Which is the best processor for gaming?

Discussion in 'PC Gaming' started by brodyhooperquint, Jan 16, 2004.

?
  1. Pentium

    39.4%
  2. Athlon

    27.3%
  3. Athlon64

    24.2%
  4. Hardly a noticeable difference between them

    9.1%
  1. brodyhooperquint

    brodyhooperquint Jaws

    Messages:
    115
    Location:
    Glasgow-Scotland-U.K.
    Hi...Hope this question is in the right place...apologies to the moderator if it is'nt.

    I am building a second computer solely for gaming and I was wondering if any of you fellow gaming guys could tell me which is the best processor for gaming?...pentium? athlon?
    Would be very interested in other people's specs and how they are finding their performance with them.
    Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks from Colin
     
  2. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    p4 canterwood or athlon64...

    if not considering athlon64's... p4 canterwood's...

    :)

    WAAAAY faster than my old athlon but I am getting an athlon64 next week so I'll be able to give perspective on that...

    the dual channel on the intel chipsets is superior to anything amd has cept on the FX/opteron platform (socket 939/940)... so that certainly helps...

    edit I am gonig to revise your poll to include athlon64 since they are different from athlon's per se...
     
    brodyhooperquint likes this.
  3. Glaanieboy

    Glaanieboy Moderator

    Messages:
    2,626
    Location:
    The Netherlands
  4. brodyhooperquint

    brodyhooperquint Jaws

    Messages:
    115
    Location:
    Glasgow-Scotland-U.K.
    Hi Sazar...thanks for the reply...would be extremely interested on your views about the athlon 64's performance as this is a processor I am seriously considering.
    Also thanks Glaanieboy for the link...very informative. :)
     
  5. vern

    vern Dominus Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    1,571
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    The Athlon64's performance gains are minimal from it's predecessors. If you want the top performance on an AMD chip ... you'd have to go with the Athlon 64 FX, the higher end version of the Athlon64.

    I'm a happy owner of an P4 3.2GHz, and I would still go with an Intel chip among today's processor offerings. One of the biggest reasons for my choice is the 800MHz bus and the wider choice of great motherboards on the Intel platform. In any case, you wouldn't go wrong with any of the modern processors. You wouldn't even notice any difference in performance. 64 bit processing might be important to you, and if that is the case, go with an Athlon 64 or Athlon64 FX although I don't expect 64bit software to take off anytime this year.

    The more important choice you would have to make is which motherboard? which graphics card? What kind of memory? Processor choice is a no brainer when compared to all the other factors than can affect your gaming now and in the future.
     
  6. ~bk

    ~bk I Political User

    Messages:
    3,768
    Location:
    Canada
    Intel Pentium, of course :p
     
  7. SPeedY_B

    SPeedY_B I may actually be insane.

    Messages:
    15,800
    Location:
    Midlands, England
    G4 or 5 :p :D
     
  8. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    the architecture of the cpu and the ondie memory controller makes the athlon64 a no-brainer decision over the pentium series...

    that and the fact that you have effectively 1600mhz bus speed :)

    yes... amd has caught up to intel's gimmicky use of fsb :D

    amd and intel both top out @ a true fsb of 200mhz... its just how it relates... ie regular athlons are ddr... intel claims qdr and the athlon64 has slightly different marchitecture and with ondie memory controller can claim 1600mhz ...

    all fun-fun eh :cool:

    the athlon64 does 32bit processing better than intel's cpu's BUT the main achilles heel is the dual channel support or lack thereof in the athlon64's (non FX)

    they are single channel v/s the fx which is dual channel... however you will see very few benchmarks that there is a discernible difference in real world performance... only in synthetic benchmarks does it become apparent which is doing what better...

    I would personally not recommend an athlon (non athlon64 that is) unless you are cash-strapped...
     
  9. brodyhooperquint

    brodyhooperquint Jaws

    Messages:
    115
    Location:
    Glasgow-Scotland-U.K.
    Hi Guys...Thanks for the input...really appreciated.Interesting to see the Pentium is more preferred.



    By the way if we are putting the 64 fx into the equation then surely it's only fair we put the P4 "extreme edition" in too. :D
     
  10. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    the extreme edition is fine and all :) but it is a stop gap and it is still not as fast as the athlon64 3200+ and above and the FX processors for gaming..

    for other things perhaps but none of the gaming benchmarks you see will show the intel processors anywhere near the athlon64's... except in quake3 where it will win...

    couple that with the fact that amd's new processors produce less heat and consume less power than the EE p4's and the upcoming prescotts and its a nice solution :)
     
  11. vern

    vern Dominus Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    1,571
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    The only edge the Athlon64 or FX has over Intel processors is ... because it is 64bit. None of the benchmarks on any hardware have shown an Athlon64 or FX to be a better performer than an Intel. It might win a test here and there ... but that isn't very consistent for a processor that is supposed to win every benchmark hands down. Maybe we both have been looking at different benchmarks, but the ones I've been looking at have not given the Athlon64 FX the gold medal for their performance. The Pentium EE that Toms Hardware received weeks ago for review killed the Athlon64 in every test ... and performed more consistently than the Athlon FX. If Bleeding edge performance is the issue ... the regular Athlon64 shouldn't even be in the equation, although the Athlon FX is a contender.
     
