New computer advice - Ruccus and other bright minds

[Elerion]

I'm looking to upgrade my computer for Doom3, HL2 etc, and I'm looking at two solutions. My current setup is:
MSI VIA KT333 Motherboard, w/o RAID
XP1800+
Ti4200
768MB DDR@333mhz
40+80 IDE HDD
and various peripherals (LAN, WLAN, DVD, CDRW, 5.1Sound, 56k, etc)

The first solution is to buy a 9800Pro and a (Barton)XP3000+, costing me about 3000NOK (~$430), and leaving me with a processor and graphics card I don't need and probably can't sell.

The second solution (and the one looking most likely right now) is to buy a new setup, and try to sell the old one complete with (or without) a 17" CRT I have lying around. I'm looking at putting together the following system right now:

MB: Asus Mainboard S-478 Intel 865PE ATX GbLAN IEEE1394 Raid SATA WiFi Retail, P4P800-E DELUXE
HDD: Wd Harddisk 160.0GB IDE 7200RPM SATA 3.5" 8MB, WD1600JD
Case: Aopen Case Midi ATX Tower 300W CoolGrey / Blue (QF50C) 2xUSB2.0 / Audio Preinstalled, 91.97020.C12
RAM: Geil 512MB DDR PC3200 400MHz Value CL2,5 5ns Aluminium Heat Spreader 2,5-2,8V, GE5123200B (2 of them)
CPU: Intel CPU Pentium 4 S-478 3.0GHz 800MHz 1M Boxed "Prescott", BX80546PG3000E
GFX: Connect3d VGA-Card Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB DDR AGP DVI TV-Out Retail Powered By ATI, ATIC3D-6033
( http://www.connect3d.com/products/products_radeon_9800pro.htm )
(Alternative card: MSI RX9800PRO-TD128 http://www.msicomputer.co.uk/Products.aspx?product_id=703448&cat_id=78)
Total price: 7700NOK (~$1100)

I'll put my old components in the new cheap case, and put the new components in my old 350W Chieftec case.

Now, a few quick questions:
- Assuming I can offload my old comp for $400-$500, the second option is far better, right?
- Does it really pay off to get the 875 chipset MB instead of 856PE, or is the difference negligable?
- Correct choice of processor?
- Are those graphics cards identical? Their product pages list the memory clock of the MSI at ~330 and the C3D at 600something, but that kind of difference sounds weird. The MSI is $10 cheaper, but I have to wait a couple of weeks for that, so I really rather want the C3D unless it's worse.

Quick advice appreciated.

[Elerion]

Looking at this thread: http://www.thesafehouse.org/viewtopic.php?t=12785

The 865 seems like the right choice. This still stands?

[ragweed]

How long do you plan on having this computer? As it stands you are buying into obsolescence with the socket 478 CPU. You might want to consider the new LGA775 if you want an Intel solution. This gives future upgrade paths were the Socket 478 doesn't.

[Nenjin]

How much are you paying for the C3D card? Sapphire 9800 PRO is $198 at Newegg.

[Mithrilhall]

I would go with the socket 939. I had a Athlon 2700XP and upgraded to the Athlon 64 3500 and I would recommend it to anyone.

[Peebs]

I did the same as Mithrilhall and have been very happy with the results so far.

[ragweed]

I'm ordering my Socket 939 based Athlon 64 3500+ as we speak. With ye olde ASUS mobo of WiFi goodness.

[Lisboa]

I think the 9800 Pro was $160 after rebate at Best Buy last week. I'm not sure it will be worth the jump for HL2 or Doom 3. Can you get a 9800XT? I also think a P4 3.0 GhZ is a little too slow. You're describing a system that would have been short of top of the line a year ago.

[Aidden]

Lisboa, I think you really need to stick to whatever profession pays your bills, because when it comes to giving advice on technical matters, you are either attempting to push an agenda or have no clue about what you speak.

Either way its bad for the people asking the advice..

[Lisboa]

Give me a break Aidden. If he is buying a system now to play Doom 3, it's my opinion he should get better than a 3.0 Ghz P4 and 9800 Pro with 128 megs. He'd be running Doom 3 at medium quality.

[Aidden]

Which confirms your ignorance in the microprocessor world..

a Prescott P4, which is the processor he mentioned is not a year old chip as you stated here:

I also think a P4 3.0 GhZ is a little too slow. You're describing a system that would have been short of top of the line a year ago.

I stand behind, and reitterate my previous message.

