Barton 2500+ or P4 2.4c?

[p5woody4]

Which system should I build and overclock?

1) Barton 2500+, Abit NF7-S, pc3200 or
2) P4 2.4C, Abit IC7, pc3500?

My last real overclock was a celeron 300a to 450 many years ago, which is still running. I have built other systems but no real overclocking. I am now trying to decide between these 2 setups. I am assuming that the Barton will overclock to 200 fsb without much problem giving me 3200+ and the 2.4 should overclock to 3.0 speed without doing anything special. are these good assumption? Will retail chips handle these basic overclocks? If not what cooling should I buy for a basic overclock, nothing extreme?

I am also assuming I will need better memory on the 2.4 because I am going with a higher FSB, is this correct?

Right now I am leaning toward the Barton since it is 120-150 dollars cheaper and both systems should perform about the same. Based on benchmarks, it looks like a AMD 3200+ is about the same as a p4 3.0.

Any suggestions or advice?

 

[Lonyo]

I was looking at the same 2 systems, a P4 2.4 or a Barton. I think Barton is the better option, as it will be cheaper, but won't perform much worse, if worse at all.
I would (and will do in the future) go with the Barton setup.

 

[Swanny]

Well, right now the 2.4Ghz P4c (retail) is $100 more expensive than a retail 2500+ Barton. Simply given that fact I'd get the Barton. That way if you don't get the overclock you're looking for (on either system) you won't have as much money invested.

 

[Zarick]

actually from what I am reading the 2.4B on a springdale(as opposed to the 845pe) should be faster than a 2500. A 2.4c even faster still. But the cost difference is significant. 96 bucks for a retail 2500 vs 161 for a retail p42.4b or 187 for a 2.4c.

 

[CraigRT]

Barton for sure... my 2500+ Barton performs within 5-10% of my 2.4B overclocked to 3GHz.. I love this CPU.

 

[onza]

RESELL VALUE = intel, so i'd go with that.

 

[Lonyo]

Welcome to the forums btw. And you shoul dnever sell on parts. Just save them up until you have enough spares for another computer

 

[p5woody4]

Thanks Lonyo even though I am not new it has just been a while since my last post. I have posted on an off for years but I could not remember my ID and password so I had to create a new account. I have also changed email addresses so I figured it was just easier to create a new one.

I know overclocking is not guarnteed, but what are my chances of getting the 2500+ to go to 200 fsb if I use a MB with the nforce2 ultra 400? I would think that most 2500+ should be able to handle this FSB.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: p5woody4
Thanks Lonyo even though I am not new it has just been a while since my last post. I have posted on an off for years but I could not remember my ID and password so I had to create a new account. I have also changed email addresses so I figured it was just easier to create a new one.

I know overclocking is not guarnteed, but what are my chances of getting the 2500+ to go to 200 fsb if I use a MB with the nforce2 ultra 400? I would think that most 2500+ should be able to handle this FSB.

Almost guaranteed. The chip and nForce2 board should handle it easily, RAM is usually the limiting factor.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Welcome to the forums btw. And you shoul dnever sell on parts. Just save them up until you have enough spares for another computer

NOt very good advice...i have been selling my old parts since 2001 and I have paid for nearly all my upgrades with little out of pocket expense...In that time I have gone from a p-pro 200 (system 1) and a AMD K62 400 (system 2) to now with about 7-8 cpu upgrades, 4-5 vid card upgrades, and 5 mobo upgrades....

 

[Quackmaster]

p5woody4, I have been having the same experience. I've spent the last 3 days *geez i need some sleep* researching this EXACT subject. I have found that I'm choosing between the following two possible systems from newegg (note that I have no existing DDR and I already own an ATI 9700, thus influencing my purchasing decisions)-


rig #1
$96 Barton 2500+ (bang for the buck)
$138 2x256 Kingston HyperX 3500 DDR $69each (good ocing RAM that won't break the bank, and is pretty stable)
$99 MSI K7N2 Delta-L (Nforce board with no integrated video. Mature Nforce 2 board easy on the features)

Total $333.
You could even go for the Kingston 3200 HyperX DDR sticks and save $11 on each to bring the price down to $311.

