Yep. I prefer ATI (well, AMD now) company to Nvidia as they've done some dodgy things in the past with drivers and re-releasing old hardware as new etc however when they next come top again, I'll buy their product if the ATI one is not as good price/performance wise. That's all I'm saying which I think you can see but not the OP.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AGP PRO
- Thread starter Ali69374
- Start date
If your happy with your cpu speed as is, then its no problem.
(edit) the radeon 3850 doesnt "require" any specific cpu speed, but its performance would be limited by your cpu's, eg - you may well find games where adding the new gpu gives only 1-2 fps more because the cpu's are working 100% and gfx isnt, conversely in same games you may get more fps gain as the cpu's were idle, but old gfx was at 100%. this can ofc be countered by just turning the fsaa up, same/much better performance in all games (depending on the age of game) with better graphics in all.
as stands: your 2*athlon mp 2600's are roughly equivelant to a (theoretical) 3000+ athlon x2, - that would be dualcore 1.6ghz. (ive tried to account for the loss of dual channel, X-bar, imc and the athlon 64 alu/fps improvements in the 400mhz actual core speed drop)
this is substantially faster than any atom cpu.
but a lot slower than the current cpu's on offer.
your cheapest cpu upgrade would be to move to a 2nd hand socket 939 system, as this would take your existing ram and agp boards are fairly common. meaning just a board + cpu. however this tech is several years out of date of and on its own. you should consider a move to AM3, perhaps pairing some cheap 1066 DDR3 sticks with a athlon x2 250 and your choice of graphics (anything over and including the 3400 series should be faster in most cases than your current gpu)
this is, ofcourse, if you are not happy with your pc as it is. if your happy, dont change
(edit) the radeon 3850 doesnt "require" any specific cpu speed, but its performance would be limited by your cpu's, eg - you may well find games where adding the new gpu gives only 1-2 fps more because the cpu's are working 100% and gfx isnt, conversely in same games you may get more fps gain as the cpu's were idle, but old gfx was at 100%. this can ofc be countered by just turning the fsaa up, same/much better performance in all games (depending on the age of game) with better graphics in all.
as stands: your 2*athlon mp 2600's are roughly equivelant to a (theoretical) 3000+ athlon x2, - that would be dualcore 1.6ghz. (ive tried to account for the loss of dual channel, X-bar, imc and the athlon 64 alu/fps improvements in the 400mhz actual core speed drop)
this is substantially faster than any atom cpu.
but a lot slower than the current cpu's on offer.
your cheapest cpu upgrade would be to move to a 2nd hand socket 939 system, as this would take your existing ram and agp boards are fairly common. meaning just a board + cpu. however this tech is several years out of date of and on its own. you should consider a move to AM3, perhaps pairing some cheap 1066 DDR3 sticks with a athlon x2 250 and your choice of graphics (anything over and including the 3400 series should be faster in most cases than your current gpu)
this is, ofcourse, if you are not happy with your pc as it is. if your happy, dont change
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 7,627
- Location
- Ireland/Northern Ireland Border
You are taking a subjective view of something which can only be viewed objectively.
And you are bonkers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 2,597
man this goes on for a bit. i thought it interesting at first but juts didnt have the heart to read it all 
given the added latencys over duel sockets in comparison to duel core. lower ram frequency and the likey and possable 256k L2 (?) and loosing onchip mem controler. noting that loosing duel channel memory is hardly any loss at all btw
however i noted btw that moving from a 3000+ socket A to a 3000+ 939 the socket A was faster for raw computing power if only slightly. (not including any benifit from onchip mem controler btw)
i would think it would have given an x2 3600+ at 1.6ghz and 256k of level2 per core a run for its money.
given the added latencys over duel sockets in comparison to duel core. lower ram frequency and the likey and possable 256k L2 (?) and loosing onchip mem controler. noting that loosing duel channel memory is hardly any loss at all btw
however i noted btw that moving from a 3000+ socket A to a 3000+ 939 the socket A was faster for raw computing power if only slightly. (not including any benifit from onchip mem controler btw)
i would think it would have given an x2 3600+ at 1.6ghz and 256k of level2 per core a run for its money.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 1,670
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
I want to love AMD again, last Intel processor I used before going AMD exclusive (besides my current Q6600) was a 500mhz P3 back in like 2001/2000, I loved my 2500 XP-M, that thing clocked like a monster (beyond 3200+ speeds).