Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question

by joeltom Nov 16, 2004 10:45PM PST

Would like to get a good gaming system. On my budget, I am looking at either a Dell 8400 Pentium 4 550 3.4Ghz, or an HP m1050e media PC with an AMD athlon 64 3700+ at 2.4 Ghz. Support is not necessarily an issue, as I think both companies are horrible. All other options being similar, and plannig to get a good 256Mb video card, I have two questions:
1.) which one would be the best gamer now?
2.) which would be the best gamer for new games a year or two down the road?
I've looked at buiding my own, but can't seem to get the parts together at quite as good a price as these two systems... ($1500 - $1700). TIA!

Discussion is locked

15 Posts
- Collapse + Expand Details
- Collapse -
Re: Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question
by skippyd333 Nov 16, 2004 11:09PM PST
- Collapse -
Re: Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question
by joeltom Nov 17, 2004 12:51AM PST

Nope. Just went to your link and priced the pieces parts. came out to just about what Dell and HP want. Sorry, the questions still stand...

- Collapse -
Re: Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question
by Willy Nov 17, 2004 1:46AM PST

Its a waste of money to get an OEM branded system from Dell, HP or similar as they aren't really game systems. What they call a game systems is just a glorified video offering stuffed into a std. system. Plus, you found out that DYI'ing pricing can create havoc on building a cheap engouh system, but really you *DON'T* want a cheap system when all is build and running as you pay for 1 on 1 purchases. It pays to have quality componets, plus you have an upgrade path in order to upgrade more easily as time changes and components become available. A gaming system in itself will be expensive as the basic requirements should include "hi-end" componets if you really want the wow factor plus the whole system needs attention, from the case, power supply to video, etc., thus is expensive. You can shop for baragins and compromise and get what you can afford for now, but with a DIY system it becomes cheaper in the long run as you should keep it for year(s) vs. an older dead-end system from Dell, HP whose upgrade path is limited. That's my story and I'm sticking with it. Silly

good luck -----Willy

- Collapse -
Re: Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question
by joeltom Nov 17, 2004 2:21AM PST

OK Willy, I'll concede your point, and I appreciate the DIY upgrading capabilities. BUT, even if I build it myself, the original questions were not Dell vs. HP vs. build, the original questions were, all else being the same,
1) which is a better gaming CPU, Pentium 4 550 3.4Ghz or Athlon 64 3700+ 2.4 Ghz
2) A year or two from now when more intensive games are coming out, which will be the best gaming CPU of the two above?
Thanks!

- Collapse -
Strictly opinion.
by r. proffitt Forum moderator Nov 17, 2004 3:10AM PST

1. I have my reasons to go 64-bit. So it wins for my reasons.

2. There are no systems today that run Doom 3 at full tilt in all its glory, so your quest may not end today. There is no system made that meets this item.

Bob

- Collapse -
Re: Strictly opinion.
by joeltom Nov 17, 2004 3:56AM PST

Thanks Bob. I'm strongly leaning that way myself, I'm just wondering if the 64-bit architecture and the bandwith AMD puts into their CPUs can make up a full 1Ghz deficit to the Pentium when I'm looking for as much as I can afford on budget.

- Collapse -
Next year the dual Athlon 64 in Socket 939.
by r. proffitt Forum moderator Nov 17, 2004 4:07AM PST

While you can do your own research on benchmarks (tomshardware.com), here my crystal ball points out the dual core Athlon 64 Socket 939 to be da' bomb.

I've owned dual CPU machines and they always met my expectations.

Bob

- Collapse -
Re: Next year the dual Athlon 64 in Socket 939.
by skippyd333 Nov 17, 2004 11:40AM PST

AMD will make up most of that gig. Theres no question which is better for your money. As I said first building is better and, if you look for bargains can be much cheaper.

- Collapse -
Re: Next year the dual Athlon 64 in Socket 939.
by JK654 Nov 20, 2004 1:18PM PST

It might take a year or so after the first dual core Athlon 64 chip is released for there to be a dual core Athlon 64 chip priced under $250.

- Collapse -
Re: Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question
by billinn Nov 20, 2004 2:06PM PST

I believe you Willy. I have always built my own systems but the choices for components are getting so complicated. Where does it tell you what is compatible with what? I'm not a gamer but my PC use is graphics intensive, often working with 300 MB+ files. I can buy a P4/2.6 for $140 or a 3.6 for $450. Am I really going to see this much difference?
With a 2 harddrive system is there any need for the slave hdd to be a fast one?
What value is Intel's Application Accellerator Software, (supports only 810 to 860 chipsets)?
What is the difference between AGP and PCI Express cards when the price is roughly equal? I need to build a system quickly as mine is a couple years old and my system files are corrupted, preventing a normal boot to windows.

- Collapse -
Just part of the answer...
by r. proffitt Forum moderator Nov 20, 2004 10:42PM PST

" working with 300 MB+ files. I can buy a P4/2.6 for $140 or a 3.6 for $450. Am I really going to see this much difference "

YES. Look to http://www.tomshardware.com about video rendering speeds and the 3+GHz HT P4's do quick nicely compared to the pre-HT CPUs.

RAW GHz pays off for video editing. The speed of the hard disk is only a bottleneck when you copy a file around and in my experience today, the drives are quick enough to not slow the editing down enough to be a real bother.

Bob

- Collapse -
Re: Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question
by AMDrules Nov 19, 2004 5:22PM PST

I don't know if someone answered this already, but I'm too lazy to read the other posts. You really can't put a good system together with that budge? I got my Althon 3400+ for $750 (the tower alone), and its banging (Gefore FX 5700 LE and a bunch of other stuff). I really don't see how you can't put a 3700 together at 1,500 unless you were buying a big *** lcd screen. Can you list the specs of hardware you want?

And on a side note, AMD and Intel are better than one another on many processes, but as far as gaming goes AMD wins every benchmark.

- Collapse -
Re: Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question
by JK654 Nov 20, 2004 7:37AM PST
- Collapse -
Re: Yet another AMD/Intel gaming question
by mastercheif Nov 22, 2004 5:14AM PST

I am also considering the same computers as you are. The main reason why i am going with the amd is because of the Front side bus. the fsb speed on the amd is 1.4 ghz while the p4 only is 800 mghz.

- Collapse -
amd
by angryfirelord Jan 30, 2005 6:33AM PST

AMD is by far the best bang for your buck. If you do your homework, AMD Athlon 64 processors cream Intel Pentium 4s in EVERYTHING. The numbering model on the one you have shown will outpreform the dell. Plus it has 64 bit technology, so it will last into your future. The Pentium 4 does not.

plus, your hp is a media center anyway!

Back to Desktops forum

CNET Forums

Operating Systems
Software
Electronics & Gadgets
Hardware
Tablets & Mobile Devices
General Help
Brand Forums
Roadshow Autos
Off Topic

Other Forums

Forum Info