[Ruccus]

Ding ding, round's over. Back to your corners :beatup


I don't like socket 939 right now because of AGP, and I don't like LGA775 right now because of the lack of a 266.7mhz (1066mhz effective) front side bus.

Is there any reason you can't wait until after you see how Doom 3 performs on your existing setup before deciding to upgrade? As written in the HardOCP Doom 3 piece:

For those of you that think you are not going to have the hardware that you need to play DOOM 3, the fact of the matter is that many of you will be just fine, although an upgrade may still be in your future. As of this afternoon we were playing DOOM 3 on a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 box with a GeForce 4 MX440 video card and having a surprisingly good gaming experience. Even a subtle jump to an AMD 2500+ with a GeForce 3 video card that is two years old will deliver a solid gaming experience that will let you enjoy the game the way id Software designed it to be. That fact alone should let many of you know that you will not be left behind in experiencing DOOM 3.

[Elerion]

Tbh, HL2 is a bigger concern than Doom, hence the choice of ATI over Nvidia for the first time. There are a couple of reasons for me upgrading now:
- I still have two more weeks at home (as in parents') and I'm bored shitless
- The job I have atm allows me to get parts a bit cheaper.
- Another game I am really enjoying on friends' comps, Joint Ops, will require an upgrade.
- When I go back to school, there will be lots of new students needing new comps, which makes it easier to sell my old one off now than it will be half a year from now.
- The new technology (64bit, PCI-E, etc) will still be out of my price range for a good long time.


As for going with the "year old top line" equipment, that doesn't bother me. My old system is two years old, I bought the top of the not-overpriced-stuff back then (like I believe I am doing now), and it has worked perfectly for me up to now. If I can get away with $500 upgrades every two years and still have a prime gaming rig, I'm happy.

Anyway, I got impatient and ordered the system described above. Thanks for the advice anyhow, it's very much appreciated, even though I don't follow all of it.

[Lisboa]

Which confirms your ignorance in the microprocessor world..

a Prescott P4, which is the processor he mentioned is not a year old chip as you stated here:

I also think a P4 3.0 GhZ is a little too slow. You're describing a system that would have been short of top of the line a year ago.

I stand behind, and reitterate my previous message.

Aidden, let me ask you, are there benchmarks which show the 3.0 Prescott being faster than a P4 3.2 Ghz Northwood? Because I don't see 'em, and I see the 3.0 Prescott benchmarking in games slower in many cases than its 18 month old Northwood counterpart. So I said nothing inaccurate.

And Elerion, I'd suggest going up to 256 megs on the 9800 Pro if it's not too late... Doom3 developers claim that a 256 meg card will be "High quality" where as 128 megs is "medium."

[Aidden]

Well Lisboa, that’s all fine and dandy, but what did your initial comments have to do with one chip versus another chip? Nobody except you, and just in your last post, ever brought up performance between 2 classes of processor. You stated clearly that the CPU in question was year old technology and that it was “a little slow”

Here let me quote your text verbatim:

I also think a P4 3.0 GhZ is a little too slow. You're describing a system that would have been short of top of the line a year ago.

Since a year ago that processor wasn’t even released to the public I’m not sure how you can even begin to justify your statement. Other than you have a habit of playing down Intel in an effort to see AMD succeed, for whatever reason and you do so by blatant lies and mistruths.

Its easy enough to state facts and let the person make an educated decision. Why you feel it necessary to come here and post statements that at best are misleading and at worst are out and out lies is beyond me, But I can tell you this, every time you do it your going to get called on it.

[TeanninBramblefeet]

Wow, Aidden has such skill with tip-toeing around personal attacks! :b

I'm actually suddenly concerned about one thing that was said, and since Ruccus has already made his entrance here, I'll just post in a reply as opposed to a new thread...

So yeah... how much difference will the 9800 pro 256 MB card have over the 128 MB card in a game similar to Doom 3? Essentially... would it be worth the extra $100, or better to put that money elsewhere on a computer?

And Elerion... Why Connect3d for the card? :crazy

[Lisboa]

Well Lisboa, that’s all fine and dandy, but what did your initial comments have to do with one chip versus another chip? Nobody except you, and just in your last post, ever brought up performance between 2 classes of processor. You stated clearly that the CPU in question was year old technology and that it was “a little slow”

Here let me quote your text verbatim:

I also think a P4 3.0 GhZ is a little too slow. You're describing a system that would have been short of top of the line a year ago.

