1. Computer problem? Tech Support Guy is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations. Click here to join today! If you're new to Tech Support Guy, we highly recommend that you visit our Guide for New Members.

Which chip to get 333 or 400 FSB?

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by RipCurl, Aug 15, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement
  1. RipCurl

    RipCurl Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    40
    Hi
    I own an ASUS A7N8X Deluxe, and according to the ASUS web site my board can take up to either of the following processors: Athlon XP 3000+(333 FSB) Athlon XP 3200+(400 FSB) I am currently using an Athlon XP 2600+ (333 FSB)and the memory I have installed is Corsair 1GB DDR XMS2700 TwinX (2x512MB) Platinum CAS2. Now the thing is, if I buy the 3000+ chip everything should be fine because it has a FSB of 333 which is the same as my current chip. But if I bought the 3200+ 400 FSB would I have any kind of bottleneck problem? I haven`t priced these chips yet, but I would like to know if there would be an obvious performance difference between the two?

    Thanks
     
  2. crjdriver

    crjdriver Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Messages:
    38,615
    The difference would something you might see on a benchmark. In the real world, I doubt that you would see any real difference. I would buy the 333 fsb processor and keep your ram. To take full advantage of the 400 fsb processor, you will need to swap your ram [unless you want to oclock it] As I recall that board allows you to run the ram asynchronous so you COULD run 333 fsb ram with the 400 fsb processor.

    Since you have a 2600+, I would save the money and get something else. Like maybe a raid card or an upgraded video card. Currently I am using a 2600+ and I have built systems with 3000+ and 3200+ for people. They [the faster cpu] will bench a little higher, however there is no real world difference between the 2600+ and the faster processors.
     
  3. Triple6

    Triple6 Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    52,901
    First Name:
    Rob
    I'll second what CRJDRIVER says. Don't waste your money upgrading to a slightly faster CPU but put the money elsewhere.
     
  4. JohnWill

    JohnWill Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2002
    Messages:
    106,418
    My "rule of thumb" is double the processing power for a processor upgrade. I'm still running a P4-2.4(533), and I don't see anything that makes me want to upgrade. In another year or a bit more, there'll probably be a real increase in processing speed, and I'll make the leap.
     
  5. Insp3cta

    Insp3cta

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Messages:
    98
    if ur gonna upgrade go from something like a athlon to a 64 or a duron to a 64, or p2 or p3 to a p4.
     
  6. Skivvywaver

    Skivvywaver

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2001
    Messages:
    13,947
    Nothing even uses a 64 yet. There isn't even a windows version for a 64 yet. As it stands right now a 64 is nothing more than bragging rights. Stay in the XP range of processors for now. You'd need a board and processor to upgrade to 64. When and if a 64 bit processor is needed, the technology will be much better.
    If I were BUILDING a system today I would go 64. I would NOT upgrade to 64.
     
  7. JohnWill

    JohnWill Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2002
    Messages:
    106,418
    Funny, I see lots of references to 64 bit XP, you telling me that Microsoft is lying to me? 64 bit versions of XP and Server 2003 will be released in less than 6 months, and Linux is already available in 64 bit versions. I'd look seriously at the 64 bit machines if I were in the mood to upgrade my machine.

    Of course, you're correct in the fact that you need a MB and processor for a 64 bit machine. I normally don't consider a simple processor upgrade for a machine, if it's time to upgrade the processor, it's normally time to upgrade the MB anyway. :)

    Other things to consider are availability of 64 bit PCI slots, RAID controllers, gigabit Ethernet, etc. No reason to have a super speedy processor if you can't move the data faster as well.
     
  8. RipCurl

    RipCurl Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    40
    Thanks guys you have made me decide not to buy a new chip. I guess you are right enough about the small performance gain I would achieve by getting a new one. I don't think I will bother with a new graphics card, as I currently have a Hercules 3D Prophet 9800 which runs great. Thanks again.
     
  9. Sponsor

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 733,556 other people just like you!

Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Short URL to this thread: https://techguy.org/262366

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice