Help me decide a new computer

i will be buying assembled computer within 2 months . note that i have monitor and cd drives . here r the configuration

AMD Athlon XP 2800+
512MB DDR RAM ( 333 mhz )
Asus motherboard with nforce 2 chipset
80gb 7200rpm hard disk
ati radeon 9600 pro ( 128mb )

i already have 15inch monitor , should i buy 17inch monitor just for gaming purposes ? is there any other good alternative to 9600 radeon ?

i will be very happy to hear ur suggestions , but one thing , my budget is below 650$

thanks,
arun_34

This seems like a fine setup to me.

I’d stick with the 9600 as this is quite a nice card. It’s not the fastest on the planet, but it sure suffices for now and the near future. It’s 3D performance is reasonable (although it won’t like HL2 and Doom3) and the picture quality is excellent.

A 15" monitor can be used for gaming, that’s for sure. Ok, a bigger screen is nicer, but there’s no absolute need for a bigger screen. A good thing about 15" displays is the fact that even on lower resolutions (800x600) games can look pretty good.

Originally posted by Dee-ehn
[B]This seems like a fine setup to me.

I’d stick with the 9600 as this is quite a nice card. It’s not the fastest on the planet, but it sure suffices for now and the near future. It’s 3D performance is reasonable (although it won’t like HL2 and Doom3) and the picture quality is excellent.

A 15" monitor can be used for gaming, that’s for sure. Ok, a bigger screen is nicer, but there’s no absolute need for a bigger screen. A good thing about 15" displays is the fact that even on lower resolutions (800x600) games can look pretty good. [/B]

well , what abt other recommendations ( graphics card ) ? tell me which card is direct-x 9 and which card is suitable for coming doom 3 and hl2 ?

any need to get 128mb graphics card . 64mb version i think would be enough for current games . what is ur opinion?

This is what i just bought last week:

AMD 2500+ (overclocked it to a 3200+)
Asus a7n8x deluxe version 2
1 gb platinum corsair ddr 400
9800 pro (flashed to 9800xt)
2x 120gb maxtor sata set in raid
and then all the other little extras…

Works beautifully, around 20,000 in 3dmark2001se and just under 7000 in 3dmarkd 2001 ( I WILL GET IT TO 7000!!!)

And it only cost me just under £700 instead of over a thousand if bought from a company or actually bought the overclocked versions.

IMO this is the best current setup you can get at the moment for prive vs performance.

Hopefully by the end of this year the ADM 64 will be a little more realistic and then i can buy my new setup again :smiley:

Originally posted by arun_34
any need to get 128mb graphics card . 64mb version i think would be enough for current games . what is ur opinion?

64mb is getting a little old now and it doesn’t cost anymore to get 128mb

Originally posted by hburrows83
[B]This is what i just bought last week:

AMD 2500+ (overclocked it to a 3200+)
[/B]

kool! did u use any cooling technique for overclocking the processor? i am sure it would void the warranty

Originally posted by arun_34
kool! did u use any cooling technique for overclocking the processor? i am sure it would void the warranty

You should have no problems overclocking a 2500 to 3200 simply by upping the FSB from 166MHz to 200MHz (and perhaps adding a slight voltage increase).

166MHz11 multiplyer = 1826MHz aka 2500+
200MHz
11 multiplyer = 2200MHz aka 3200+

I’m sure even stock cooling would be fine as long as your case is properly ventilated. Make sure you have fast enough RAM (PC3200) and a motherboard that allows overclocking and it is usually that simple. If you want to push it even further I would get a better heatsink and even faster memory (PC3500). Of course as with any overclock results may vary but from what I’ve read 90% of people that have tried and have the proper setup have been able to get the 2500 running at 3200 speeds :smiley:

For the video card, your next step up would be a Radeon 9700 Pro/9800 (non-Pro)/GeForce FX5900 (non-Ultra). The ATI cards should be able to handle HL2 / DoomIII just fine. Stick with ATI if you can because from what I gather they have better DX9 performance.
Check out this card buyers guide. It really helped me out allot :bigsmile:

Originally posted by Dee-ehn
[B]This seems like a fine setup to me.

I’d stick with the 9600 as this is quite a nice card. It’s not the fastest on the planet, but it sure suffices for now and the near future. It’s 3D performance is reasonable (although it won’t like HL2 and Doom3) and the picture quality is excellent.[/B]

Actually John C. stated when the GF3 came out that they would run Doom ]l[ just fine. The only thing I would do, is if you can swing it, is get more ram.

@sseth , i think i will go for agp 8x radeon 9600 pro 128mb version . the page says it is slower than radeon 9500 pro , but the advantage is i can overclock it .

thanks for the information regarding overclocking athlon xp 2800+ . will agp 8x work in agp 4x ?

Originally posted by arun_34
[B]@sseth , i think i will go for agp 8x radeon 9600 pro 128mb version . the page says it is slower than radeon 9500 pro , but the advantage is i can overclock it .

thanks for the information regarding overclocking athlon xp 2800+ . will agp 8x work in agp 4x ? [/B]

If you look again, I was refering to a Athlon 2500+ not a 2800+ CPU.

The 2800+ uses a 12.5 multiplyer (166MHZ FSB12.5 = 2083MHz). If you tried to overclock it to 200MHz FSB you would end up with 2500MHz. Much too fast, you would only be able to get that high with water cooling or nitro cooling plus you would have to get lucky and get a really good chip.
If you want to give it a shot you could try the 2600+ it is 166MHz FSB
11.5 = 1917MHz. So if you went to 200MHz FSB*11.5 = 2300MHz. For that overclock you would need something better then the standard heatsink plus it’s not as likely to work. I would stick with the 2500+ myself.

Yes, 8x cards are backwards compatible with 4x AGP slots.
In all honestly the difference in performance between 4x and 8x is usually not more then 1-2%. There are even some cases where 8x versions have been slower then 4x. The ammount of bandwith that 8x has available is simply way more then any games need atm. It came out as more of a marketing ploy then anything else.
Perhaps the next generation of cards may begin to use it but nothing atm really does.

well , if you have read properly my first post , i had written 2800+ . but i dont think i would want to try overclocking least something happens . moreover , the cooling material is not available here as u know i am not from western countries .

sorry i didnt read that 2500+ properly . 3200+ is better than 2800+ in terms of performance??

By quite a decent ammount. Not only because of the extra clock speed by more importantly because of the higher Front Side Bus.
Having a higher FSB is quite a large factor in increasing performance.
If you don’t feel compfortable with overclocking then by all mean get the Baron 2800+ it is still a good CPU for the price.

i read a few reviews in the internet and it seems that pentium series have always won against athlon xp in gaming benchmarks . but still do u think i should go for athlon xp and save lots of money instead of buying pentium 4?

Uh-oh a Pentium 4 vs Athlon XP question.

Don’t ask me, I’m biased towards Athlon.

according to the poll I conducted long ago poll
it seems most of the cdfreaks members vote for amd . so i will buy it instead of p-4

:cool:

Originally posted by arun_34
[B]according to the poll I conducted long ago poll
it seems most of the cdfreaks members vote for amd . so i will buy it instead of p-4

:cool: [/B]

Good choice :smiley:

Unless you plan on spending a ridiculous ammount of money the Athlon is the way to go.

Although… I would for sure look into getting an Athlon 64.
You can find the lower end Athlon 64’s for as low as $210 right now. :bigsmile:

I still have a doubt . AMD doesnt have support for SSE and SSE2 instruction whereas pentium 4 have them . is there anything abt this to worry ?

I’ve never had any issues with the Althon XP CPU’s I’ve had and it’s well known that the performance is pretty damn close and in lots of cases better when compated to Pentium4 chips, with or without SSE2. Then there is the fact that Athlon XP’s cost like half the price compared to a similar ranked AthlonXP CPU. Take that saving and buy a better video card or something! :smiley:

imho if you are going to go with Intel it’s only worth it if you will be getting a Pentium4 3.0GHz or higher that runs on the 200FSB (in marketing terms 800MHz). Anything slower gets owned by the Athlon XP in most cases.

BUT, if you are going to be spending that much money on a Pentium 4, you would be better off to get the Athlon 64 anyway which also has SSE2 btw.

Either way AMD wins! :bigsmile:

And Athlons in the near future will even have SSE3 on board.

Don’t worry too much about SSE2 and 3 though, as they are multimedia instructions that aren’t that widely used. The only place where they really kick in is in Photoshop and Premiere. But as said, the 64 has SSE and SSE2 so don’t worry :slight_smile: