Choosing a CPU

[Steel_Avatar]

I'm purchasing a new computer for school. Sadly enough, my P III 550 cannot handle the IDEs we're now using. Stupid CS department thinking that it was a good idea to revamp the whole first year to focus on Java.

Price is something of an issue for me, so I'm looking right now at the two following processors:

Athlon64 3000+ (2.0GHz) / 512KB L2 800MHz FSB Socket 754

or

Pentium4 3.0GHz / 512K L2 OD Cache / 800MHz FSB / Socket 478 (HT)

The P4 is cheaper by about 10 dollars, so the difference in cost is not the issue.

A few notes:

1. Whatever I purchase has to last at least 3 or 4 years without an upgrade.

2. My current and future workloads at school will involve the standard coding in various languages, but also a fair amount of animation, 2D and 3D algorithm work, and other graphics related stuff.

3. While I do want to be able to play games, that is not the primary concern ( if it was, I'd just choose the Athlon64 and be done with it ).

Any insights people could offer would be great. Links to benches would help mightily too.

[GIR]

If price is an issue, you might want to steer away from the A64.

[th5418]

Pentium 4. The A64 isnt exactly worth it at the moment. Its sitll 'new'

[Dacar92]

Go with the P4. Maximum PC had an issue a few months ago in which it placed head to head the P4, the AMD (something or other) and the Mac's newest chippy. The P4 won.

Maybe because Intel spends advertising money with them?

If you can't find the article to read, PM me and I will scan it and e-mail it to you.

[rplusplus]

Im a big proponent of AMD but if your going to be doing a lot of programming and the such go with Intel. They are better for Work related stuff whereas the AMD is much better for gaming.

And you don't need 64 bit processing at the moment of anytime in the immediate future.

R++

[Dacar92]

And you don't need 64 bit processing at the moment of anytime in the immediate future.

R++

That's because there isn't really any software that is capable of taking advantage of it. But it's coming. Games will likely be the first real challenge for it. Unless some Math Scientist writes some programs for fractals or the like.

[GIR]

The A64, at the moment, is a super-nerd "look what I got" kind of thing. A P4 will suit you fine. Or even an equivalent AMD, non-64, processor. Look around.

[Raistlin Majere]

The A64, at the moment, is a super-nerd "look what I got" kind of thing. A P4 will suit you fine. Or even an equivalent AMD, non-64, processor. Look around.

its the overpriced namebrand in the nerd world.

[Steel_Avatar]

If price is an issue, you might want to steer away from the A64.
The prices are identical.

Right now the 64 isn't worth it because there isn't anything that runs on it. But in a few years, who knows? And like I said, this has to last.

Dacar: I've seen conflicting benchmarks, that's why I'm not sure yet. What issue was that article where they compared the chips in?

[mysnistaken]

I'd say go with the P4 cuz HT will make a difference in applications (Also the Prescott cores are supposed to do better with creation applications...stuff but I don't have any real evidence of that yet)....whereas it might be a while before 64-bit applications are released...but I guess if you want to prepare for several years from now go with the Athlon seeing as 64bit will take over in a while..

[th5418]

Then go with the AMD if you want it to last a few years.....

[Steel_Avatar]

Mind you, we don't even have a 64bit OS yet ( don't mention *nix, I will NOT be running it ).

I'm leaning towards the P4. I think I'll stick it on an 865PE board, and pair with a 9800 Pro ( 128 MB ) version.

[Mad Merlin]

There isn't much point in getting the Athlon 64 over the Athlon XP if you're going to be running Windows, that extra ~140 USD won't be put to use for at least a year or two. If you want your computer to last you, I'd recommend putting that money into a larger hard drive and/or more RAM, both of which can be put to use immediately.

[SaroDarksbane]

Hyperthreading is awesome.

[Silvermyst]

if I wanted something that's gonna last a good 4+ years, I'd go for the AMD64. Like you said there's not much 64bit support yet, but that will change completely over the next 2-3 years. I think you can currently get a 64 bit version of windows XP, not that you need it since the AMD64 proc still runs 32 bit programs fine.

I'm far from an expert though in processors, GFX cards are more my forte

[garublador]

By the time 64 bit applications are popular enough to warrant having a processor that can handle them, the current AMD processors will be slow. By the time you need to get a processor that can run 64 bit applications because that's the standard, the current AMD chips will be ancient.

If you want to run 64 bit applications in the future, just wait and get a processor then. For now, stick with the P4.

[GIR]

The prices are identical.

Right now the 64 isn't worth it because there isn't anything that runs on it. But in a few years, who knows? And like I said, this has to last.

Dacar: I've seen conflicting benchmarks, that's why I'm not sure yet. What issue was that article where they compared the chips in?
Ok, well, if the prices are identical, then here's something to consider. In the next few years or so, yeah, there's probably going to be numerous uses for a 64-bit processor. However, AMD didn't just release their 64 and are now sitting around twiddling their thumbs. They're making newer processors. In a few years, there'll be newer, better 64-bit processors, and any applications are most likely going to be built around more of those specs, than around a processor that was made years previous. With most everything about computers, in a few years time, things can become out-dated at best, obsolete at worst, whether it be Pentium or AMD.

If I were in the situation you were, as much as I like AMD, I'd go with the P4. You'll get the best use out of it now.