[quote:8dd90]now thats an overclock..... however as i said its using nothing other than the stock HSF and bios settings. AMD can also be o/c but unlike P4 you are now dealing with manually cutting/joining parts on your cpu as well as filling in the trench the nex XPs come with. this is not something either of us can assume your standard user is capable of or willing to do. [/quote:8dd90]




oOo: :::::::Melee caucks his head like a confused dog:::::::: oOo:


.............I push button.........gun go boom.........*smile*.........

cool

If that 2.0 P4 is a northwood like mine you can probably overclock it in excess of 3.0 ghz.

"Northwood" is a plant where a .13 micron p4's are produced. The smaller size helps in cooling and the chip can be pushed farther than a standard p4.

Unfortunatly i cant find the thread that followed a guy as he overclocked his 1.6a (a is northwood) to 2.8ghz. Completly stable. He had to upgrade his cooling and a few other tweeks, but it was there and running fine.

[url:0605d]http://forums.anandtech.com/categories.cfm?catid=28&STARTPAGE=1[/url:0605d]

Some good overclocking talk going on there. A thread with a 2.0 at 2.8.

Over all i think you made a fine choice. AMD's are nice chips but typically run a bit hotter and that heat can hamper efforts to over clock them. I did do my research before buying this chip and everything i read put this chip on par or better than the top of the line AMD of that time. 1800xp (clock of 1600)

Now that may sound a bit odd a 2.0 on par with a clock of 1.6. In fact its not odd at all. AMD and Intel have taken differant approaches to gaining speed. Contrary to popular beleif it is not all about clock speed, its all about whats done in 1 clock. So AMD takes the apprach of getting more done per cycle and running fewer cycles. While Intel does less per cycle, but has more cycles.

Its all about your preferance. AMD user will always call Intel users idiots. The fact of the matter is that Intell has made vast improvments with there latest chips and they are untouchable with an AMD. The 512 FSB was a big step with the 2.52ghz P4. Now AMD will up theres and continue on. The fact is buy what you think is right for you. Because tomorrow there will be something better than what was the best the day before, and what you bought will be shunned by all.

Well, to change the subject a lil', what do you think of those logitec speakers? I have the Klipsch and they're the best sounding speakers that i heard for the PC. I'm just curious if the logitec can rival the Klipsch in your opinion.

The only thing that can rival Klipsch is a newer version of Klipsch. I have had many sets of speakers. I am an avid home audio freak.
My Klipsch still amaze me every time I crank up my computer.

If you're into overclocking intel is the way to go. The 1.6a can normally be overclocked to 2.2 ghz, an 600 mhz overclock and thats with the standard heatsink fan.

You wil never see an amd cpu (for the forseeable future) get anywhere near the region of 800mhz more power. 200mhz maybe but even then you need better cooling and anything more than that requires water cooling or a vapochill case which brings the cpu down to minus temperatures. Thats if you want to spend about $800 on a vapochill system.


I built a pc for a friend a couple of night ago with an xp chip, first time ive seen one an it seems to run cooler than my thunderbird. Saying that though i'l prob go the p4 route when upgrading anyway.

I like my Logitech speakers. They offer damn good sound, good clearity and a punch. I got the 2 speaker and sub set up since i live in an apartment, but the 4 speaker set sounded amazing in the store. I was so tempted to get it. Then i thought of the complaints i would get playing Mohaa and having shit exploding everywhere.

[url:48a5f]http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm?page=products/productlist&crid=18&countryid=19&languageid=1[/url:48a5f]
(I wanted the big four speaker set)

When i got a set 4 speaker, sub set of Altec lansings in a deal with a computer component i gave those a whirl. They crackled at certain times and all my tweakings couldnt get them to work properly in all situations. On top of that the sub didnt work in Mohaa. Over all i'll never get altec lansing, even free. I went back to my two speaker set of Logitechs.

They work fine and have only given me the best sound quality. Good set of speakers for $50 (us). Only thing wrong is the blue "on" light is so damn bright i have it turned slighty away. Very impressive speakers.

I hate AMD, but I will admit their Athlon XP line is superior to the P4. BUT! But, now the P4 is up to 2.80Ghrz, making it the leading processor right now. In today's top PC's, Athlon's XP 2200 was ONLY outperformed by the P4 2.53Ghrz, and only by about 3 points on http://www.madonion.com's 3DMark 2001. Now sopposevly, the 2.80 beats it by about 106. So, yes the Athlon is good for gaming, but only if you are not going to buy a processor faster than 2.2Ghrz. Anything over that, you can get the P4. Another plus about the Athlon is that it's cheaper.

2.8 gigs? What are you HONESTLY running that 800 megs makes ANY kind of difference? I mean I can see you wanting to get the most out of your product before it becomes obsollete but -

Sheesh. 1.2gigs has served me more than well.

