Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Athlon 64 3000+, A Budget Gamer's Perspective

Posted by timothy on from the enjoy-the-las-vegas-effect dept.

VL contributes a link to Viperlair's budget-conscious and game-oriented review of an AMD processor that's not on the bleeding edge, but makes a good showing for the money: "For the price of the Socket-939, you can pick up an A64 3000+, K8T800 based motherboard, and a decent mid-range video card. For gamers on a budget, I think the choice is obvious."

13 of 333 comments (clear)

  1. Just what I was looking for... by Necromancyr · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Trying to put together a new system but I can't see dropping thousands and thousands on it. A similar combo was also recommended by Anandtech in their recent mid-level system guide.

    And it's a 64! :)

    1. Re:Just what I was looking for... by garymm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't even know how intel stays in the retail processor business. For as long as I've been building PCs (4 years, I think), Athlons have been considerably cheaper.

    2. Re:Just what I was looking for... by Slack3r78 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In the past, I'd agree with you - chipsets were the sticking point for AMD, but nForce2 is coming up on 2 years old this winter, and that was the turning point. Outside of one odd implementation (an MSI board that doesn't even use the standard drivers, but I dislike MSI anyway), I have yet to see an nForce2 machine with stability problems.

      Of the 3 nForce2 based machines I own and all the ones I've built for other people, I've yet to come across a piece of hardware that didn't just work. Time to bring your notions about AMD out of 2001. :-)

    3. Re:Just what I was looking for... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The last time I assembled a computer, the difference was $0. Granted, this was at a local shop. The chips weren't all that different in cost. This was pricing out the best board and the cheapest chip for each brand CPU.

      The kicker at the time was that the Intel chipset board included sound, a couple Firewire ports and a network jack all onboard. Even the shop's best Athlon boards didn't have all three, so it would have been just as much money to buy the extra cards, and then two of precious open slots would be taken.

      Those slots were important. I didn't assemble the replacement system (a used Xeon), but seriously, it has six PCI slots (four PCI 33/32 and two PCI 66/64) and I have a card in every slot.

    4. Re:Just what I was looking for... by bigbadwlf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Agreed.

      Once upon a time I ran a Pentium-MMX 233 on an Ali chipset. I never knew how much stability I could have had until I upgraded to a PIII-800 on a BX chipset. It was rock solid. Now I'm running a P4-3GHz on i865 - every bit as stable as my last.
      In short, I've come to believe the best way to go is with a CPU and chipset from the same manufacturer.
      Why doesn't AMD make their own chipsets? Who is going to know their CPUs better than them?

    5. Re:Just what I was looking for... by gabebear · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I just had some caps pop on my Epox 8RDA+ nforce2 based board. That's not really a sign of a problem with Nforce2 chipsets as much as Epox's bad luck selecting compenent suppliers. Anyway, hopefully my replacement board will get here from NewEgg soon.

  2. already outdated by _|()|\| · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This review claims that the cheapest socket 939 processor is $450. With the recent price drops, you can get a retail 3500+ for about $350, compared to $220 for a 3200+ or $175 for 3000+. Also, the review would have been much more useful had it shown results for both versions of the 3200+, so that you can compare the impact of clock speed and cache.

  3. Buying an Intel by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    used to be the lazy man's way to make sure you got a good mobo. You could always just buy an Intel branded board and you'd be good to go. With AMD, you had to navigate through several choices to avoid a crappy board (yes, I know those choices where there for Intel too, but they were so easy to avoid).

    Whelp, Nvidia came along and changed that. Now I recommend AMD/Nforce to everyone I talk too, if only for the kick-@$$ sound on the higher end boards :).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  4. When doing hardware upgrades... by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I mostly go for an optimum usefulness vs. cost ratio. That almost never translates to the latest, newest, fastest (too expensive for what you get). Nor does it translate to the cheapest available (cheap, but often low quality or lousy support). Although cheap, common, low-cost hardware can be a good choice. It might even mean second hand hardware, but from a useful/cost ratio perspective, that is not often a good choice.

    The sweet spot for me mostly lies around the bottom range of hardware that is sold new. A couple of times better than what you have, brandnew, with warranty, and relatively affordable.

    For single components, ignore the component-only specs, always consider how they improve your full setup. A CPU that's twice as fast, won't make your entire system twice as fast.

  5. Re:If I recall by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It sure sounds like a false economy going with S754 now to me too; saving up a little more and getting a S939 mobo and the 3500+ CPU would be much better. S939 is the way AMD is going with its mainstream CPUs, and there is the dual-core "Toledo" chip due late next year according to their roadmap to give a sweet upgrade path that's pretty much guaranteed to work.

    I've just upgraded two of my boxes to the 3500+ and 3800+ S939 chips and couldn't be happier with the results. Both Linux (FC2 x86_64 on the 3500+) and Windows (XP on the 3800+) motor along far faster than I was expecting, and I have that dual core upgrade to fall back on when games require that much grunt. As far as I'm concerned it's "Intel Inside" alright - "Inside the store, covered in dust on the shelf". :)

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  6. Re:How about sub-1000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Yeah, if we're talking "budget" here, it seems much smarter (to me) to stick with a 32-bit processor. We (or at least I) have no idea how long the socket-754 will exist, or whether there will be a different upgrade path in the not-so-distant future (if anyone wishes to correct me, please do). Socket-A motherboards and processors are dirt cheap right now, and you can get a lot of bang for your buck. Right now on newegg, you can get an nforce2 ultra 400 for $54, and an athlon mobile xp 2500+ for $86 (Why mobile? There's a version with 1.35v core, which can be overclocked far higher stably than most standard athlon processors which cost much more). Throw in a 9800pro or nvidia equivalent for about $200, and all the rest that the parent mentioned (except I'd get a cheap case), and you've got yourself a true budget rig for about $600.

  7. Gaming? Windows? 64-bit? NOT. by fire-eyes · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Heh. When I think gaming people I think windows. But, in this case, it's pointless: there's no stable 64-bit version of windows.

    Now, if we start talking linux, then yes, this is great. At least with an nvidia card (note: ATI still has not come out with 64 bit drivers for linux).

    And no, I didn't RTFA.

    --
    -- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
  8. Depends on your budget size ... by dougmc · · Score: 2, Interesting
    After all, even Bill Gates has a budget when he buys a new computer. It's just bigger than mine probably is.

    When I want a new computer, I see what Fry's has. They usually have a decent Athlon cpu + cheap MB for $80-$100 at any given time. Lately it's been Athlon XP 2700 or 2800's -- which are really quite fast. The MB is cheap, but I've had generally good results with them.

    You could get a system that will play Doom reasonably well for something like $400. If you have $1000 to spend, sure, you can get something that's a bit better, but not that much better.