. I'm currently looking at either a Athlon 64 3400 socket 754 or a Pentium D 920 2.8GHz. Now, some of the questions I have is overall would either be worth the money and maybe which would be better. Also I was curious about cache size, the Athlon only has 512KB cache but the Pentium has a 4MB cache... is the larger cache important? Also, whats the difference with the Pentium duo core with 800MHz front side bus compared to the AMD hypertransport with 1600MHz bus?

All in all I know some about these things but am having a hard time deciding on which CPU to get and if it's worth the extra money to get a duo core as apposed to a hyperthreading cpu, if it's worth it to have a 800FSB as apposed to a 533FSB or is the AMD with the higher 1600 or more FSB better. I just can't decide... Help.

Oh, also, is the difference between the Ghz on the cpu from like a 2.4 to a 3.4 really that big of a thing to warrant spending the extra $100 or so? and why are the AMD's Ghz so much lower than Pentium, how does an AMD 2.0 or 2.4 Ghz compare to a Pentium 3.0 or higher?

Comments

  • Radio91PRadio91P Layton, UT New
    edited April 2006
    The reason there is so much of a difference is because AMD used HTT(hyper threading technology). In other words they move slower, but the do a lot more work during that time. AMD is not really big for the clock speed. They are great chips though. I have the AMD Athlon 4400+ X2. If you are going to be doing multiple things this is a great chip.

    Overall, both of the chips are on a different standard, one does work faster, and the other does more work slower.

    AMD all the way!
    Radio91P
  • chewychewy Michigan
    edited April 2006
    Radio91P wrote:
    The reason there is so much of a difference is because AMD used HTT(hyper threading technology). In other words they move slower, but the do a lot more work during that time. AMD is not really big for the clock speed. They are great chips though. I have the AMD Athlon 4400+ X2. If you are going to be doing multiple things this is a great chip.

    Overall, both of the chips are on a different standard, one does work faster, and the other does more work slower.

    AMD all the way!
    Radio91P


    Thanks. I really like the HT and duo core idea as I have ADD and can't sit still while something is running... have to keep moving :D I do like the X2 but I just don't want to spend that kind of money right now. Is the Pentium duo core able to be fast and do multiple things sufficiently to make it worth while or do you think the AMD would be the way to go? Especially playing games, I like to be able to keep up with the program!
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited April 2006
    If you want to do multi-tasking, several things running at once, it's a no-brainer -- go dual core. If highe-end gaming is important, you would probably be better served going AMD. The D920 will game well too, but not quite up to par with the AMD X2 series.
  • rykoryko new york
    edited April 2006
    just straightening some things out for you...

    it's "dual-core" not "duo core" and it can be used to describe both amd and intel processors.

    "core duo" is actually a new line of mobile processors from intel based on the yonah dual-core arcitecture. there are single core versions of these chips and they are called "core-solo".

    let me ask you a question....why s754 amd 3400+ vs. pd 920?

    i would go for a s939 amd a64 3700+ (san diego) for the same amount as a pd 920 (~ $230)

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103539

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116237

    then you can get a decent s939 board and be on your way :)
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited April 2006
    i would go for a s939 amd a64 3700+ (san diego) for the same amount as a pd 920 (~ $230)
    Although I enjoy both apples and oranges, I usually don't compare them. The A64 3700 is single core, the D920 dual core.

    For multitasking, especially heavy multitasking, the D920 will blow the A64 3700 away. For light multitasking, they'll both be about the same. For gaming, yes, I'd probably take the AMD 3700.
  • rykoryko new york
    edited April 2006
    well i agree with you, but since amd doesn't have any cheap dual-core cpus you only have single cores to compare with the pd 920 in the under $250 segment.

    intel completely dominates the cheap dual core segment with the pd 805, pd820 and pd920. if you need to multitask on a budget, intel seems the only way to go.

    when people are trying to stick to a budget, they don't have the luxury of affording amd dual cores. exact situation i am in right now. i would love to drop an x2 3800+ into my current rig, but i just can't justify $300 for a cpu. especially when i could get an intel dual-core cpu, new mobo, and 1gb ddr2 667 for the same price. maybe when am2 comes out s939 chips will drop in price....but then comes conroe so is there even a point?
  • chewychewy Michigan
    edited April 2006
    Thanks for the info. The reason I said A64 3400 was that it was a CPU/Motherboard bundle for $220 (after rebate) (http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1828854&sku=MBM-K8NE-3400). The D920 is $356 with motherboard (http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1820049&sku=MBM-945PSNLK-920). I wanted to try to keep under $300 for both CPU and motherboard.
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited April 2006
    well i agree with you, but since amd doesn't have any cheap dual-core cpus you only have single cores to compare with the pd 920 in the under $250 segment.
    Sorry, I didn't know your comparison was within that context.
    The reason I said A64 3400 was that it was a CPU/Motherboard bundle for $220 (after rebate)
    That's not too shabby! :cool2:
  • chewychewy Michigan
    edited April 2006
    How about this one
    http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1901386&sku=MBM-TF6100-3700
    Do you think this is a good combo worth the money?
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited April 2006
    Biostar is known not known for high performance, but then, I haven't really heard bad things about them. That board you linked seems to have a lot of features. Keep in mind though, it's a micro ATX (mini). It will work in a medium or full sized case, but won't have many slots for expansion. If you don't plan on overclocking, I don't see a problem with the Biostar you linked. If you do plan to get it, you'd be advised to see you if you can find any reviews on it.
  • rykoryko new york
    edited April 2006
    fyi, tigerdirect mail-in rebates are total BS. google tigerdirect rebate scam and see what i mean...

    newgg is probably the best e-retailer for computer parts. there are others but most everyone reccommends newegg.
  • JimboraeJimborae Newbury, Berks, UK New
    edited April 2006
    Radio91P wrote:
    The reason there is so much of a difference is because AMD used HTT(hyper threading technology). In other words they move slower, but the do a lot more work during that time. ........