MOH is such a system hog that every hertz counts. oOo:

And there's a big difference between 2Ghrz and 2.8. Just try the difference between a 1.3Ghrz P4 and a 2Ghrz. You'll see it.

shucks... I've been playing just fine with an 850 and a geforce 2 biggrin:

Although I can't rightfully see how anyone could drop like $500 just on a processor, even if it slightly out performs an AMD. Guess I'm just not rolling in cash like you guys. and arguing is futile anyway since both chip makers are constantly making improvements and changes. one company could be ahead one quarter, and a different one the next....who knows.

It's just a matter of "when you buy" and "how much you're willing to spend". I've owned both intel and AMD based systems and have nothing against either. at this point in time, both offer more power than 99% of people really need anyway...

Well my brother on wednesday is placing an order for a 2.4ghz(b) (133mhz fsb) pentium 4 with a motherboard and some ddr-ram. ed:

The above setup will make my sd-ram 1.33ghz thunderbird look very slow ffs :(

with 2.4ghz he can easily get 3ghz out of it and possibly a few hundred mhz more and the real laugh is its a pc thats not for games playing, he does a lot of video encoding which rapes cpu time so he needs the fastest cpu he can get (well affordable anyway). His gfx card will be a radeon 8500 dv.

Time for me to think about an upgrade, considering the radeon r-350 when thats released and a pentium 4 setup as im pissed off with amd's.

[quote:f8e07]shucks... I've been playing just fine with an 850 and a geforce 2

Although I can't rightfully see how anyone could drop like $500 just on a processor, even if it slightly out performs an AMD. Guess I'm just not rolling in cash like you guys. and arguing is futile anyway since both chip makers are constantly making improvements and changes. one company could be ahead one quarter, and a different one the next....who knows.

It's just a matter of " when you buy" and "how much you're willing to spend". I've owned both intel and AMD based systems and have nothing against either. at this point in time, both offer more power than 99% of people really need anyway...[/quote:f8e07]

I'm from this school of thought - the MOST I use my computer for is 3D MAX - and I still only REALLY need RAM to make that program move smoothly. I've used a friends p4 and honest to god wasn't convinced I need anymore processing speed.

As far as gaming is concerned - I REALLY dont need to see the fur on the ALLIED jackets to feel fulfilled.

I think ALOT of this comes from this desire to not be left "behind" in the tech-race. As soon as a game tells me I need more processing speed to compete - then I'll upgrade. Till then, I've very comfortable not shelling out that kind of cash.

Well, congrats on getting your new computer. My friend just bought a Dell 4500, and stayed home today because it's either coming today, tomorrow, or the day after, but, he still insists on missing school for it, I, on the other hand, am dehydrated because I went on a trip to Universal Studios this last weekend, and sweated all 120oz. of soda off in less than 2 days. My computer is pretty good, just upgraded to 512MB SDRAM, tried to upgrade to an ATI Radeon 7000, figured it doesn't fit in my computer, don't know why; but, I have an ATI Rage Pro II 16MB, which running on MEDIUM and 16-Bit graphics on MOH is 80 ping on my 2.2MBit/268kb. I have a P4 1.8GHz, and my other computer has an AMD K6-2 550MHz, now, of course there's a huge difference between those two, but I see no problem with either of them, when I got my HP (AMD), it was top of the line, and everybody wanted to play it; now, 3 weeks later, 700MHz was the best....I love my Dell, P4 is working fine, no need to overclock it, though I could easily get 2.4GHz, I feel no need for anything over 900MHz. I mean, the most I've seen a game needing was 700MHz, 16MB gfx, and 128MB RAM, so, I'm perfectly fine except for my damn gfx card.

LOL... I was bored and surfing around on tom's hardware site and found out I was more right about the processor race constantly switching hands than I thought.

about 2 weeks ago AMD came outta nowhere with the athlon xp 2600+, beating intel's best offering. it used their recently released thoroughbred core and could handle being overclocked.

THEN, a mere 5 days later intel launched their P4 2.8, beating AMD down again.

Due to the overclocking ability of the 2600+, AMD is rumored to be going for 2800+ in october. and you know intel will have something to fight back with like a P4 3066 (although I still can't seem to help noticing the huge price differences...and that's an unbiased opinion, it's just a fact that intel is hundreds more)

and this sort of thing is bound to happen over and over again. it's just an ever flip-flopping quest for speed that doesn't seem to have an end. and I think the only people who really care about having whatever is fastest are the ones that:

1. have a lot of money
2. just like bragging rights for being the "first" with something (even though in no time flat something better will come out)

the articles are interesting from a technology standpoint just to see how development progresses these days though:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q3/020826/index.html
(this article is about the P4 taking the lead, but it's interesting no matter which company you may "side" with if any)