939 or 754(?) pin CPU.

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Donald McTrevor, Jul 18, 2005.

  1. I am thinking of a new PC but it is 754 pin (appprox I forget).

    It is a 754 pin not 939 and I am worried I will struggle to upgrade
    it futher, will it take a duel core chip for instance?

    Or anyone know of a similar product which is 939 pin?
    (AMD not INTEL).

    This is the PC (i am in the UK)

    http://www.currys.co.uk/martprd/sto...ccgaddfejgdffjcflgceggdhhmdfhl.0&page=Product
    &sku=138538&category_oid=-20732&fm=15&sm=3&tm=1
     
    Donald McTrevor, Jul 18, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements



  2. Hmm... Just to answer my own question, I read elsewhere that
    the 939 will probably be as much of a 'dead end' as the 754 especialy
    when you consider how long I go before an upgrade
    (I have a Cyrix II processor about 266mhz, 66mhz bus),
    so I guess by the time I get round to upgrading my new system
    even the 939 will be ancient history.
    I was rather annoyed that I can't upgrade my current PC's CPU
    as it was the end of the road as far as the motherboard was concerned.

    I guess that is a fairly commom experience? I wouldn't know
    as this is my first and only PC.

    So is there much life left in socket 754?
    A processor would have to be twice as fast to be worthwhile
    up grading it. My new machine will be about 20 times faster
    than what I currently have so it should keep me going for a while
    ( Ihope!!!).
     
    Donald McTrevor, Jul 18, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements


  3. CPU upgrades in the same socket are rarely worth it. To get a noticeable
    speed increase you want to at double a systems performance, preferably you
    it should be 3 or 4 times faster. Usually those kinds of increases require
    a new socket to accommodate the increased memory bandwidth and power
    requirements of next generation CPU. We have an exception to this rule at
    the moment, the dual core Athlon 64s fit the same 939 pin socket as the
    single core Athlon 64s so it's possible to double the performance (for
    some workload types) with a CPU upgrade. I think that this is a unique
    moment in history that won't be repeated.

    As a general rule of thumb the only thing that you should plan on
    upgrading over the life of a system is the RAM and the disks. Buy a system
    that you think will meet your needs for a reasonable amount of time and
    then plan to replace the entire thing when the time comes.

    In your case absolutely anything that you buy will be screaming fast
    compared to the antique that you have now. The socket 754 Athlon 64s are a
    great choice if you are looking for the best price/performance. I'd
    recommend a 3400+ with 1M of cache if that's the way you want to go. I
    think they offer two versions of the 3400+, a faster clocked version with
    1/2M and a slower clocked version with 1M. Cache size is much more
    important than clock speed so make sure that you get the 1M version.

    If you want to buy a system with the longest lifetime then get an Athlon
    64 X2 4400+ system. The 4400+ is a dual core processor, each with 1M of
    cache. Essentially it's two 3400+s on a chip (same clock speed, same
    amount of cache per processor, same memory bandwidth per processor). Dual
    processor systems feel snappier then single processor systems even though
    single threaded applications won't run any faster. Even if you don't have
    any multi-threaded applications an operating system has a lot of things
    going on simultaneously so you'll some benefit from the second core
    immediately. As more and more applications are optimized for multiple
    processors you a greater benefit. Expect to pay about $450 more for a
    4400+ system vs a 3400+.
     
    General Schvantzkoph, Jul 18, 2005
    #3

  4. Yes there is always something faster justaround the corner or at least
    for more money anyway. Buying at the top of the range is not really for
    me though your tend to pay big bucks for not such a huge increase in
    performance.
    I would have been happy with a semperon a few months ago untill
    the athlon 64 started dropping into my 'price comfort zone'

    Thing is I looked at the prices for 754 and 939 processors and
    motherboards and there didn't seem much difference.(if any) so I
    am disappointed I can't find such a system for the same price.
    I would imagine in say 3 years time I could pick up that
    64 X2 4400+ for a fraction of its current price.

