AMD system finalised (finally)

I dont know if you will get a mobo with an AGP slot for your 939-pin config. Go for the PCI-E version itself. Its cheaper and it also runs a lot cooler than the AGP version.

NOTE SOME SUGGESTIONS

1.Go for APC 600W UPS

2.I box comes with generic powersupply, So invest in a TRUE 400w powersupply.May cost u about 4000.

3.Go for PCI-E if your mobo supports PCI E as no mobo will be having AGP + PCIE buses together, and PCIE is relatively new technology.

4.If u r interested in surround sound, invest a little more for Altec Lansing VS 3151. They r good. u may need around 2500 extra for them.

Hope this helps .

anispace said:

well i decided to go for AMD over intel.My config is as follows...wanna know if its good. Also can some1 give me the exact prices (IN MUMBAI) of the config.

Also should i go for 6600gt PCI-E or AGP (whats the price diff)



Processor: AMD 64 3200+ 939 pin - Rs.8500/- (approx prices)

Motherboard: Asus A8N-E - 8100/-

RAM: 512MB Corsair DDR 400Mhz Ram

Monitor: Viewsonic E71f (17") -7500/-

HDD: 120GB SATA Seagate

Graphics card: XFX 128 MB GEFORCE 6600GT (PCI-E) - 10,500/-

Optical Drives: Liteon or Sony CD-RW - 1400/-
Liteon or Sony DVD ROM - 1500/-

UPS: Numeric 600 VA - 2050/-)

Keyboard and Mouse: Logitech Multimedia Keyboard and Optical Mouse - 1100/-

Cabinet-Ibox ((does it come with a SMPS (400W)))

TV tuner : Compro Videomate PVR/FM -1850/-


Speakers: Altec Lansing ATP3 - 3000/- (2.1 system)



total approx <54000 Rs.

Click to expand...

Since you have mentioned that you are going for Asus A8N-E motherboard,you have no choice but to go for PCX 6600GT.As this mobo is based on Nforce 4 Ultra chipset which is essentially a PCI-Express chipset.Price difference should be around 500 bucks,AGP being expensive.

Go for Powersafe 450/500 Watt PSU.

how much does the powersafe 450w cost??

also isnt the generic ibox supply not good enough?

Also are Intels that good at multitasking.

what about AMD. Cant i browse the net or listen to music while burning a cd-r
on an AMD system.

anispace said:

Also are Intels that good at multitasking.

what about AMD. Cant i browse the net or listen to music while burning a cd-r
on an AMD system.

Click to expand...

You can do those and then some. Really, pentiums with their HT aren't the gods of multi tasking. They are just more responsive when multi tasking. I can render a 3d scen in 3ds max while working in poser in another window while browse the net listening to iTunes. And, BTW, I have almost the same config as yours, 'cept I have 2x 512MB ram, 4x80 GB hard disks and sony dru 800a dvd riter.

Bottleneck

Assembled my AMD 64 unit with following config:

AMD 64 754 pin 3000+
Asus K8S-MX
512 RAM 333Mhz SINGLE
128MB 5600XT nVidia
120 GB Seagate SATA HDD
Creative 5.1 Live!

Using 3DMark 05, I got a lousy mark of 240. I'm sure there be plenty of bottlenecks preventing a better mark. My query is:
Is it the graphics card?
RAM since its single and only @ 333Mhz?
Motherboard (hopefully not) ?
Proc ?

I'll most likey get chewed by some who'll say everything but specifically.... looking mostly at the graphics card, whats the top dog graphics card from Ati or nVidia on a 8X AGP? managed to overclock mine a bit to improve the performace but not a great improvement there. Will adding another memory card help? Not looking at pCI express cards video yet since will involve changing motherboard and the proc as well at this stage.
Any suggestions?

the gfx card without doubt is ur bottleneck....altho u cud do with adding a bit more of some fast ram ..
however if are a casual enough gamer u might want to continue with the card...u can play today's games at lower settings peacefully

followup query

thnx for the confirmation. no casual gaming here but on a self imposed budget for now. was playing KOTOR 2 and some parts were slow and unresponsive. ended up overclocking the card and seemed to work but is the graphics card's clock speed as important as the amount of memory thats available?
are Kingston RAM modules good as others or are the Corsairs the ones to go for?
what would be the top 8X AGP card to look for?

the "top" agp card is very expensive ....so it depends on the amount u can shell out for one!
last time i heard both kingston and corsair were good buys...

but is the graphics card's clock speed as important as the amount of memory thats available?

Click to expand...

both are important...but more important than these two is the GPU engine itself, a 128 mb 6600GT is way faster than a 128 mb FX 5600XT for example!

@anispace
well i feel u need 2 change few thins instead of XFX go for either gainward or Leadtek.then go for samsung 17'' MB2 monitor instead of dat viewsonic,160 will b betta i guess as da price diff bet 120 and 160 is very less.and then u can go for powersafe smps which will cost u 1.6k or may b antec which will come around 3.5k both r 400w.

whats the diff between AMD Athlon 64 and AMD Athlon 64 FX???

which one should i go for?? Exact name please as there are lots of AMDs in the market..

try to avoid corsair value select with current asus nforce 4 atleast,prob man might occurnot supported with that mobo
1gb dual ch

I just got a new system, AMD 3000+ 939 rs 7250, RS480 ATI based mother board rs 5600 and 512MB ram rs 2200. Not a games system although it will work with DX9 stuff but very slowely. But it does have built in GFX and has TV/SVHS output. Was getting tired of my Intel 1.8GHZ which was slower than my intel P3 800MHZ. Hopefully this will work fine for web surfing and java stuff.

*www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1802

Prices in India still seems to be 50-100% higher than the US. I think the FX series has 1 Meg cache and are not multiplier locked.


The Athlon 64 4000+ and FX-55
The first thing to know about these processors is that their fabrication process isn’t 90 nm, as we initially thought, but 130 nm. Even if AMD already has several 90 nm production lines, they are for 2 GHz maximum processors (the Athlon 64 3500+). The upgrade to 90 nm reduces production costs and therefore the sales price. We hope to see this effect in the near future.




The Athlon 64 4000+, like the 3800+, is clocked at 2.4 GHz. The difference between these two processors is the L2 cache increased from 512 to 1024 Kb. The Athlon 64 4000+ corresponds to the Athlon FX-53. The only difference is that the multiplying coefficient isn’t completely free as is with the FX series.

The Athlon 64 FX-55 reached a new level of frequency at 2.6 GHz. AMD is finally able to reach over 2.4 GHz for production, a frequency it was stuck at for the last six months. This improved frequency, however, is restricted to the FX series. The Athlon 64 4000+ has a 2.4 GHz with a cache L2 of 1024 and not a 2.6 GHz with 512 Kb of cache L2. The number of AMD processors able to reach over 2.4 GHz shows that they aren’t yet ready for mass production in this domain.


*www.behardware.com/articles/525-1/amd-athlon-64-4000-and-fx-55.html