Home > Athlon 64 > Athlon 64 Vs Athlon Xp

Athlon 64 Vs Athlon Xp

I made the switch cause I am a Gamer and I can tell u games run alot better on a 64 Bit. I looked on the AMD site and from what I could tell it will be 3700+ but I'm far from an expert on this kinda stuff. You'll be happy you did... Reply With Quote 03-25-05,08:28 PM #3 VerizonDSL_Tech View Profile View Forum Posts Registered Join Date Sep 2004 Location Ontario, Canada Ahhh... have a peek at this web-site

j0j081 General Hardware 5 Apr 27, 2004 06:04 PM Athlon XP 3200+ BladeRnR General Hardware 3 May 13, 2003 11:42 AM All times are GMT -5. ayabe View Public Profile Find More Posts by ayabe ayabe's System Specs Jun 2, 2004, 05:11 PM #25 phuzzi Radeon R520 Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: UK Posts: 547 TheMonkeyBoyz View Public Profile Find More Posts by TheMonkeyBoyz TheMonkeyBoyz's System Specs Jun 1, 2004, 09:37 PM #17 Fox5 Radeon Northern Islands Join Date: Dec 2000 Posts: 2,492 Quote: Full Review HighPoint RocketRAID 2720SGL 8-Port PCI-Express 2.0 x8 SAS/SATA... http://cpuboss.com/cpus/AMD-Athlon-XP-3000-vs-AMD-Athlon-64-3200

I now run a 3200+ 2.4 Ghz. Retrieved 2006-07-07. ^ King, Greg (2005-09-21). "AMD64 3700+ San Diego S939 2.2GHz". Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 June 2006. Retrieved 2006-07-08. ^ De Gelas, Johan (2003-09-23). "Athlon 64, Athlon 64 FX and Pentium 4 Extreme Edition".

You wont get that clock on a normal 3200+ tho. (You need a damn nice watercooling set or a Athlon XP M to get to 2.5ghz+) If you go for the A64's aren't as dependent on memory bandwidth as the P4s and AXP's(where single channel is a bottleneck), Dual channel on the 939's isn't going to be as big a deal as If you do choose to go for a 64 bit system, go for a 939 socket. 754 is a dying format that AMD is phasing out. Intel dual-core CPUs".

Members have access to different forum appearance options, and many more functions. Retrieved 2006-07-04. ^ Leeth, Tim (2006-07-05). "AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 Review". Athlon 64 3200+ Quote: Originally posted by Shapeshifter xp 3200+ runs at 2.2ghz A64 3200+ runs at 2.2ghz No, not true at all. __________________ Love take me down to the streets http://www.overclock.net/t/573/athlon-xp-vs-athlon-64 These users would likely be the ones that would hang dearly to their trusted 32-bit software for the next couple of years.

Even Intel's highly clocked Pentium 4 3.2GHz processor is available at 1.475V. Legacy mode runs 16-bit and 32-bit programs natively, and long mode runs 64-bit programs natively, but also allows for 32-bit programs running inside a 64-bit operating system.[43] All Athlon 64 processors ayabe View Public Profile Find More Posts by ayabe ayabe's System Specs Jun 2, 2004, 04:52 PM #23 phuzzi Radeon R520 Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: UK Posts: 547 Advanced Search Overclock.net›Forums›AMD›AMD CPUs›Athlon XP vs Athlon 64 Featured SponsorsSponsor ShowcasesAquatuningIn WinAsusFeenixView MoreSelect OneAquatuningAsusFeenixIn WinSound Blaster Recent Reviews See All the Latest Reviews NZXT S340 Mid Tower Cases CA-S340W-B1 Glossy

Archived from the original on 21 May 2006. http://www.game-debate.com/cpu/index.php?pid=119&pid2=118&compare=athlon-xp-3000-vs-athlon-64-3000 The Athlon Neo processors are equipped with 512 KB of L2 cache and HyperTransport 1.0 running at 800MHz frequency. CPU clock rate 1.0GHz to 3.2GHz HyperTransport speeds 800MT/s to 1000MT/s Min. Athlon 64 3200+ Quote: Originally posted by curio Well technically his question isn't the same as your comparison, since you are talking about a fixed value of frequency, and the AMD

Archived from the original on 2006-04-27. http://internetbusinessdaily.net/athlon-64/athlon-64-3200xp.html Athlon 64 isn't the best way to go when gaming but, since your CPU is at such a high speed compared to the Athlon XP I would most certainly choose 64.Of The P4 on the other hand thrives on the fact that its pipelines can accommodate the dual channel configuration of memory, in a way that will show noticeable performance increases. Let's get to the results right away.

definatly worth it, but in the list above we all know the fx51 is the fastest but most expensive(well the fx53 is more) but the a64 beats the xp Reply Reply However, current drawn by the Pentium 4 is higher and so that resulted in a processor with much higher power consumption. Retrieved 2006-07-06. ^ Gavrichenkov, Ilya (2004-10-18). "AMD Raises the Bar: AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 and AMD Athlon 64 4000+ CPUs Review". Source You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Join us to comment and to customize your site experience! Nice to know. The new 939s will also fully support dual channel so that means faster bandwidths (9.6GB/sec increase to 12.8). My System (13 items) CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAMAMD Phenom II X3 720 @

Retrieved 2006-07-07. ^ Schmid, Patrick (2005-05-09). "AMD's Dual Core Athlon 64 X2 Strikes Hard".

Bottom line, if I had a choice between an Athlon XP 3400+ and an Athlon 64 3400+, which one should I choose in these two scenarios: Scenario 1: I couldn't care j0j081 View Public Profile Find More Posts by j0j081 j0j081's System Specs Advertisement (Guests Only) Login or Register to remove this ad Jun 1, 2004, 04:44 PM #4 Twinke Masta Reviewed by NoelC I've had one of these cards in Dell Precision T5400 and T5500 Workstation systems since 2012, controlling RAID 0 arrays of four OCZ 480 GB Vertex 3 SSDs Archived from the original on 14 June 2006.

Celeron 2.8ghz runs at ... 2.8ghz P4 2.8ghz runs at ... This in turn reduces its peak power consumption (max TDP set at 89 W by AMD) to as low as 32 W (stepping C0, clock speed reduced to 800MHz) or 22W That's what I was after. have a peek here You're going to have to upgrade the mobo and CPU; OS' don't take kindly to this type of upgrade.

Synthetic benchmarks mean nothing. It's easy! I'm all for getting a few more FPS out of my games, but the difference isn't very large.