<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=168861#168861" target="_new">Check it!</A>

and post your opinions.

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>

Wow great job. That will makes things alot easier for people.

Cool guide. And I'd say one that is really unbiased.
But you may want to consider AXP with 512kB cache as a good options for gamers.

The scotty has sse3...u forgot that...


If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a procesor
110% BX fanboy

Yup good guide!

I think he will recommend Barton 2500+ in the Overclocking section. Because alongside with unlocked 1800+/2000+, the Barton 2500+ is the best AMD overclocker and it's damn cheap!

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?

Nice job

I know the oc section will follow, but I think it is worth saying (perhaps in some graded way) which you will get good oc'ing from (eg xp1800) and which are bad.

Oh, an important point imo: when talking about these lower end xp's, such as the 1700, make it clear that you can upgrade as far as the 2400 (2ghz). Upgradeability for relatively cheap is an important consideration for me, and many others no doubt.

Cheers,

Chris

XP2000, 256ddr 2100ram, GF4 MX440, XP Pro

Good job!

I can say it's not biased. You might add a little section on chipset. Not full range recommendation/decription, just a short note for each platform.

Exemple : AMD XP best chipset is nForce2 400 ULTRA and AMD64 is Via...

I know it's a CPU guide, but it's not worth buying a GOOD cpu with a non performing chipset.

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?

found a nit picky edit...

replace version with versions...


If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a procesor
110% BX fanboy

Very nice guide

Athlon 2700xp+ (oc: 3200xp+ with 200fsb) , Radeon 9800pro (oc: 410/370) , 512mb pc3200 (3-3-3-2), Asus A7N8X-X

Thank you


If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a procesor
110% BX fanboy

Congrats, you put a lot of work in it, it may actually be usefull. A few constructive comments though:

1) change the order. Move "Picking the right cpu" to the top of the post, its what people will need/want to read. the rest is more...background info. As it is now, a newbie being directed to the FAQ may not even scroll down far enough to find what he needs to read.

2) I know the whole point of your exercise is to make generalizations, but it might be usefull to include links to specific benchmarks if you have the time. Especially things like DivX encoding, 3D rendering or CAD.. people generally use just one specific app for this (not surprising if you know how much a true 3D package costs), and they should mostly only look at the performance of a certain cpu for that single app. So it would be nice to able to click to benchmarks using 3DS, Maya, POVray, ..

3) you knew this was comming: I can't agree with your x86-64 statements. I'll first discuss factual errors:
-"AMD64 is marketing name of x86-64".. minor nitpicking, but x86-64 was also a marketing name. I would rather say "AMD64 is AMDs marketing term to describe its 64 bit extentions to the x86 ISA" or something
- "and it will overcome the 4GB memory limitation of current 32 bit CPUs. Since this feature is currently not utilized in windows environment and more than 4 GB memory is going to be necessary in desktop PCs at least until 2006, "

NO NO NO NO, and again NO. LOL, please Spitfire, didnt you read any of the discussion on this ? 64 bit is <b>not</b> about accessing more than 4 GB RAM, its about having a flat memory address space, allowing apps to break the 2 GB address space limit, regardless how much or how little RAM you have. A 64 bit cpu and OS are definately usefull even with only 1 gig or RAM. please, do me a favor, and read <A HREF="http://www.chip-architect.com/news/2003_04_20_Looking_at_Intels_Prescott_part2.html#The need for 64 bit processing: Closer than you think." target="_new">this little piece by Hans de Vries</A>. Scroll down to "The need for 64 bit processing: Closer than you think." Its only 1 paragraphs, and nearly a year old, but still as true as ever. Keep in mind Hans is not at all a DTP'er, and there are plenty of people using Photoshop. And this is just one tiny example. Also bare in mind, he is not even mentioning the fact windows (and every other 32 bit OS) is limited to 2 GB /process as they reserve 2 GB for the kernel, VMM, etc. (okay, 3 GB for XP PRo if you edit boot.ini, but you need recompiled apps to take advantage of this).

You are entitled your own opinion on 64 bit adoptions, but at the very least I think you should report that opinions vary widely on this matter... minimum minimorum. Otherwise, I believe you are doing your readers a disservice by not giving them the whole picture. At least allow them to make up their own minds.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by bbaeyens on 02/03/04 04:24 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

1) Good idea, I think I'll do this change.

2) Yeah, generalization is the whole point of this guide. But most of the similar apps. prefer similar kind of CPU. Exceptions usually come from programs that aren't used in the first place, but has some use (Ogg Vorbis encoding for example, AXP 3200+ = P4 3.2 GHz = A64 3400+ in this app, SSE2 is useless here). The generalization thing will still be the main concept, but I will try to point out exceptions from now.

BTW, if you use pirated software, then "how much it costs" is useless. Especially students and beginners mess with lots of software without buying. And many small Asian commercial animation houses use any software they want to use, because of free style piracy. (don't be rude on them, they really can't afford to pay $400 to $1000 for a single software. They will be out of business if they're forced to pay for Maya, 3DSMax)

3) Maybe I'll rename the AMD64/x86-64 naming things according to your suggestion.

I've read most of your arguments about memory limitations. I know it's 4 GB addressing (4 GB, 2GB + 2 GB), not only physical RAM. But then, currently most people are fine with 512 MB physical and 512 MB virtual, total 1 GB addressing. In fact, I'm using 512 MB physical + 256 MB virtual, total 768 MB addressing space. I can't remember when I last got "low virtual memory" message (my work is gaming, some audio editing, audio/video encoding). Some people need 1 GB physical and maybe similar ammount virtual RAM, but they are still not majority.

And "until 2006" is my way to say "end of 2005". I want to mean, 4 GB addressing will be good enough for 95% people for whole 2005.

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>

nit picking is very helpful. try to find more similar things.....

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>

>BTW, if you use pirated software, then "how much it costs"
>is useless

Well then, consider the learning curve of a program like 3DS. Once you get to know it, you'll think twice about switching to Maya. Oh well, this is OT anyway.

>But then, currently most people are fine with 512 MB
>physical and 512 MB virtual, total 1 GB addressing.

Most people are fine with a 2500+ for now. I am. In fact, I might be fine with it for another year or two. Does that mean I wouldnt benefit from a 3400+ ? A P4EE ? Sure I would ! same applies to 64 bit. You may not *need* it, but that doesnt make it useless.. far from. And unlike a P4EE/A64/FX, chip, AMD64 support is free.

Besides, if I spend >$400 on just the cpu, I expect to hang on that system for a while. 64 bit is not a requirement, nor will it be for quite a while, but it is anything but useless.

> I want to mean, 4 GB addressing will be good enough for
>95% people for whole 2005.

Define "good enough". You mean like in "sub optimal" ? You mean like people found windows 3.11 good enough in 1996 ? Or windows 98/ME good enough today ? It still gets the job done you know.. who needs XP ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

BTW, did you read that link ?