    Er I think you're mixing up your technologies here :
    AMD = HTT (Hyper Transport Technology)
    Intel = HT(Hyper-Threading)

    And to quote the first googled page I got "the two have nothing to do with each other".

    A brief explanation of what they are, ask Thrax for a more in depth one.

    HT is a method by where data is moved across the bus
    HTT is a method of mimicking a dual core cpu so that multiple tasks can be executed at the same time.

    Imo for the tasks you are describing I'd go with the Intel dual core system, it'll still be able to play the games but all the background tasks will be running off the second cpu in the background.
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited April 2006
    Er I think you're mixing up your technologies here :

    AMD = HT (Hyper Transport)
    Intel = HTT (Hyper-Threading Technology)

    You've got it half right. HTT is AMD's Hyper Transport. HT is Intel's Hyperthreading. Your explanations were correct, just wrong acronyms.
  • chewychewy Michigan
    edited April 2006
    Ok, so what is important about the motherboards? I hate to be a pain in the ... well, I just want to be informed before I spend $300 + on a motherboard and CPU. I'm thinking of this:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16813121291#DetailSpecs
    to go with:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16819116237R

    I'm still not definitely decided on Intel or AMD but I do like the Dual Core... Also, do you think the difference between 2.8GHz and 3.0GHz is a big enough difference for the $60+ price contrast? Or do you think 2.8GHz should be enough for moderate computing? Thanks for all your help, as I said, I don't mean to be a pain but I want to make sure I get a decent product for what I'm doing without spending a ton of unnecessary money.
  • JimboraeJimborae Newbury, Berks, UK New
    edited April 2006
    Leonardo wrote:
    You've got it half right. HTT is AMD's Hyper Transport. HT is Intel's Hyperthreading. Your explanations were correct, just wrong acronyms.


    Ooops how embarrassing, I was writing that with stinking hangover, twas a typing error.:doh:

    Thanks Leo
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited April 2006
    Comments on hardware you linked:

    - Intel motherboards are very stable and easy to set up. On the performance scale, they rate average, but no more, which is not a bad thing. I'll take a look and see if I can find you a better performing board with the same quality and stability. Intel boards tend to be a bit pricey for what you get.

    - The refurbished D920 is a really good price. Keep in mind though, that it may not come packaged with a heatsink. The warranty may not be the standard three years as is for the full retail CPUs.

    - In my opinion, I don't think the performance difference between 2.8GHz dual core and 3.0 GHz dual core is worth $60. That's really a very minimal difference in performance.

    EDIT: Before I look for motherboards, please tell me what features you need with it.
  • chewychewy Michigan
    edited April 2006
    Leonardo wrote:
    Comments on hardware you linked:

    - Intel motherboards are very stable and easy to set up. On the performance scale, they rate average, but no more, which is not a bad thing. I'll take a look and see if I can find you a better performing board with the same quality and stability. Intel boards tend to be a bit pricey for what you get.

    - The refurbished D920 is a really good price. Keep in mind though, that it may not come packaged with a heatsink. The warranty may not be the standard three years as is for the full retail CPUs.

    - In my opinion, I don't think the performance difference between 2.8GHz dual core and 3.0 GHz dual core is worth $60. That's really a very minimal difference in performance.

    EDIT: Before I look for motherboards, please tell me what features you need with it.

    I didn't mean to pick the refurbished one... buying a new combo I will definitely spend the little extra to get the retail one!

    As far as features, I want at least 2GB memory ability and I want it to work, other than that I don't really know or care so much.... I don't have a clue about chipsets and stuff, I just want something that will allow the CPU to perform properly. Obviously I want USB on it and the other standard plugs, I don't know if I will need PCI Express slots or just PCI but what ever I can get that will perform up to par I can adjust my epxansion cards to fit. Mainly I need something that will be fairly fast so I can play games (Battlefield 2, Far Cry, then whatever may come out in the future), run my quickbooks (I think my PDA will run that so not an issue there i'm sure...), and be able to watch videos, burn CD's and DVD's, and record streaming video (security cameras and related software) when I'm not in the office doing other stuff...

    :usflag:

    That's neat!


    irelandCx7.gif
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited April 2006
    Most of the new boards for Socket 775/dual core use DDR2 memory and have PCIe slots. If you have to buy a new video card and memory, then perhaps economy would favor going with AMD dual core. That way, you could keep your older, but good technology with the AGP video card and DDR(1) memory.
Sign In or Register to comment.