Should I wait for AMD 64? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

GarthInPittsburgh · 08-31-2003, 06:08 AM

I'm going to be getting a new gaming PC in the relatively near future, but I really don't want to get one right before a "major advance" in proc. technology...

I believe computers available with AMD 64 proccesors are going to be available about one week before HL2 is scheduled to come out (of course, with my luck, it will probably come out 2004)... otherwise I was going to get a computer with a 2500+. How much of an advantage would the new 64-bit processor have over a 2500+ in games like HL2, Doom3, UT2k4, etc.?

sixate · 08-31-2003, 06:56 AM

Depends on how much you have to spend. I'm sure the new 64's are gonna be expensive as hell. The 2500+ is less than $100.

I'm gonna upgrade my PC, but I'm waiting to see exactly what the new 64's are gonna cost. If it's too high then I'm gonna get a 3000+ or 3200+.

Caphreak · 08-31-2003, 07:51 AM

The proc. youre referring to is the Opteron. Its already available for server/workstations, and according to AMD's website, its release of the desktop/mobile versions is Sept. 2003. But the 2ghz version of the server chip is about $850 each and im sure the desktops will rank right up there. I know someone who uses a dual opteron, and they say it is really sweet. I would say price is definitely not worth it yet.

juanvaldes · 08-31-2003, 11:31 AM

the Desktop version of the Opteron is going to be called the Athlon 64. It will likely be much more expensive then the current XP's but hopefuly not as bad as the Opteron.

Since your only after games I'd say pass, pick up the cheap proc for the time.

mrquackers · 08-31-2003, 12:09 PM

I've used one and they're DAMN sweet chips. Everyone here's right, though. They're going to cost a lot - and there's not a lot that can take advantage of their power. If you buy one, you should be safe for several years. But you also run the risk of early adoptor problems. I'm having this same debate right now, ironically.

ack32 · 08-31-2003, 12:32 PM

Unless you have an application that will benefit from the 64-bit architecture, it probably doesn't make sense to upgrade to those super-expensive chips yet.

A good application would make good use of the 64-bit memory addressing, such as Windows 2K3 Server using more than 4GB of RAM natively (rather than using the old Win2K extended memory tricks), and also applications that are compiled for 64-bit, like Microsoft SQL Server Enterprise 64-bit edition.

I don't think you'll see significant performance increase if your primary use will be gaming. You can get an Althon XP 2500+ for so cheap right now, it's definately a good deal.

GarthInPittsburgh · 08-31-2003, 12:49 PM

Well, I know that HL2 and many other games are going to get patches so that they are optimized or whatever for the AMD 64. Anyway, I would think that with a decent graphics card (unrelated: how well does a Radeon 9600 compare with the 9700?) that the upcoming swarm of FPS's will run fairly decent.

meff · 09-01-2003, 03:07 PM

Not much is optimized for the Opteron yet, unless you use Linux..

Sure they're expensive, but when I bought my P4 I was planning not to upgrade for awhile, and so far all my hardware is STILL up to par, and the clock speeds for the Opteron aren't too great just yet.

nickdman · 09-01-2003, 11:37 PM

Comming from an Engineer, no don't wait. You will need a 64 bit OS with programs that are 64 bit to take an advantage of the 64 bit architecture. However 64 bits doesn't necesarilly (i need spell check) it will be better. You need to look at all the features of the chip, ie pipeline stages, how long to flush the pipeline, floating point operations, memory, is it more risc tahn cisc visa versa, exception handling etc....

ack32 · 09-02-2003, 01:07 AM

No doubt, the Opteron's 64-bit architecture is more potent than the Althon XP's. The Opteron takes much of its design from the Althlon core, but it has an integrated memory controller and much larger L2 cache, and of course supports 64-bit instructions as well as 32-bit. It is also designed to reach higher clock speeds than the Athlon, albeit at the expense of deepening the instruction pipeline.

