Faster processor or faster video card?
 

Im in the middle of planning my next computer purchase, and Im wondering whether I should spend the money to go from an Athlon 64 3000 to 3200 or to go from a vanilla 6800 to the 6800GT. Both upgrades will cost me about as much, and I can only do one of them, but which one will get me the better result?

The only thing the machine will be used for that will use the power is gaming--Doom3, and future generations.

Here's another one--should I do either upgrade? In one year, Im planning on leaving the States to go spend a year in Europe. I sincerely doubt Ill be taking a desktop with me--too much hassle to get it sent over there. Should I just leave it at the 3000 and 6800 and save the money?

I'd probably save the money, and see how your system runs doom3 before you think about upgrades. After that, you can determine what your bottleneck is (if there is one) and change accordingly.

I'd save the money mate. A 6800 will certainly run Doom3.

When you come home from Europe, another year will have passed. That means any money you spend on the upgrade now, will have a very limited lifetime.

Keep your money for beer and chicks in Europe, enjoy your current setup (which is not to be sneezed at!), and upgrade in two years time when you return.


Mr Mephisto

How much memory do you have? 1 Gig is better than 512 megs, for example. What's the harddrive? Perhaps a WD Raptor SATA harddisk might be a good investment.

Y'see, your system is good enough. After the CPU and videocards, other parts will become bottlenecks...

Yeah save the money...put the computer to the test before deciding what to buy.

Well, I have to buy something--Ive had my current machine for two years, and it plain and simple isnt going to run the Doom 3 generation.

I already have a gig of Muskin pc3200, so thats taken care of.

I like Mephistos advice though :)

Anyone? Any other opinions? I wanna get this thing ordered this week :)

Save your money, upgrade when you comeback from Europe.

Here are doom 3's specs, maybe this will help you decide.

id Software (Todd Hollenshead specifically) have finally spoken and have revealed the official minimum requirements these are:

Minimum:
P4 1.5Ghz CPU (or equivalent).
384MB of RAM.
64MB graphics card (see below for chip details).
2GB of free hard drive space.

Lowest supported GPU is a Geforce 4 MX (worse than Geforce 3).
Supported cards:
GF 4 MX.
GF 3.
GF 4.
GF FX (and higher).
Radeon 8500s, 9000s and higher.

PC Gamer were the first to review they themselves recommend:
2Ghz CPU.
512MB RAM.
Radeon 9800.
5-channel sound card and speakers.

For historical purposes only:

From what John Carmack has said the minimum specification for running the basic DOOM 3 engine will be a:

1000Mhz Athlon/Pentium CPU.
256MB of RAM
GeForce 1 / Radeon 7xxx level of graphics card.

'Full impact' based on some estimates (not official):

1400Mhz Athlon / 1800Mhz Pentium 4 or higher speed CPU.
256MB of RAM + again quite dependant on how memory hungry your OS is.
GeForce 3 (original or Ti 500).

Current (June/July 2003) high-end systems should be kicking ass:

Athlon XP 3200+ 3.06Ghz Pentium 4
512MB of RAM
Radeon 9800 Pro or GeForce 5900 Ultra

Source: http://www.doom3portal.com/info/systemreq.php

I just ordered the system with the A64 3000 and the vanilla 6800. Thanks for the help guys.

It's too late now, but I would have waited a few more months (probably until next year) when PCIExpress starts coming out in quantity.

No good, I need a new machine. This one is struggling with *this* generation of games, and theres no way Doom 3 is running on it. I thought about that, but decided I couldnt wait any longer.

Well, sailor, all I can say is, post some scores for us. 3dmark2001, 3dmark2003, pcmark2004, sisoftsandra, just to name a few. I know I'd love to see some good scores come out of it, and with even a basic 6800, when combined with a 3000+, you're gonna get some in-fuckin-credible scores.

Just a note...that 64 bit processor ain't going to do much good with out a 64 bit OS...I say this because I'm about to build a system around the AMD 64 3000+ and I'm only doing so because a friend who belongs to MSDN can score me a 64 bit version of XP (no, it's not Longhorn).

But a 64 bit processor will still run better than a 32 bit processor on a 32 bit OS. Just look at the benchmarks from TomsHardware - http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2004...ngl_benchmarks The Athlon 64 3200 outperforms the Athlon XP 3200 in almost every benchmark.

And anyone can get a 64 bit version of XP. Just go here https://microsoft.order-9.com/winxp6...winxp64&id=dl# It's a free 364 day trial.

Taking a desktop to Europe isn't that much of an issue. Just ship it over. Where in Europe are you going though? You may have to consider tax on bringing it in seeing as you are staying quiite some time. You would have to check with something like the embassy for details.

Noone actually buys Athlon 64's for 64-bit computing. People buy them because they're powerhouses in gaming. :) They may be 64-bit, but that's definitely not their best feature. Their best feature is kicking ass.

-Lasereth

Exactly.

*Me waits patiently for new computer to arrive to kick some ass*