    The system I was thinking of buying was a Athlon 64 3200
    Newcastle which seems pretty fast according to this table,
    which doesn't cover duel core processors (I think).
    If it was a 939 it would be ideal for me. I had to email
    the manufacturer for some of the info as retailers don't tend to
    supply it.
    Another thing is whether it is 90nm or 130nm (I think its 130,
    obviously) the 90nm consumes less power I believe.

    It can get awefully omplicated deciding what to get, by the time
    I have found the relevant infomation (and comprehended it)
    prices have dropped and something else is on the horizon.

    I should just buy it I guess, as is should be more than
    adaquate for my needs, currently anyway.
    My current system is actually fine most of the time
    except it can't play some .wmv and other video files
    and it is a real struggle for it to cope with playing two
    poker tables at the same time. Mind you I am not very good
    at playing two tables either!! Sometimes one is a struggle!!
    Also some multitasking is also a problem.
     
    Donald McTrevor, Jul 18, 2005
    #4
  5. Donald McTrevor

    kony Guest

    On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 16:45:48 -0400, General Schvantzkoph

    That is ridiculous.

    Almost every socket that's come along in the past 8 years
    has had the option to nearly double _actual_ performance
    with a CPU upgrade for less than $100. The proposed upgrade
    to dual core A64 will (on average) come nowhere near double
    actual performance and cost significantly more than $100.

    The unique moment in history is that performance has never
    been higher, but that the benefit from and cost for
    upgrading hasn't been such a bad ratio in the past 10 years.
     
    kony, Jul 18, 2005
    #5
  6. I strongly disagree. Even when the socket remains the same there are
    generally chipset or motherboard changes to go from a first generation to
    a second generation part. For example the motherboards that were current
    when the Athlon XP 1600+ was state of the art can't take a part faster
    than a 2200+, hardly a worthwhile upgrade.
     
    General Schvantzkoph, Jul 18, 2005
    #6
  7. Donald McTrevor

    Cuzman Guest

    General Schvantzkoph wrote:

    " To get a noticeable speed increase you want to at double a systems
    performance, preferably you it should be 3 or 4 times faster. "

    So everyone should just upgrade their systems when there is a 4x
    performance increase? That's the stupidest thing I've read on usenet in
    a while.


    " I think that this is a unique moment in history that won't be
    repeated. "

    How about the time when they start releasing quad-core CPUs, all clocked
    well below the highest dual-core CPU?


    " As a general rule of thumb the only thing that you should plan on
    upgrading over the life of a system is the RAM and the disks. "

    Maybe you should write to AMD and Intel, telling them to disband their
    retail CPU markets. Tell them to supply CPUs as OEM parts to
    motherboard manufacturers only. Please post the replies you get from
    them on usenet.


    " Cache size is much more important than clock speed so make sure that
    you get the 1M version. "

    Not to everyone it isn't.


    " The 4400+ is a dual core processor, each with 1M of cache.
    Essentially it's two 3400+s on a chip (same clock speed, same amount of
    cache per processor, same memory bandwidth per processor). "

    Each core on the socket 939 4400+ does have the same clock speed, L2
    cache and multiplier as a socket 754 3400+, but the dual-channel
    capabilities put the 4400+ above the socket 754 3400+ in single-threaded
    applications. It is actually the socket 939 3700+ that has the
    aforementioned qualities of the 4400+, and is given the more
    distinguished PR rating because of the dual-channel capabilities.
    http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-amd-athlon-64-microprocessors
     
    Cuzman, Jul 18, 2005
    #7
  8. Hi Donald. I'm in the UK too. Don't buy your system ready built, you
    get much better value for money (and control over the hardware) if you
    build it yourself.

    If you let us know your budget (post it here or send me an email), we
    will be able to help you piece together a decent system.
     
    Random Person, Jul 19, 2005
    #8
  9. Yes wait untill you can get a 20X increase, like me :O)
    I am thinking that this may well be the way things go, ie 4 core
    the 8 core maybe similar to X2 X4 X8 cdroms etc...

    Horses for courses. everyone has different requirements.
    A fast CPU is not great help if the data if travelling on the
    slow bus from the main memory.
     
    Donald McTrevor, Jul 19, 2005
    #9
  10. Further notes:
    I pieced together a computer of equivalent specs to yours for £400
    excl VAT, compared to Curry's £500. I bet others could beat it
    price-wise with a bit more effort. Be aware that your audio/graphics
    processors appear to be integrated into your motherboard, which means
    your computer will slow down when it is playing music or displaying
    graphics (as opposed to having a separate, dedicated card).

    Also, as you appear to be a computer user who does not require a high
    powered system, you could probably build a much cheaper platform using
    the AMD Sempron processors.
     
    Random Person, Jul 19, 2005
    #10
  11. I am not actually sure if it actually true that it is cheaper to build it
    yourself anymore.
    I was looking at an athlon 64 system (link in my original post)
    for £500 inc monitor TFT.
    For example buying the PC and monitor seperately costs a staggering
    £50 more!!!
    That is prehaps not the best example but when I started adding up the
    prices of the seperate components at PC World, it didn't look like
    I would be making much of a saving, if any. It looked lilke it might
    well cost considerable more.
    However I may stand to be corrected as I may not have been
    comparing like with like.

    Anyway here is the spec:-

    AMD Athlon 64 Processor 3200+

    512mb DDR RAM

    Dual Layer DVD ReWriter drive

    160Gb Hard drive

    PROVIEW 15" TFT MONITOR

    AMD Athlon 64 processor 3200

    Windows XP Home Edition Operating-System

    512 mb RAM Memory

    160 Gb Hard Disk Capacity

    DVD Drive and DVD Re-writer

    Processor Type AMD Athlon 64 processor 3200
    Clock-Speed Not Specified
    Front Side BUS Not Specified
    Cache Not Specified
    Operating-System Windows XP Home Edition
    RAM Memory 512 mb
    Hard Disk Capacity 160 Gb
    Optical Drive 1 DVD Drive and DVD Re-writer
    Optical Drive 2 Not Specified
    Plug In Removable Hard Drive No
    Built-in TV Tuner Not Specified
    Built-in Digital TV Tuner No
    Built-in Radio Tuner Not Specified
    Remote Control No
    802.11g Wireless Network Ready No
    Graphics Memory 128 MB mb
    Graphics Description SIS Mirage2 Graphics(VGA port)
    Sound Card Integrated 5.1 sound solution
    Soundcard included No
    Speakers Included Not Specified
    Media Card Reader 9-In-1
    Built-In HP Docking Station No
    No of USB connections 7
    No of PCI Slots 3
    No. of Firewire Connections 2
    Keyboard Yes
    Wireless Keyboard and Mouse No
    Mouse Yes
    Weight 14.5 kg
    Height 500 mm
    Width 300 mm
    Depth 600 mm
    Network LAN 10/100 BT Network Interface
    Software Titles Included WORKS 8.0
    Delivery Details


    For delivery information on this and other products please click here
    Operating System


    Windows XP
    Microsoft® Windows® XP is the next version of the Windows operating system.
    Windows XP puts the exciting experiences of the digital age at your
    fingertips. From digital photos, music, and video to building a home
    network, Windows XP brings you into the digital age with ease. Built on the
    solid foundation of Windows 2000, Windows XP also sets the new standard in
    efficient and dependable computing. A new visual design, reliable Windows
    engine, and new Internet security features combine with capabilities for
    sharing your computer, to give you the most dependable Windows operating
    system yet.
     
    Donald McTrevor, Jul 19, 2005
    #11
  12. Hi Donald. Yes, the first thing I did when you posted the link is check
    out the system :)

    Here is my equivalent system:

    AMD (Clawhammer) Athlon 64 Bit 3200/1 Mb L2 cache 754Pin CPU OEM
    £92.35

    Motherboard 800FSB DDR400 8xAGP USB2.0 £27.22

    Seagate 160GB HDD - OEM £43.99

    512MB DDR 400MHz PC3200 CL=3 Memory Module £26.59

    LG 52x32x52x16x CD-RW/DVD-ROM Combo Drive Black - OEM £17.85

    Midi Tower Case in Beige with 2.0 USB/Audio and 350w PSU £13.21

    CTX 15" TFT (3 Years Warranty) £99.98

    OEM Windows XP Home Edition SP2 - 1Pk £50.68

    ATI Radeon 9200 128MB DDR DVI TV-Out Retail Box £18.71

    Cart Total: £390.58 (excl. VAT)

    I would however shop around from different retailers. The one I put the
    pieces together from are not exactly known for their glowing aftersales
    service.

    As you're going to be putting the components together yourself, I do
    suggest you use a company with a good aftersales service in case you
    accidentally mess something up.
     
    Random Person, Jul 19, 2005
    #12
  13. Unfortunatley OE did not quote this properly.
    Regarding graphics and sound, I have a built an integrated
    system on my current set-up and I was wondering if I could
    use a seperate graphic and/or sound cards to speed up my
    computer a bit? Or does it being built in mean I am basically
    stuck with a slow set up? I would imagine I could pick up
    something pretty cheap which would improve my system
    (like from ebay). Most .wmv files are unwatchable/unplayable
    on my currrent set up.
    I am not sure how these video cards work anyway but .wmv
    criples my PC!!

    Yes the semperon would be OK, the Athlon 64 just sounds
    sexier!!! and itisnot that much more considering it tends to come
    with a system with double the memeory and hard drive.

    Mind you here is a £370 semperon (v £420 athlon 64) which has
    a bigger hard drive (200 not 160) for £50 less.
    It can all get very confusing!! Especially as they are marketed so
    that there is always soomething that little bit better for a little bit
    more. I am sure I have seen semperons for around £300 too.

    I gues I am looking for something 'future proof' which will probably
    never be the case whatever I buy!!
    A few months ago the Semperon looked a bit pricy but now I view it
    as the bare minimum!!
    One of the things which is 'bugging me' is that I would like a 939 socket
    as I think it might be more 'future proof' but in reality that socket would
    probably be obselete by the time on my next upgrade (probably 6 years on!!).
    Decisions...decisions!!
    "I used to think I was indecisive, but now I am not so sure".


    AMD Sempron 3000+ Processor

    512 Mb DDR RAM

    200 Gb Hard Disk Capacity

    Multi-Format Dual Layer DVD Re-Writer

    Integrated Intel Extreme graphics

    6-in-1 Media Card Reader

    4 x USB 2.0 connections

    Microsoft Works 7.0

    Windows XP Home Edition Operating-System









    Further notes:
    I pieced together a computer of equivalent specs to yours for £400
    excl VAT, compared to Curry's £500. I bet others could beat it
    price-wise with a bit more effort. Be aware that your audio/graphics
    processors appear to be integrated into your motherboard, which means
    your computer will slow down when it is playing music or displaying
    graphics (as opposed to having a separate, dedicated card).

    Also, as you appear to be a computer user who does not require a high
    powered system, you could probably build a much cheaper platform using
    the AMD Sempron processors.
     
    Donald McTrevor, Jul 19, 2005
    #13
  14. What exactly do you use your computer for?

    I remember reading a while ago that a 1GHz PC is plenty for typical
    office/clerical work. A run of the mill Sempron 2500+ or so would more
    than suffice. You only really should get an AMD64 if you think you will
    need it.
     
    Random Person, Jul 19, 2005
    #14
  15. Again OE will not quote your post for some reason but thanks
    anyway its very useful.

    I have never put togeather a system myself bar upgrading memory
    and adding hard drives and cdroms etc. So I probably would not
    have a problem at least not untill the word BIOS is mentioned!!

    One think not mentioned is carriage costs, I don't know if I can get
    those parts locally and P&P tends to be costly.
    I am in Nottingham and there don't tend to be many parts retailers
    about, apart from maplin, who tend to be expensive.

