TedM

Hi Folks.

I've been quite impressed with the quality of the advice I've seen on this forum concerning other topics, so I've joined to ask a question of my own.

I want to upgrade CPU and motherboard. Mine are both old and tired. (MSI MS-6738 w/133FSB, Athlon XP2600)

For various reasons, I would like to use the AMD Athlon XP 3200 CPU - I can discuss why in another post/thread, but that's not my question.

Here's what I need to know - I'm extremely confused as to which mobo is "best" for this CPU - so many choices!

I'm not a gamer, but I do want to do some quality video capture to make DVDs from various analog and digital sources - home movies of vacations, etc. This would probably be my most intensive application. I've got a Turtle Beach Video Advantage PCI setup for this, but the rest of the system (esp. the mobo onboard graphics) is too slow, and drops many frames.

I've looked at the AMD mobo recommendation page:

http://www2.amd.com/us-en/recmobo/ResultsHandler/1,,30_182_869_4348^7923~63674,00.html

and see a lot of great choices, but how to choose?

Anyone care to jump in with some solid advice?

Thanks!

linderman

Asus Motherboard for sure and a name brand Power Supply like Antec or Enermax 450 watt or larger


http://www2.amd.com/us-en/recmobo/De...?queryID=70811




regards:


Joe

ebackhus

I second Linderman's suggestion. Assuming you're still going to be using a Socket 462 (Athlon XP, Duron, etc) then an ASUS or MSI would be good. I'd trongly suggest going with something like an Athlon 64 as the HyperTransport really zips data through fast, thus meaning your video data will be more precise. Integrated video should be rebust enough to handle just about any 2D task you give it. An AGP 8X will have smoother output. You may also want to look for a motherboard with IEEE or FireWire connections, they are GREAT for video work.

whodat

if thats the case you need the asus a7n8x-e deluxe
chow

UncleMacro

I'd limit myself to nForce 2 ultra 400 motherboards. That chipset works well and is well supported by NVIDIA. The two most popular are the ASUS A7N8X and the ABIT NF7-S2. There are various models of both motherboards depending on what kind of devices (firewire, etc.) you want attached.

MD_Willington

And if you do go for a XP3200+..please buy a retail processor in box XP3200+...

We've got fake 3200+'s showing up...check it out:

http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=48267
http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=47434
http://forums.amd.com/index.php?showtopic=48093

mgoldb2

I truthfully dont think you will be happy in the performance increase from a athlon xp 2600 to a athlon xp 3200. First of all because AMD no longer officially make athlon xp 3200 places that still selling it that I see is way over priced for what you getting. 2nd I dont think there that big a difference between a xp2600 and a xp3200.

For example looking at pricegrabber the cheapest retail box of a athlon xp 3200+ cost $148.

For that price you could get a athlon 64 3000+ newcastle core skt 754($146) or athlon 64 3000+ skt 939 venice core($148). I think you would get alot better performance from a athlon 64 3000+. This is A) memory controller on the cpu B) uses hyperthreading instead of FSB.

Just my 2 cents.

MD_Willington

It uses Hypertransport...NOT hyperthreading....

mgoldb2

hehehe opps mind must of been off at the moment. my hands dont always type what my mind says :P.

TedM

Hope you guys get this - I know it's getting pretty far down on the list.

I wanted to thank all of you who replied. You really got me to thinking. After considering what you said, I changed my mind completely. The bogus XP3200 CPUs, the cost/benefit ratio, the newer architecture, etc., finally became overpowering, and I'm now centering my quest toward an ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe board with an AMD Athlon 64 3200+ (socket 939).

Does this sound like a better direction that the AMD XP 3200+ (socket A) with an asus a7n8x-e deluxe?

Still a couple of things I don't quite get.

First, I've heard that AMD is gradually phasing out support for the older sockets, and 939 will be the "socket of the future." Is this accurate?

Second, the AMD specs quote "processor stepping" listing things like "CG," "D0" and "E3." What is this? Does it equate to the various cores, like "Winchester" and "Venice?" If so, how do I differentiate/choose among them? Which core is best?

Am I going the right direction here, or am I still missing something?

Thanks again for your time and excellent replies.

