AMD Processors
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Processor Confusion!
Topic Summary:
Created On: 09/07/2005 08:22 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 09/07/2005 08:22 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
iceman536
Junior Member

Posts: 1
Joined: 09/07/2005

It has been several years since my last upgrade and I currently run an Athlon XP 2000+. In looking at the Athlon 64 processors I have no idea of what type of performance increase I can expect - i.e. is it worth the money to upgrade. If I went to an Athlon 64 3000 would I experience notable performance increase?

I am not using my PC for gaming but often have numerous programs running simultaneously such as Dreamweaver, Excel, Fireworks, IE, Outlook, etc. Recently I imported a text file into Access which was 30,000 records long with 175 fields and this took maybe 5 minutes (impressed it didn't crash!. Would a Athlon 64 3000 show me big improvement when doing something like that?

In a way I guess I am looking for a benchmark of an Athlon XP 2000+ vs. any of the Athlon 64 processors. Is there such a thing?

Thanks.
 09/07/2005 09:35 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
zir_blazer
Code Warrior

Posts: 2840
Joined: 03/19/2004

Theorically, you computer should not crash without mattering how heavy the task is, though it may take a whole bunch of time. Windows XP can work on a 200 MHz Pentium Pro with 64 MB of RAM, and it will not crash, but don't complain if it is too slow neither /tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /> If it does crash, then you have either a Software or Hardware issue.
There are a whole bunch of Benchmarks of Athlons XP and Athlons 64, try searching them at Anandtech' ">http://www.anandtech.com/. For real life performance, you will notice a huge performance increase going from an Athlon XP 2000+ to even a Socket 754 Athlon 64 2800+. They aren't very expensive and you can get a very noticeable performance increase. The amount of programs that you got in the background running should not affect overall performance if they are all in Idle (For example, while Internet Explorer, Dreamweaver and all the others are in the background doing nothing, they would just consume RAM Memory and not Processor resources), as far that you got enough RAM Memory to have them loaded there and not needing to put heavy presure in Windows Pagefile, that is when you will notice a slowdown for having too many applications (Or few but more heavy) doing nothing opened. I would also recommend you 512 MB of RAM or 1 GB of RAM.
 09/07/2005 06:44 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
leexgx
Case Modder

Posts: 584
Joined: 07/06/2005

QUOTEI am not using my PC for gaming but often have numerous programs running simultaneously such as Dreamweaver, Excel, Fireworks, IE, Outlook, etc. Recently I imported a text file into Access which was 30,000 records long with 175 fields and this took maybe 5 minutes (impressed it didn't crash!. Would a Athlon 64 3000 show me big improvement when doing something like that?

yes it probly do it strate away (if not it be in seconds) as the task of what you just did is mostly CPU load

the AMD64 do not compare to an AMD XP cpu well (the way the amd64 cpu is made is going to way faster then how an AMD XP works)

-------------------------
Gameing > AMD64 5000+ X2 Black (OC 3.2ghz - 1.375v) > TK Big Typoon > Asus M2N32-SLI delux > 2.2gb 4gb Gell ram > NVIDIA 8800 GTX > X-FI

Server > phenom 9500 (OC 2.475ghz 1.3v)> 4gb ram > Asus M3A32-MVP> lots of disk space
Statistics
112018 users are registered to the AMD Processors forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in.

FuseTalk Hosting Executive Plan v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.



Contact AMD Terms and Conditions ©2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Privacy Trademark information