Pentium 4 530 Vs Pentium 4 Prescott

[Firefoxx]

Every month, nay, every day something new will come out. If you constantly wait for the newest and greatest, you'll end up never buying anything. Keep in mind that the newest and greatest are usually also the most expensive.

I bought my current computer about a year ago. It replaced an old 300Mhz slot1 Celeron, which actually worked quite well (except for games). I expect to be using it for quite some time, but probably not 5 years. When multi-core hyperthreading 64-bit becomes mainstream, I'll buy it. In the meantime, I need something that actually exists to work on. I have no doubt that I won't be required to upgrade within the next few years just to use mainstream software. 64-bit is the way of the future, but 64-bit windows is not yet mainstream (and probably won't be for at least a few more years). I'm not worrying. I always stay on top of tech developments... but that doesn't mean that I buy everything as soon as it comes out.

Condo, doing all this ruminating is good and proper, but will you continue to lust after new hardware and never make a decision? I reiterate: If you're truly after 64-bit, get the AMD. If you can find a suitable mainboard, it *probably* won't be over budget. I can't say for sure, since I don't have much info on AMD socket 939 prices.

[MikeWill]

waldwolf,

Great info. Probably by the year end it will be possible to try out 64-bit Windows. And I don't think the other 64-bit applications will be far behind. 2006 most likely will be the year of 64-bit evolution.

As far as for the dual-core (or multi) processors, I afraid their price will be in the sky, at least at the beginning, as Firefoxx rightly mentioned.

The 64-bit CPU will be my choice for sure. (this is my decision, Firefoxx)

Yet, I don't think that I need to rush after AMD just because it is already on the market (my current system is still working). Intel is just behind the corner... how long could it be?

Let's see what it will come up with.

[Firefoxx]

The 64-bit Intel processor was just announced. No hardware site has seen it, let alone has any concrete information on its specifications. In other words, it will be a lot longer than you think before this processor even exists.

If you feel that there is no need to buy now, then there is no rush. You've been using Win98 and a PIII for this long, I think a couple more years (the time it will take for 64-bit Intels to become mainstream) won't hurt.

[The Coder]

I'd say no problems buying AMD now. It's solid, cheap and will last. Waiting for something better is a never ending process as Firefoxx says. But if you really must know, it appears Intel may use SpeedStep as a reason to buy them over AMD. In the past, cpu's just ran full throttle all the time. With todays clock rates and mass transistors this has two problems: great heat generation and high power consumption. Future cpu's are going to work more like a car engine. It will be idling at a slow rate if you aren't doing anything and when you are, it will be like pressing the accelerator to get more power. There is already some of this type technology in the mobile cpu's. This technology has been evolving for years and will continue to by both companies.

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050208_144444.html

Also notice the generous 2mb cache on Intel! Can't wait to see how they stack up. Specs don't always tell the whole story; gotta wait for the benchmarks and to see the pricing. And then of course after Intel rolls these out, AMD will have something just around the corner.

[MikeWill]

The Coder,

First of all, I want to confess that my previous decision to choose Northwood over Prescott was influenced by Tomshardware article.

Can you please explain what is the SpeedStep power management technology. Is it simply translates as 2 MB Level 2 cache?

Quote from the article you mentioned:

"The 64-bit Pentiums are expected to be first in a wave of new processors that will play with clock throttling in order to decrease overall power consumption of the chips. ...the processors will fit into "stylish" and smaller designs due to their "cool and quite" operation. "

Doesn't this justify the waiting for upcoming 6xx-series?

Can you tell what board (chipset) you're using with your Athlon 64 CPU, and other specs of your system (including graphics). Does it have some special cooling or power supply?

I have noticed that there are several variations of Athlon 64 for socket 939:

- 3400+ 200-MHz hyper transport

- FX-51 2.6 GHz 1 MB L2 cache

- FX-53 2.4 GHz 1 MB L2 cache

- FX-55 2.6 GHz 1 MB L2 cache

- 4000+

Are these the 130 nm and 90 nm versions?

What is the "virus-protecting NX bit" in AMD?

Are there are any limitations in using AMD?

[waldwolf]

condo - I think your decision to wait a while, and taking time to investigate all avenues, is a wise one.

When it comes to electronics, the only certain thing you can expect in the future, is change itself. For example, everyone is talking about 130nm and 90nm chip processes. Well, last September Intel demonstrated a 65nm processor running guess what........WinXP Pro x64. Intel say they will initiate 65nm production later this year.

Intel. AMD and IBM all realize they are about to hit that perverbial "brick-wall" in processor speed, due to heat and power consumption problems. Thus the move to dual-core and "Cell" processors. (In Intel's case, the duel-core is a reality. They have already manufactured over 2 million and shipment to OEM's has begun.)

A year from now, I think we'll all be surprised at what's available and (due to increased competition), the relatively low prices.

