Originally posted by: Stumps
there is a pretty high demand right now for AXP's (at least in Australia anyway)....a lot of people are trying to upgrade their old rigs to run Windows Vista
It makes me laugh a bit because alot of those people are using NF2 chipsets...and it isn't supported by Vista :laugh:
Good idea, I'll do the same.Originally posted by: BladeVenom
Maybe I should start selling my Athlon XPs.
Originally posted by: Artanis
Btw, NF2 chipset is supported very well by Vista.
Originally posted by: Stumps
Originally posted by: Artanis
Btw, NF2 chipset is supported very well by Vista.
not by Nvidia it isn't...the basic windows driver doesn't work properly and leaves a few devices undetected...not to mention the NF2 IDE driver supplied by Microsoft is as slow as sh!t.
Nvidia have stated that they won't be supporting the NF2 chipset in Vista
Originally posted by: SickBeast
The Athlon XP was a good chip, and was very popular due to their low price and good perfomance compared with the hot and slow P4.
I still run an Athlon XP/NF2 combo and it's been so fast that I've avoided upgrading to an A64/C2D. It does what I need it to very efficiently.
People probably want to upgrade old rigs. It doesn't make sense tho. You can get a Sempron faster than anything in the Athlon XP family for *cheap* these days!
Originally posted by: Soviet
and the P4's were faster too.
You're kidding right? If you look at the P4 from a performance per watt standpoint, it is the worst processor ever developed. Efficiency was not the P4, hence intel's scrapping of the architecture.Originally posted by: Soviet
The AXP was always hotter than any of the P4's it competed against (preshott was the A64's competitor) and the P4's were faster too.
Originally posted by: lopri
OP: Did you check the prices of RDRAM?
Originally posted by: SickBeast
You're kidding right? If you look at the P4 from a performance per watt standpoint, it is the worst processor ever developed. Efficiency was not the P4, hence intel's scrapping of the architecture.Originally posted by: Soviet
The AXP was always hotter than any of the P4's it competed against (preshott was the A64's competitor) and the P4's were faster too.
The Athlon XP outperformed the earliest revision of the P4. The P4C was quicker in some benchmarks and slower in others. The Prescott was very hot and a little slower per clock than the P4C.
From a price/performance standpoint the AXP always blew the P4 out of the water, especially factoring in motherboard/memory cost (rambus anyone?).
Originally posted by: A554SS1N
I always remember seeing a 3200+ Athlon XP performing as good as a 2.8Ghz P4 Northwood - it was miles behind the 3.2Ghz P4.... maybe that's just a few tomshardware guides I'm thinking back to (which were controversial at the time because people accused them of being Intel supporters).
Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
always depends on what u use the computer for. my younger bro he got a AXP3200+ on a Abit NF7-S and let me tell you this old rig still rocks. boots up faster than 10seconds, plays WoW with an 98pro @ 30-40 fps. Now if ur like that kind of guy who likes to play WoW, WC3, surf the net, listen to music and thats it...what u need to upgrade for? time for upgrade is when he decides to play a new ressource hungry game but until that day comes his old shity rig is still workin like a charm.