UncleMacro

Going socket 939 makes a whole lot more sense than going with an Athlon XP. Socket 939 has a future ahead of it which includes dual core CPUs. Of course, no socket lives forever so eventually AMD will come up with something new. As far as going with an ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe, SLI doesn't really make a whole lot of sense unless you're a pretty serious gamer and even then SLI's benefits are debatable. If you don't intend to run two identical video cards at some point then you can save some money by dumping SLI. You'll get more benefit by having an extra PCI-Express x1 slot. When it comes to CPU cores, the Venice (512K cache) and San Diego (1M cache) are the ones to get. Don't get any of the older ones like Winchester or Newcastle. The Venice core has some fixes as well as an improved memory controller. Many of the Internet retailers like newegg list which core you're buying.

Since you listed video capture and manipulation as your main application, you should probably take into account that Pentium 4s tend to be somewhat faster than Athlon 64s at that sort of thing. Check here for a comparison. The Pentium 4s come out a little ahead in that sort of application but the Pentium 4s are also somewhat more expensive and when you take the price into account, they are pretty much the same speed. The Athlon 64s are as good a deal as Pentium 4s for folks who do a lot of video processing and the Athlon 64s have other advantages like running cooler and have 64 bits in case you need to add a lot of RAM someday.

mgoldb2

While it true that 64bit can handle alot more ram then 32bit but if he ever wants more then 4gb he going to have to buy a new motherboard again because none of the current skt 939 motherboards supports more then 4gb of ram.

Besides that I pretty much agree with everything UncleMacro siad. I would like to secound his point that if you getting a athlon 64 3200 MAKE SURE YOU GET THE VEINCE CORE. Like he said San diago also a great core but they tend to only come in higher model then the 3200+. The lowest San diago core I can think of off the top of my head is the 3700+. Also good core are the manchester and the torldo but those are the dual core cpus and are very expensive.

Like he said unless you a extreme gamer SLI will do no good for you. I would get something with the Nforce4 ultra chipset.

skt 939 should be around for a few years but nothing last for ever. I think on there road map they have something called the M2 socket(940 pins but not compatiable with the 940 pin motherboard out right now).

Socket A is pretty much dead right now. all new cpu this year will be skt 754 semprons and skt 939 athlons 64/x2.

Some general things like already mention in the single core market pentium does a bit better with video rendering(things are alot more competive in the dual core market). Pentiums 4 tend to do a bit better in mutitasking to do to hyperthreading which better allows it to handle 2 threads at the same time(again this only counts for the single core market).

In gaming athlon 64 are the clear winner.

I think most likly you will be very happy with a athlon 64 3200+. I think it will perform just fine for your needs. the differences between the athlon 64 and pentiums 4 I mention in the last paragragh are pretty small in reality.

UncleMacro

I ended up getting 2 gig of RAM for my computer because I was stitching some very large panorama images which were up to 5000 X 60000 pixels. I also had to edit some multi-layer versions of those images in PhotoShop. I was endlessly stopped by various programs' inability to access more than 2 gig per application. And even if my data could fit into a 2 gig address space, memory fragmentation quickly reduced the practical working set to much smaller than could fit in my physical RAM. Even if I tried to stick 4 gig of RAM in my machine, I could only access a 3 gig address space using the /3G switch and the memory fragmentation still jumps up and bites you.

Basically, translated to english, that means that I was constantly running out of virtual address space and even adding more physical RAM wouldn't solve the problem. If I had only had a 64 bit CPU with a 64 bit operating system then my 2 gig of RAM would have gotten through the task just fine. A 64 bit CPU does not just increase the amount of physical RAM you can install. It also makes sure you cannot run out of virtual addresses and each program can operate without regard to memory fragmentation. In the end, the only way I could solve my problem with a 32 bit operating system was write my own program which chopped the images into pieces, called the other programs to do the work, and then blend the separate images back together into a single piece. Once you start working on things which have huge data sets (like video), you just long for the day when you don't have to worry about bumping into 32 bit (or 31 bit) limitations. 64 bit operating systems are a great idea even when you have 4 gig or less of RAM installed.

mgoldb2

Thanks for that interesting read. My mistake I was not thinking in those terms when I read it.

TedM

I continue to be impressed with your responses. You guys go right to the heart of the matter - no dithering around.

OK, I'm sold on AMD products, so it looks like it will be an AMD Athlon 64 3200+ with the Venice core.

I'm also sold on ASUS motherboards.

Now, the question is - which one?

Assuming I dump SLI (which means the A8N-SLI Deluxe board is out), which alternate ASUS board do you consider to be the best for my application? Mgoldb2 says the Nforce4 ultra chipset, so that would mean the A8N-E - right? But how about one of the A8V's with VIA chipsets?