Pros- cheap, reliable due to platform maturity. Very fast for any games through the end of the year except maybe Half Life2 or Doom 3. Good overclocking potential (average OC is ~400MHz according to the OC database). Works great in most software right now.

Cons- will most likely be a relatively low end CPU for Doom3/HalfLife2. CPU upgrade path is limited (xp3200 is likely the end, or close to it). Needs more aggressive (read: aftermarket heatsink/watercooling=$$) cooling to OC.

rig #2
$196 P4 2.4c (likely to overclock to 3GHz+, but 2.8 is almost a given)
$138 2x256 Kingston HyperX3500
$99 Intel Springdale based (865pe) Abit is7-e (don't "boo" this board just yet) OR $138 Asus P4P800

Total $433- 472
The 865/875 is undoubtedly a better performer than the AMD, but costs $100-140 more.... hmmm

Pros- VERY likely (but not guaranteed) to top 3GHz. Hyperthreading is becoming more useful. Will most likely be a good mid/lower-mid level CPU for Doom3/Half Life2 (assuming you get that magic 3GHz overclock) Great Upgrade path using Intel "Prescott" cpus means you will be safe through at least 3.8ish GHz. Stock cooling is quite good for OCing. Last and Least: the "cutting edge kewlness" factor.

Cons- unstable and immature chipsets mean all kinds or issues are plauging rigs built on these 865/875 boards. Random reboots, RAM timings driving people crazy, 8MB hdds in RAID not working properly, beta BIOSes everywhere (which can be a VERY good thing if you're hurting), 45 (!!) reboots in a day... The real question is "do you mind being a beta tester" ?!? Also, the cost is high for the performance if you don't get to the 3GHzish overclock. Clearly, if you aren't comfortable troubleshooting hardware issues, then you could be in for a lot of trouble.

It seems to me that the Athlon path is an easy, but less rewarding one. Maybe you'll get to 2.3GHz with an extra $30-40 spent on a heatsink and be happier than a chair under J-Lo's butt. The NForce2 boards are also a LOT less finicky about RAM. The Athlon route is also far less likely to cause premature baldness or sleepless nights. Meanwhile the P4 path gives us the opportunity for unseen levels of performance, great upgrade paths, far more tweakability, and a place in the Professor X's School for the Gifted and a free lunch. Yeah, right

I'm picking the P4 path, but at least I've got a backup rig, broadband internet for help/tech support, and lots of patience/experience with banging my head on the wall. I know what I'm getting into. I also have a specific plan, and that is to run this sucker hard now, and then maybe upgrade from my Radeon 9700 and Pentium2.4c to an ATI R400/nVidia NV40 and Intel "Prescott" sometime after Doom3/HalfLife2 hit the shelves.

What do you plan to do with either of these systems in 4-6 months? If this is gonna be your primary rig for HL2 or Doom3, maybe the Athlon will be enough (especially with an xp3200+ upgrade), but I would plan on having enough money to buy a new vid card if you don't have at least a 9700 or Geforce 5800. If you already do have one of those vid cards, then I would save money to upgrade your system's weak point (CPU or RAM or vid) sometime around when those two games hit the market.

Also, FYI I've been hitting the forums at the HardOCP, overclockers.com, Toms, Ars etc etc. Thus far the best dialogue on 865/875 issues appears to be going on over at abxzone.com (formerly Asusboards). Check it out.

Anyways, sorry for the long post . This is my way of rationalizing/easing my head over the fact that I'm broke, but just shelled out $500 for a new 'puter that has immense potential to give me a huge pain in the a**. Now where's my beer? I need to calm down!

 

[bgeh]

Originally posted by: onza
RESELL VALUE = intel, so i'd go with that.

maybe it's true............but AMD lower end is cheaper than intel, so i think there's no difference

 

[peroni]

Quackmaster, thanks for your message.
You saved me a day of research.
Thanks!

 

[p5woody4]

Quackmaster, thanks for info

I found this review that compares an AMD 3200+ with a P4 3.0. Acehardware

Gaming Benchmarks AMD 3200+ (400 MHz FSB) versus Pentium 4 3 GHz C (800 MHz FSB)
Age of Mythology 1024x768 12 % faster
BF1942 1024x768 10 % slower
Comanche 800x600 19 % slower
Dungeon Siege 1024x768 5 % slower
Freelancer 1024x768 High Quality 2 % slower
Ghost Recon 1024x768 32 % slower
Grand Prix 4 1024x768 5 % faster
Jedi Knight 800x600 4 % slower
Medivial War 1024x768 4 % faster
Unreal Tournament 2003 Asbestos 6 % slower

Based on this it looks like on average, the p4 is 5% faster.

I am not a hardcore overclocker so I will be happy running the amd at 400fsb or the P4 at 3.0. Based on this and the information from Quackmaster I am stilling leaning toward the AMD setup for the following reasons.

1) I only upgrade every couple of years and I will not be reusing any of my parts, I will give it to somebody in my family when I am ready to upgrade next time.
2) I don't think 5% will make a difference on which games I can run.
3) Stability, I like stable machines
4) Price/performance
5) Support the underdog, this is America

 

[Quackmaster]

Hey peroni (like the beer?) and p5woody4, glad to be of help. It's nice to see someone(s) benefit from my blabbering:Q. I spent a lot of time researching prices/parts/latest performance. I spent even more time trying to rationalize how my broke-a** was gonna spend $500 for a new computer. WHO CARES?!?!? I GOT A NEW P4 2.4c :evil: mwhahahah

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: onza
RESELL VALUE = intel, so i'd go with that.

yeah, but you pay full price at first too, so that doesn't matter one bit.

it's like a honda.. sure it's got good resale, but it's alot more expensive to buy a Honda than a domestic. (poor resale on a domestic) Id rather buy whatever is cheaper initially.

price = AMD > INTEL

 

[BobbyC]

Quackmaster - Why couldn't I find this message a few days earlier???

I just went thru the same thought process. Almost identical parts too!

Option 1
AMD 2500+ Barton
Abit NF7
2 x Kingston HyperX 3200
$306

Option 2
Intel P4 2.4c
Abit IS7-E
2 x Kingston HyperX 3200/256
$400

Option 3
Intel P4 2.4c
Asus P4P800
2 x Kingston HyperX 3200/256
$429

All prices were from newegg.com or googlegear.com

I'm leaning toward Option 3 at the moment but I haven't seen enough review to make a decision yet. I upgraded my computer about 1.5 yrs ago on an impulse and didn't research it enough and got stuck with a Willamette cpu and a D845WN mobo with 512mb PC133. I don't want to make the same mistake again.

-Bobby

 

[IQJUMPuw]

I would go with option #1...

For $100+ more, you won't see any significant differences. They are both very nice CPU's, but you can spend that $100 on something else like a video card or something. You will have a faster AMD rig for the same price.

 

[onza]

its alll opinions... no one is right

 

[Quackmaster]

hey BobbyC, I hear ya loud and clear. Tough call, huh? I considered going with PC3200 and just using the 5:4 ratio (or 3:2 if the cpu really clocked), but eventually ruled that out as it's a pretty safe bet that 250HMz fsb is attainable with good RAM. That would put the RAM at stock speeds of 200MHz and still leave some MHz room for the jump to watercooling.

Actually, I've found quite a few users with the hardcore RAM, Twinmos, Kingston HyperX and Corsair all getting to 260+fsb speeds. That being the case, DDR466 (PC3700) is VERY viable since it allows the opportunity to reach 240-250ish fsb speeds with a 1:1 ratio (!!!).

Dig the links for some of the useful stuffs I've been finding-


asus p4p800d at bleedingedge.com

Great PC3500 roundup with Corsair, Mushkin, Kingston, Geil

As for the statement by IQJUMPuw about saving the $100 for something else, that is exactly what I'm doing now by going Springdale/2.4c/2x256MB of Kingston. Otherwise I'd go Canterwood/2.6-2.8c/2x512 TwinMOS or hardcorecooling DDR466 for ~$175-250 more and get that extra 5-10% overclock/all-around performance.

In other words, I agree with you onza. We've all got a different view based on our software needs/current performance level/existing hardware. Reading these types of posts sometimes helps people (I know it helps me--- :light:--- )to look at other options.