  12. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    64bit is not part of the equation... all tests are performed for 32bit applications...

    many benchmarks DO show the athlons to perform better than the pentiums and

    raw gaming performance for the athlon64's v.s the 64 FX and EE processor :)

    http://hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTc1LDQ=
    http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040106/athlon64_3400-05.html#opengl_benchmarks

    bear in mind the athlon64 3400+ costs about half the FX price and about 2/5th the EE price...

    now for GAMING performance the athlon64's are consistenly @ around the same level or better than anything intel has to offer currently... that is the point I have been reiterating and I included toms benchmarks to prove that very point...

    the gaming benchmarks prove my point and it becomes a no-brainer when considering price/performance ratio's...
     
  13. Arniestan1

    Arniestan1 OSNN Addict

    Messages:
    111
    Between AMD and P4 there really isn't that big of an advantage. The reason I would pick AMD is the price. The more important factor in gameing is the video card. A secoundary important hardware would be a good sound card. Here I'd have to say go with "sound blaster live". In the videocard's ATI has the edge, however I am going to wait to upgrade before I spend $200-$300 or more even. The next major advacement in video is just around the bend in PCI exsprees. Which are supposed to be 16x faster than what are currently availible. Then I would have to wait again for the price to come down. I'm not going to get a PCI express and a new mainboard that'll support it as soon as it comes out. By the time I feel the price justifies the end that technology will be closeing in on being old and obselete. The future is bright but awfully expensive.
     
  14. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    pci express does not make a card faster... it allows more bandwidth...

    its the same with agp4x and 8x... the real world differences are tangible @ best... we will have to see how the same cards perform on the different ports respectively in order to decide...

    16x improvement is a massive stretch... the next gen card from ati is supposed to be upto 2x the r300's performance... not sure about the nextgen card from nvidia but 600mhz STOCK memory clock sure sounds lovely :)
     
  15. billthy

    billthy Eat, Drink, Be Merry

    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    Michigan
    right now i would probly say P4, but when games start using the 64 bit, i think AMD will have it
     
  16. Goatman

    Goatman Ska Daddy

    Messages:
    676
    First off look at the sources you are quoting... Tom's Hardware has been known to be extremely biased!! Intel can do no wrong....

    Also considering waiting, AMD is release the A64 3700+ and 4000+ soon.

    I have a Barton 2500+ and am loving it, for hte amount I spent on it, it's a great performer, and kills my buddies P4 2.6C. Dual DDR is a moot argument because current technology doesn't use it. Neither on the P4 Camp or Athlon.
     
  17. NetRyder

    NetRyder Tech Junkie Folding Team

    Messages:
    13,256
    Location:
    New York City
    Definitely not for gaming. :p
     
  18. zino

    zino OSNN Junior Addict

    Messages:
    46
    so i am a complete moron when it comes to hardware...so i am asking a bit of advice here since all of you are talking about gaming..:p

    I have in mind this motherboard (AMD btw) http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=633737&sku=S450-2028

    and this processor http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=495335&sku=CP2-XP28003BC

    for my next gaming pc.....

    however, i have an alternative that i could also get which is intel (combo) http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=32413&Sku=MBM-AB60N-2400&CatId=1235

    Now my question for all of you, is, which of the two for the money i would be spending, would perform better on todays games? (and yeah, i would like to save money by buying AMD, but i would like first and foremost performace for around $270...its my budget.)

    Thanks for any advice..
     
  19. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    its not a bad combo..

    I would suggest getting an nforce2 chipset over a via chipset for athlons :)

    they have dual channel implementation and generally bench higher == performance is ever so slightly better...

    still for the price its not a bad board...

    the intel combo is also not bad if that is route you choose.. performance should be @ a par with the 2800+ specially since its a canterwood... the higher bus speed does make a difference...

    my personal recommendation would be to get the intel combo if you can afford it.. else get the amd combo since it is cheaper :)
     
  20. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa

    on the contrary... dual channel is very evident...

    on my rig using memory in a dual channel configuration does net a slight performance improvement... specially when opening apps and what not... its not much but its there.. and benchmarks for memory show a much greater increase...

    also look @ the benches for the athlon 64bit lineup... the FX is better in most all memory intensive situations due to its dual channel support integrated...

    intel and amd both have dual channel setups... @ the moment I would have to say intel probably has the lead...