Many of the Opteron's pluses and minuses can be read about on the Tom's Hardware and Anandtech overviews of the K8 architecture:

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030422/index.html
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1815

It's true, certain applications may be optimized for 64-bit operations, but those are mostly image-processing, scientific or database programs, or programs needing to address more than 4GB of memory at maximum speed. SQL Server, high end 3D Rendering programs or Scientific applications, and imaging programs like Photoshop will probably benefit. For games, I'd say that since modern graphics cards handle most of the rendering and video acceleration duties, you won't see any improvement in that arena, although other areas like the physics simulation or AI for the bots may benefit.

In conclusion, it always is expensive to live on the bleeding edge. Opteron motherboards are currently few and far between, and both the motherboards and cpus have a poorer price/performance ratio than the super-cheap Althon XP's. I'd say for at least until the end of the year, your best buy for the money will be the Athlon XP.

Unless you've got cash to burn, go for a cheap Athlon XP solution, then play catch up in a year or so with newer and cheaper components than are on the market right now. One or two-generations behind the latest and greatest always seems to be the price/performance sweet spot, anyhow.

burgerdog · 09-02-2003, 01:47 AM

For gaming I don't think you'll need a 64 bit chip for at least a year or so. From what I have heard (and I could be wrong) Windows isn't even going to support 64 bit until late 2004.

Dunno how that relates to individual apps though...

Graphics cards seem more important to games than procs anyway. If you really want lots of CPU power you could get a dual proc system. Probably cost about as much as a 64 bit setup, and more stuff can (presently) take advantage of it.

oberon · 09-02-2003, 02:31 AM

Definitely wait for prices to come down & software to get released to take advantage of Athlon 64's. I for one am building a new Athlon XP box and fully expect to replace it with an Athlon 64 in a year or two.

08-31-2003, 06:08 AM	#1 (permalink)
GarthInPittsburgh Crazy	Should I wait for AMD 64? I'm going to be getting a new gaming PC in the relatively near future, but I really don't want to get one right before a "major advance" in proc. technology... I believe computers available with AMD 64 proccesors are going to be available about one week before HL2 is scheduled to come out (of course, with my luck, it will probably come out 2004)... otherwise I was going to get a computer with a 2500+. How much of an advantage would the new 64-bit processor have over a 2500+ in games like HL2, Doom3, UT2k4, etc.? __________________ i was going to call 911, but I was downloading a file

08-31-2003, 12:09 PM	#5 (permalink)
mrquackers Exhausted Location: Northeastern US - please send help!	I've used one and they're DAMN sweet chips. Everyone here's right, though. They're going to cost a lot - and there's not a lot that can take advantage of their power. If you buy one, you should be safe for several years. But you also run the risk of early adoptor problems. I'm having this same debate right now, ironically. __________________ "If you're walking on thin ice, you may as well go ahead and dance."

08-31-2003, 12:49 PM	#7 (permalink)
GarthInPittsburgh Crazy	Well, I know that HL2 and many other games are going to get patches so that they are optimized or whatever for the AMD 64. Anyway, I would think that with a decent graphics card (unrelated: how well does a Radeon 9600 compare with the 9700?) that the upcoming swarm of FPS's will run fairly decent. __________________ i was going to call 911, but I was downloading a file

09-01-2003, 03:07 PM	#8 (permalink)
meff Vanishing, like I do.. Location: Austin, TX	Not much is optimized for the Opteron yet, unless you use Linux.. Sure they're expensive, but when I bought my P4 I was planning not to upgrade for awhile, and so far all my hardware is STILL up to par, and the clock speeds for the Opteron aren't too great just yet. __________________ Toy-like people make me boy-like.

09-01-2003, 11:37 PM	#9 (permalink)
nickdman Upright Location: Hell a.k.a. Stockton	Comming from an Engineer, no don't wait. You will need a 64 bit OS with programs that are 64 bit to take an advantage of the 64 bit architecture. However 64 bits doesn't necesarilly (i need spell check) it will be better. You need to look at all the features of the chip, ie pipeline stages, how long to flush the pipeline, floating point operations, memory, is it more risc tahn cisc visa versa, exception handling etc.... __________________ There once was a man from Nantucket, His ......