 

[BobbyC]

IQJUMPuw - The reason I was thinking about the AMD solution was to save a few bucks. But for longevity, Option 2 and 3 are a better choice, IMO. 800 fsb is the way to go and with the Athlon at the end of its lifecycle, I feel I might be in the same position a year or so down the line. I already bought a MSI Ti4200 128mb card last month and that's what got me thinking about upgrading. My current mobo and cpu is pretty weak now.

onza - I agree 100%. I've been trying to discuss this on another board and I've been getting responses by diehard AMD and Intel guys and it just turned into a flame war, which I'm not interested in and give less credibility to their opinions.

Quackmaster - It's a very tough call. I don't know how much o/c'ing I'll do but I want that option so I don't have to buy upgrades in a year. I'd like to see at least 250mhz fsb, which I've been reading is easy to do with good 3200 ram. I'd like my mobo and cpu to last for a couple of years hopefully. I decided to go with 3200 HyperX as it was the best memory for the price ($57 ea for 256mb)

Thanks for those links but I already saw them The 2nd link is what made me change from corsairs to kingstons.

With all that said, I'm really leaning toward option #3 since it's only a bit more than #2. I'm still wary of AMD procs from some of the benchmarks I've seen.

-Bobby

ps. I like the dialog on here, it's actually helpful

 

[squidman]

Why do ppl oiverclock, if they still get more than 30 fps in games at highest graphic settings? I dont understand...

 

[BobbyC]

I think the fps is just for benchmarking purposes. The human eye can register at most 30 fps.

I think overclocking has more to do with computers being a hobby more than the actual performance and getting the most out of your equipment. It's like having a car with 500 horsepower. Why do you need it when 100 or 150 hp will do for driving around town?

-Bobby
slow computer, fast car

 

[Tom]

Why even get out of bed ?

 

[Quackmaster]

Originally posted by: squidman
Why do ppl oiverclock, if they still get more than 30 fps in games at highest graphic settings? I dont understand...

Squidman, just to be clear, I am not in anyway trying to flame or rag on your hardware etc. That said, to answer you question I would first ask two questions,

"what kind of computer environment are you currently using for video games?"

AND

"what TYPE of video games do you play?"

Example, if you play the Sims, c&c Generals, Dungeon Siege, or any other game with an overhead, isometric, or other non-first-person viewpoint then the 30/sec barrier is not all that big a deal. "Yes", more frames are never a bad thing , but it doesn't really affect gameplay.

But if you're playing a first-person-shooter, flight simulator, or driving game and you have the hardware to get framerates in the 50-100+ range.. well... FRAMES ARE HUGE!!! (sorry for yelling). This is not me being some fanboy benchmarking nut either. I was playing Counterstrike and Aliens vs Predators2 at a party/LAN (more a party than a LAN) last year. It was at a friend's house and there were a lot of non-gamers there(but lots of :beer: drinkers). We had 6-10 machines running at any given time for folks to just hop on and play at their leisure. At that time, I had the fastest video card/cpu combo at the LAN and quite a few of the non-gamers gravitated to watch the gameplay on my computer. Their remarks always consisted of how good it looked on my computer. The thing was, several of my friends at the party had the same video card running the same in-game detail level, with better monitors and plenty capable machines to the point that there were several computers displaying framerates in the 70+ range. Mine was locked at a constant 99fps all the time. PEOPLE WHO DON'T GAME CAN OFTEN SEE THE DIFFERENCE between 30fps and 70. Even stumbling drunks at a house party

The human eye has been measured to see between 28 and 35 images.sec. Problem is that in video games our eyes are not synchronized to the monitor's refresh rate. Compound that with the video card's output not being synchronized to the monitor (Vsynch off) and you can easily see 30fps as though it were 15-20. ouch! That's why people often seek more frames, particularly at the 70 and 100 fps barriers. Those two points give your eyes the opportunity to see an image 2 or 3 (respectively) times as opposed to the single opportunity provided by 30fps.

If you've ever seen a computer running 30fps in Quake3, Counterstrike, Descent etc and also seen another computer beside it running 100 frames/sec (we are assuming all game detail/effect levels to be equal) you would be hard-pressed to find folks who CAN'T see the difference (my 89 year old neighbor was able to tell, and he's blind in one eye.:Q "No" this is not a joke). Don't believe me? Who cares!?! What matters to you most?