    Anyway I will have a look at it again tomorrow.


    Hi Donald. Yes, the first thing I did when you posted the link is check
    out the system :)

    Here is my equivalent system:

    AMD (Clawhammer) Athlon 64 Bit 3200/1 Mb L2 cache 754Pin CPU OEM
    £92.35

    Motherboard 800FSB DDR400 8xAGP USB2.0 £27.22

    Seagate 160GB HDD - OEM £43.99

    512MB DDR 400MHz PC3200 CL=3 Memory Module £26.59

    LG 52x32x52x16x CD-RW/DVD-ROM Combo Drive Black - OEM £17.85

    Midi Tower Case in Beige with 2.0 USB/Audio and 350w PSU £13.21

    CTX 15" TFT (3 Years Warranty) £99.98

    OEM Windows XP Home Edition SP2 - 1Pk £50.68

    ATI Radeon 9200 128MB DDR DVI TV-Out Retail Box £18.71

    Cart Total: £390.58 (excl. VAT)

    I would however shop around from different retailers. The one I put the
    pieces together from are not exactly known for their glowing aftersales
    service.

    As you're going to be putting the components together yourself, I do
    suggest you use a company with a good aftersales service in case you
    accidentally mess something up.
     
    Donald McTrevor, Jul 19, 2005
    #15
  16. As I recall, the P&P for the comp from that retailer cost under £10.
    My first homebuilt computer was a success, even though I had no prior
    experience. It is not that difficult, just make sure you have a clear
    space to work with, ground your hands from any static and read the
    manuals.
     
    Random Person, Jul 19, 2005
    #16

  17. Not much really as far as processing goes, I was just trying to
    future proof my self. I thought my existing computer would
    last forever untill they started bringing out ever more bloated and
    inefficient applications. I often find when I 'upgrade' an application
    it runs several times slower.
    I play poker online for money sometimes and it is a real struggle
    for it to play two tables at once (which makes it more of a struggle
    for me too!! as it takes an age to switch between table, sometimes
    being so slow I lose money because the hand has timed out).
    (I actually made a profit recently!!)
    It might be nice to burn cds in the background at times too.
    Also it won't play some video .wmv files as it is too slow which
    is a real pain, they seem to be unbelievably slow!!! I am not sure
    why.
    Also I would like to watch some football matches via my PC
    but I will need a faster internet connection for that too (current;ly
    300kbs) need 1 or 2 meg.
    I am hoping the profits from poker will pay for that, athough probaly
    not judging by my perfromance last night!! However results over the
    last 3 months suggest it will.
    I would not recommend you trying it yourself though, I lost quite a
    bit initially but then won it back when I learn't more about the game.
     
    Donald McTrevor, Jul 19, 2005
    #17
  18. Donald McTrevor

    kony Guest

    Ah but they can!

    If you can't run at the higher FSB, you just increase the
    multipler. It's true that it can't be done with some of the
    newer generation multiplier locked AMD chips, BUT we don't
    need it to be possible on those, merely to have an upgrade
    path that isn't locked- enter Mobile XP.

    It will be a significant percent lower performance to drop
    FSB (and memory bus). That doesn't diminish it's value
    though, because even if you only gained 70% performoance
    increase (which is conservatively low figure for most apps),
    it's still done at only $85 cost. That IS good bang for
    the buck for "some" people... not myself and apparently not
    you but for others it was a good choice.
     
    kony, Jul 19, 2005
    #18
  19. Donald McTrevor

    Fakename Guest

    Computers are basically disposable. When it's time for an upgrade you
    won't really care what this one can be upgraded to because you'll
    probably be buying a new one.
     
    Fakename, Jul 19, 2005
    #19
  20. Donald McTrevor

    kony Guest


    Sure, if you buy junk then don't know how to upgrade it.
    Otherwise, "probably" be buying a new one has everything to
    do with why you needed the upgrade.
     
    kony, Jul 19, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.