08-31-2003, 06:56 AM	#2 (permalink)
sixate Registered User Location: Somewhere in Ohio	Depends on how much you have to spend. I'm sure the new 64's are gonna be expensive as hell. The 2500+ is less than $100. I'm gonna upgrade my PC, but I'm waiting to see exactly what the new 64's are gonna cost. If it's too high then I'm gonna get a 3000+ or 3200+.

08-31-2003, 07:51 AM	#3 (permalink)
Caphreak Insane Location: Ames, IA	The proc. youre referring to is the Opteron. Its already available for server/workstations, and according to AMD's website, its release of the desktop/mobile versions is Sept. 2003. But the 2ghz version of the server chip is about $850 each and im sure the desktops will rank right up there. I know someone who uses a dual opteron, and they say it is really sweet. I would say price is definitely not worth it yet.

08-31-2003, 11:31 AM	#4 (permalink)
juanvaldes Banned Location: shittown, CA	the Desktop version of the Opteron is going to be called the Athlon 64. It will likely be much more expensive then the current XP's but hopefuly not as bad as the Opteron. Since your only after games I'd say pass, pick up the cheap proc for the time.

08-31-2003, 12:32 PM	#6 (permalink)
ack32 Tilted	Unless you have an application that will benefit from the 64-bit architecture, it probably doesn't make sense to upgrade to those super-expensive chips yet. A good application would make good use of the 64-bit memory addressing, such as Windows 2K3 Server using more than 4GB of RAM natively (rather than using the old Win2K extended memory tricks), and also applications that are compiled for 64-bit, like Microsoft SQL Server Enterprise 64-bit edition. I don't think you'll see significant performance increase if your primary use will be gaming. You can get an Althon XP 2500+ for so cheap right now, it's definately a good deal.

09-02-2003, 01:07 AM	#10 (permalink)
ack32 Tilted	No doubt, the Opteron's 64-bit architecture is more potent than the Althon XP's. The Opteron takes much of its design from the Althlon core, but it has an integrated memory controller and much larger L2 cache, and of course supports 64-bit instructions as well as 32-bit. It is also designed to reach higher clock speeds than the Athlon, albeit at the expense of deepening the instruction pipeline. Many of the Opteron's pluses and minuses can be read about on the Tom's Hardware and Anandtech overviews of the K8 architecture: http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030422/index.html http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1815 It's true, certain applications may be optimized for 64-bit operations, but those are mostly image-processing, scientific or database programs, or programs needing to address more than 4GB of memory at maximum speed. SQL Server, high end 3D Rendering programs or Scientific applications, and imaging programs like Photoshop will probably benefit. For games, I'd say that since modern graphics cards handle most of the rendering and video acceleration duties, you won't see any improvement in that arena, although other areas like the physics simulation or AI for the bots may benefit. In conclusion, it always is expensive to live on the bleeding edge. Opteron motherboards are currently few and far between, and both the motherboards and cpus have a poorer price/performance ratio than the super-cheap Althon XP's. I'd say for at least until the end of the year, your best buy for the money will be the Athlon XP. Unless you've got cash to burn, go for a cheap Athlon XP solution, then play catch up in a year or so with newer and cheaper components than are on the market right now. One or two-generations behind the latest and greatest always seems to be the price/performance sweet spot, anyhow.

09-02-2003, 01:47 AM	#11 (permalink)
burgerdog Tilted Location: All Under Heaven	For gaming I don't think you'll need a 64 bit chip for at least a year or so. From what I have heard (and I could be wrong) Windows isn't even going to support 64 bit until late 2004. Dunno how that relates to individual apps though... Graphics cards seem more important to games than procs anyway. If you really want lots of CPU power you could get a dual proc system. Probably cost about as much as a 64 bit setup, and more stuff can (presently) take advantage of it.

09-02-2003, 02:31 AM	#12 (permalink)
oberon Quadrature Amplitude Modulator Location: Denver	Definitely wait for prices to come down & software to get released to take advantage of Athlon 64's. I for one am building a new Athlon XP box and fully expect to replace it with an Athlon 64 in a year or two. __________________ "There are finer fish in the sea than have ever been caught." -- Irish proverb