I'm definitely not a gamer, so have absolutely no use for the dual video cards, but is that really the only thing that sets the A8N-SLI apart? I guess I'm impressed by all the positive press reviews and awards the A8N-SLI has gotten. I would certainly be willing to pay the extra price for the A8N-SLI if it meant greater adaptability/expandability down the line.

I think we're down to the end-game here, so if I can just resolve these last niggling doubts, I won't bother you anymore!

UncleMacro

I don't think there's anything wrong with VIA chipsets (I'm about to build a machine using one for other reasons) but I think the nForce4s have a somewhat better reputation when it comes to compatibility issues. No chipset is perfect but at least if you have an NVIDIA chipset and an NVIDIA video card, you know they're designed to work together. PCI-Express seems to be a lot less trouble than AGP ever was so VIA would probably be fine but I'd go with NVIDIA if you don't have any strong reason to go in one direction or another. So you'd be down to A8N-E and A8N-SLI of one sort or another. If you don't care about the SLI part then you're just down to looking at the various amenities on the motherboard: PCI-Express x4 slot, RAID support, firewire, etc. Decide what slots and devices you want and then you're done.

TedM

OK, based on the excellent advice above, I have purchased the A8N-SLI and Athlon 3200 Venice. I chose the A8N-SLI over the A8N-E because of the greater number of peripherals, expandability, etc. Also, I found out that the second SLI slot defaults to a PCI-E x1 slot unless specifically configured for SLI. I also purchased a BFG GeForce 6600 GT OC graphics board, which should be more than enough for me.

I want to anticipate as many of the potential build/startup problems as I can. In the event that my current OS (Windows XP Home) is not recognised, I will not hesitate to do a clean OS install. I try to do this about once a year anyway, as I love the sweet way the system runs when everthing's fresh. I've read what some of you replied to Lewis11777 in his thread "Mobo Upgrade Prep," started 6/26, and agree heartily.

However, will this present a problem under my current circumstances? All I have for the clean OS install is the "Recovery Disk" from my initial system - a PowerSpec computer as sold by MicroCenter. This has always been fine as my only previous upgrades have been more memory, better optical and hard drives. The Recovery Disk formats the hard drive and installs a fresh copy of XP - no problem.

My concern is that now I'm doing a new mobo, CPU, and graphics board upgrade, and the Recovery Disk will undoubtedly install all the drivers for the old system. Is this a problem? Do I need to find/buy a real copy of Windows XP, or is my Recovery Disk adequate? Will I have any trouble going back in and installing the new drivers for the new hardware? If so, what are your suggestions as a workaround? Step-by-step procedures would be greatly appreciated if any are necessary

You guys/gals are the greatest. Thanks for your help!

UncleMacro

I'm afraid there's not that many people around here with recovery disk experience because we tend to build our own machines and install retail/oem copies of Windows. But from what I've read recovery disks are hardwired to the computer and are not supposed to work on any other computer. I think the license they get from Microsoft is for one computer and that copy of Windows is not supposed to be run on another computer. Once you upgrade your machine enough it's probably not going to work.

You could probably use the SYSPREP solution suggested in the other thread but you would have to do the SYSPREP on your current hardware, then shut the machine down and make all the hardware changes, then boot your "new" machine and then install your new drivers. But for that method to work in the future you'll have to reassemble your old hardware whenever you want reinstall Windows.

If I were you, I'd just try the recovery disk to see if it will install. There's a good chance it will refuse to install or won't boot. Then call MicroCenter and tell them you had to change motherboards and ask what to do. If they tell you to go away then you're stuck getting a retail copy of Windows.

TedM

For all the reasons stated elsewhere, I definitely do want to perform a clean OS install about once a year, but, on the other hand, I definitely don't want to reassemble all the old hardware each time I do it.

I'll try the recovery disk on the new hardware. Assuming it does work, what about the drivers? If it boots, how do I go about replacing the old drivers with the new? This may seem very elementary, but I've never done it before, so I would like to try to do it right the first time!

In the final analysis, you're right - I probably ought to quit whining and get a retail copy of XP!

Thanks again, and Happy Fourth!

linderman

If your looking to build a real nice rig like your talking I wouldnt waste 3 minutes palying with a recovery disk from another system / I have tried that / you must call for activation codes / when you get done describing what you got installed now they will baulk big time. The recovery cd is bound to look for the presence of certain hardware id's and configurations.

retail version / thats the way to fly !!!!!

regards


joe