Since a year ago that processor wasn’t even released to the public I’m not sure how you can even begin to justify your statement. Other than you have a habit of playing down Intel in an effort to see AMD succeed, for whatever reason and you do so by blatant lies and mistruths.

Its easy enough to state facts and let the person make an educated decision. Why you feel it necessary to come here and post statements that at best are misleading and at worst are out and out lies is beyond me, But I can tell you this, every time you do it your going to get called on it.

I have no idea what you're talking about. I never mentioned the "dreaded" AMD in the post. I never argued and don't claim that that a 3000 XP, or even a 3200 XP outperforms a 3.0 Ghz Northwood/Prescott . The only suggestion I made was that a P4 3.0 Gig seems a little slow and he should consider shelling out more for more speed. Then you hit me with saying I cannot consider the Prescott the same as the Northwood? How is that misleading?


Yeah, I may be an AMD fanboi but it's funny to hear you always accusing me of having an agenda. I don't get paid by AMD, and I am not the one who gets stock options.

Edit: I see how you jumped to the conclusion that I must be supporting the 3000 XP over the 3.0 Ghz, but I'm not, I consider my 3000 XP slow by today's standards.

[Ruccus]

Teannin, the performance difference between a 128mb and 256mb card is currently unknown; I've heard mention that HardOCP is doing a more extensive collection of benchmarks with a wide variety of cards and processors so as to show what will be the sweet spot for many different systems. They should have that article up by next week, or possibly by the end of this week. Currently anything right now is pure speculation.

While Lisboa alludes to Id saying "128mb cards = Medium" and "256mb cards = High", that's simply what Id Software has programmed into the game for baseline default settings. The only difference between Medium and High settings is the compression of the normal maps so I would expect visually those two settings won't appear too different (in the HardOCP article the performance hit going from Medium to High on the 9800XT was only around 10%). Just like Robert Duffy mentioned that Ultra setting is playable on today's high end systems even though it's not set by default, High is most likely playable on high end 128mb cards, though it's not set by default.

You may even get overall better visual quality for the same framerate by going to a Medium setting and adding anisotrophy instead of choosing High Quality with no anisotrophy. Just like there's only so much you can do to make a bad looking game look good, there's only so much you can do to make a good looking game look bad.

[Ruccus]

It appears that HardOCP just published the article I eluded to above. The full article is here (http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQ0). One thing to note in the article is their mention that "we think we've been conservative in our opinions of the playable levels of IQ shown in our guide. It is totally plausible that you might find 1280x1024 a gameable resolution where we have suggested 1024x768 as the “best playable.” We've played it a bit conservative because we know that many of you will use this guide to base your future computer hardware purchasing decisions on"

They list the "best playable IQ settings" for a P4 3.0 and 128mb Radeon 9800 Pro as 1024x768 with Medium Quality detail setting in which it averaged 50.4fps, though the the XP3200+ and 128mb Radeon 9800 Pro (which is roughly the same speed, as noted by the two processors' performance with identical settings on many of the graphics card benches) averaged 47.3fps at 1024x768 with AAx8 and D3's "High Quality" setting. I'd expect a P4 3.0 running at 1024x768 with AAx8 and D3's "High Quality" setting should get right around a 47fps average, which would be very playable.

As for the difference between 256mb and 128mb cards, scanning over the results I couldn't see a 128mb card vs. an identical 256mb card, but there is the 9800XT vs. 9800 Pro. The 9800XT is a higher clocked (412 vs. 380mhz) version of the 9800 Pro with 256mb of memory instead of 128, and looking at the results it appears the 9800XT's increased clock speed is probably causing the majority of its performance lead over the 9800 Pro (around 3fps). I'm using the XP3200+ results (both were done in "High Quality" which is where 256mb should start to become useful), and while there is one downward spike near the end of the 9800 Pro graph, aside from that point framerates seemd to shadow the 9800XT throughout the benchmark run.

[Elerion]

Thanks Ruccus. If the clock speed is the main thing affecting the performance boost, I'm in luck, as I should be able to clock+flash the 9800Pro into a 9800XT. I might need some additional cooling, but it's doable.

I got most of my components today, but MB probably won't arrive until saturday at the earliest. Can't wait :)

[TeanninBramblefeet]

I swear, every time a thread pops up that says anything about differences in card, I always get worried :b

Just got a 9800 pro 128 MB myself, so I wanted to make sure that I didn't shoot myself in the foot for performance until the X800s drop down to $200 (HA!), heh.

Thanks as always Ruccus, ever with your finger on the pulse of the computer world...