hi...alright i thiunk i need your suggestions on this...im about to buy a new pc....for editng...im choosing between two cpus. amd xp 2500+ and amd 64 3000+...i know its a bit odd to compare the two...ok ill be overclocking the 2500 so it can use 400ddr dimms...my friend keeps on telling me to buy the 2500 becaude its chipsets is at its very best and the cpu together with its mobo is tried and tested.... but im really thinking cause amd 64s are real powerful but the issue with ram compatibility is there. but i read from a site...tomshardware...that a certain asus board is ok with almost all of the rams... and i also was thinking that in the near future 64 windows will be used so i think it will be an advantage for me if i already have amd 64... guys i really need help....plss...pls critic...
Recent XP 2500s don't usually overclock as well as some of the earlier issues of the chip. If you're counting on running one at 200MHz front side bus you might just be in for a bit of disappointment!
On the other hand, when looking at Athlon64 I think RAM compatibility is the wrong thing to be worried about - you should be concerned about the Socket format! A64s will be moving to the Socket939 format sometime in the near future, and those jumping in to the current Socket format might just be left with a rather limited upgrade path.
For the moment, I'd suggest an XP in the 3000+ or 3200+ models, or a P4 at about the 3 GHz range would be ample.
For Video editing, the most important thing to look at in your purchase is decent RAM (which you can reuse later) in copious amounts, and heaps of drive storage space, preferably SATA drives for future proofing.
Catweazle so itd be better for me to get an amd 64 3000+...socket 754 it is..i really have no choice..cause thats where my budget gets me....is 1 gb dimm enough for the mean time....? and about the ram compatibility ar yousure ram will work? as ddr400? cause i read tests only the asus mobo got most of the rams working...and the prob is our local comp shop dont have that mobo..only epox k8t800 and msi k8t800 neo...both did well but not as good as asus...so what else ? by the way...thanks for the quick reply...
I think Catweazle's suggesting an XP 3000 or 3200, not the 64 3000. There's a bit of a difference... Especially price-wise... If you're on a budget, you'd probably want to go with the XP 3200.
In your case, make sure you buy brand-name components, and you should be in good shape. The only times I've ever run into any RAM compatibility problems have been when I've used no-name "el cheapo" RAM. Other than that, I've been good, and I've used Gigabyte, Intel, Asus, Soyo, and Amptron boards in this manner.
If I were you, I'd get the XP3200+ and the DDR400 RAM. From there, you should base your motherboard purchasing decision on what's available, and then out of that, which board has the most features for the least money.
oops, sorry. I forgot to respond to this earlier.
That's exactly what i meant, Alex. I wouldn't really advise anyone to feel pressured to switch to A64 and Socket 754. It'd be better to 'patch up' just yet, and wait for Socket 939 with PCI Express slots a bit further down the track.
High-end games machines are the only ones that'd have you looking at A64 and Socket 754 just at the moment.
im from the philippines and amd 64 3000+ costs only $50 dollars more than xp 3000+...so what you think? really confused on what to buy...
I think you'll find that a suitable motherboard costs more as well. Compare the price of an ABit NF7-S motherboard (which is a high performance, fully featured Athlon XP motherboard) with the cost of a decent nForce3 250 chipset motherboard for Athlon64 (which is the best in class for that processor choice).
ok thanks a lot...so ill be getting a xp...thanks!
yes if i am to think about the long run...i think 64's are better...
Well, it's not really a better buy to get technology that you know won't be compatible with future releases of that processor.
Like Catweazle said, you have to factor in the cost of the motherboard. The AMD64 motherboards are quite a bit more expensive than the XP motherboards. So, even if the chip is only a little more, you're still going to get hit in the wallet on the motherboard. ...And what if you want to upgrade? Since they're changing socket formats on the 64 bit chip, you're going to be out of luck.
Again, my recommendation would be for an XP3000+ processor. Even though it's not as fast as the 64, it is a tried and true platform that's been around for a while. It's still really upgradable, and it should last you for a good while. And, the money you saved on components you could put towards a 64 bit system once Socket 939 has come around, and PCI Express is more standardized. That way, when that happens, you'll have a 64 bit system, and it will have the latest technology available, and it will be upgradable.
Perhaps I should clarify a little what I was saying. I wasn't really suggesting that the Socket 754/Athlon64 based system is a bad choice. I was simply trying to indicate that the higher rated Athlon XP processors are still quite capable, and that budget needs to be taken into consideration for purchasing choices.
If the Socket 754 motherboard/Athlon64 combination fits within budget, then yes - that's the best performing combination currently on offer. The future upgrade path for replacement processors for the Socket format doesn't look too rosy, but by the time the system has outlived it's usefullness, then motherboard/processor combinations for the newer Socket 939 format should be an affordable alternative anyway.
If the higher initial cost of the Socket 754/Athlon64 path is a factor which impacts too heavily on the budget, then the Athlon XP or Pentium 4 processors, coupled with a good quality motherboard, still provide the 'heart' of a quite capable computer system, which should address your needs for some time to come yet. The lower initial outlay for a motherboard/processor combination for one of these platforms would free up more of a limited budget to allow for other system needs to be more adequately met. Let's face it - hard drive storage space and plenty of RAM are vitally important factors in a Video editing system. Have those needs been addressed in the purchasing plan? I'd consider a video editing system to require a Gigabyte of RAM and a couple of large capacity hard drives!
You work out the sums yourself, ian_tec234, but if you have to 'rob Peter to pay Paul' when you balance up the budget, then cut corners on the processor rather than the other components, because you want to end up with a system that is functional. Bragging rights gleaned from having the 'latest and greatest' processor are good and well, but they mean little of the rest of the system isn't up to scratch.
And a final word on 'processor upgrade path':
I can't recall the last time I upgraded a processor without upgrading a motherboard at the same time! Whether it's been to cater for a new type of RAM, or to add features and capabilities which weren't available when the system was first purchased, there simply hasn't been enough reason to upgrade a processor in the same motherboard. At a bare minimum, an upgraded processor should be at least 50% faster than the old one to make the effort worth considering, and even then the size of the performance boost isn't generally big enough to warrant the expense.
All up, I think that an over-emphasis on the 'Gigahertz' figures for the processor is the most common mistake made by people addressing the need to purchase a new system.
all...right im convinced now...since amd xp 3000+ is almost the same with a p4 3.0 i might get the p4...and pair it with a nice asus board...and purchase two 512 mb dimms...hmmm ok i read that prescotts are hot...is it really that much? is it a major negative for the system? ill be getting an aerocool jet fan for the processor and 2 exhaust and two intake on the case....and im just wondering how long do you think could i use this system i mean how long can it meet system requirements? on newer softwares? thanks a lot for your time people.