/edited-spelling/

Edited February 11, 2005 by waldwolf

[The Coder]

Speedstep has nothing to do with the amount of cache. Bigger cache yields better performance and 2MB is pretty good; that's what Intel uses on their high end Extreme Edition Pentiums.

Enhanced Intel Speedstep Technology allows the system to dynamically adjust processor voltage and core frequency, which results in decreased power consumption, which results in decreased heat production, which in turn allows improved acoustics because fans do not need to spin as quickly. Sure if you want, wait a month to compare Intel's offering if they are out by then. One note about SpeedStep is Intel is having more problems with heat than AMD because Intel runs their chips at higher frequencies and on a smaller scale (64nm vs 90nm?). So while they are billing SpeedStep as a "feature" it could actually be more of a creature of necessity.

I'm pretty sure Intel now has the "virus-protecting NX bit" in their chips too. I really don't care so much about that feature, but don't know real world how effective it is or not. It just eliminates one single type of vulnerability in the case an application is written poorly and can be exploited by a buffer overrun.

For mobo's, I always like to see what SharkyExtreme recommends for their Extreme PC. You can look at all the components to get some good ideas there.

There are no limitations using AMD. You can use them to boot good old Dos if you want. They operate just like a Pentium when used in a 32-bit operating system and Intel's new 64-bit chips will be just as good and compatible in that regard. It's just a real shame Intel went off into the Itanium architecture for their first go at 64-bits. It cost them a lot of time and money they could have invested in x64. The x64 chips are a great technology because of the pure compatibility with 16-bit and 32-bit programs. It's a perfect bridge to 64-bits.

[MikeWill]

Thank you, The Coder. Your posts have been most helpful, at least for me. BTW, are you staying in Thailand?

waldwolf, I appreciate your moral support.

Firefoxx, thank you too for your valuable input, even though I disagree with you assestment that I'm unable to make a decision.

It is true that I changed my previous decision to stick with Northwood in favor of 64-bits (mainly due to the input from The Coder). Obviously it will have inpact on the timing for my new system. Maybe I have also to adjust my budget. Still, I'm up to a stable, reliable and long lasting system (as my current one is ). That's why, I don't have a need to rush.

I don't want to disregard AMD, but would prefer to have a choice. In the meantime there are lots of stuff I need to learn and research on all the components preparing for the new system.

Edited February 12, 2005 by Condo_bk

[Firefoxx]

I think I'll just drop from the discussion. I was under the wrong impression that a computer purchase was imminent, but obviously this is not the case. My mistake, a result of "threadlag" from another computer buying thread.

I don't like getting into "mine is better than yours" arguments, since they always leave a bitter taste in my mouth. I only advocate Intel P4's since I have no experience with the current AMDs, and I have nothing against them. I just put together the system I mentioned above for a friend, and he's quite happy with it. I didn't do an AMD system, since it would have been my neck on the line if anything went wrong. Another friend of mine still holds a grudge against me for bad advice (based on hardware site reviews) for a 2x CD-writer bought several years ago. I don't want a repeat.

As I have said, I also waited very long before buying a new computer. I always research heavily before making any decision. From what I can see, you still have a lot to find out before making your decision. I've contributed what little I know, and so I have nothing else to say.

The last bit of advice from me: Never base your decision on information from a single source.

[MikeWill]

Firefoxx,

You really shouldn't take this matter as a personal stinger (or whatever else), there were no intend to offend you at all. People may disagree and just discuss their opinions and arguments freely. This is a free forum, and believe me, your opinion and advise matters! Nobody going to blame you. Blame for what? For offering help!

[waldwolf]

Firefoxx,

You really shouldn't take this matter as a personal stinger (or whatever else), there were no intend to offend you at all. People may disagree and just discuss their opinions and arguments freely. This is a free forum, and believe me, your opinion and advise matters! Nobody going to blame you. Blame for what? For offering help!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree completely. Firefoxx and many others spend a considerable amount of time helping other members with questions and problems. He and everyone else offering a helping hand, are to be applauded.

We may all, at one time, disagree on the small points, but overall the aim is to assist each other in navigating the rough seas of technology.

Thank you Firefoxx, for sharing your knowledge.

cheers

[The Coder]

Thank you, The Coder. Your posts have been most helpful, at least for me. BTW, are you staying in Thailand?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For what it is worth, yep! For a couple years now staying in BKK and I like it. I agree with the sentiments. Everyone adds value in these discussions and firefoxx tends to be a top quality information provider.

There are rumors Microsoft may ship 64-bit only releases of its products as early as 2007, to some extent freezing 32-bit machines in their tracks 2 years from now. Here is some more reading on that.

Edited February 13, 2005 by The Coder

[MikeWill]

I've have made some searches to estimate the cost of building a 64-bit system in Thailand today. It would more appropriate to open a new topic for this...

Cost of assembling 64-bit systems in Thailand today.