best budget cpu for non-gaming?

[Glassman]

well, PR means Performance Ratio.. it's a number by which one should be able to scale the performance of various chips in the same line and it is a public secret that it's meant to be a comparison to Intel's Celeron processor frequency, although the processor itself runs on much lower clock because of completely different core architecture.. usually people think of a CPU frequency as an alpha & omega of CPU speed.. PR is used just because of these folks..

cache is a small but really fast memory directly on the CPU die, it's size varies.. the more the better of course..

memory controller serves as a glue between memory modules and the CPU itself.. before the Athlon64 CPUs came out, this was handled by motherboard chipset.. moving the memory controller directly on the CPU die reduce latencies and improve performance significantly..

90nm process is yet another step in miniaturisation as well as improved power consumption.. and for AMD, their 90nm technology went through extremely good unlike that of intel..

 

[Helter Skelter]

It is a bit complicated, but I'll try to explain as best I can without getting into too much highly technical geek speak:

PR stands for Performance Rating. AMD has been using these for years now, ever since they introduced the Athlon XP line. They did this because their actual performance was far greater than specifications like clock speed would normally suggest. For example, a 2.1GHz Athlon XP would kick the snot out of a Pentium 4 of the same clock speed. In fact, it would perform roughly on par (slightly better for some tasks, slightly worse in others, but more or less even) with a 3.0GHz Pentium 4, so they give it a "3000+" PR.

Cache refers to how much memory is present on the processor core. This is generally very, very high speed due to it's proximity to the CPU core. More is usually better and results in higher overall performance, especially in tasks requiring high-speed processing of lots of small (programming wise) objects. This also relates to the PR a bit because some Athlon 64 models will be identical other than one having a larger cache (like the socket 754 version of the 3400+ having 512kb of cache while the 3700+ has 1Mb, though both run at the same clock speed).

The memory controller is the middleman between your system's memory (RAM), and the CPU. Having it located in the same place as the CPU speeds things up immensely and solves a lot of inefficiencies that having the controller located on the motherboard causes.

The 90nm process refers basically to advances in miniaturization, or rather, making more stuff fit into a smaller area. This provides a number of small benefits in this case. Power consumption is improved (and they run cooler thans to this), and chips manufactured in this process generally overclock a bit better. Mostly an efficiency improvement, there is no real speed benefit outside of overclocking.

There's more to all this, but that's hopefully the fairly simple gist of it.

 

[breadnbutter]

just a thought since you mentioned that your father wants "reasonable speed in multi-tasking":

At the moment the Pentium 4 is supposed to have a slight advantage for multi-tasking since it has Hyperthreading (to the OS it looks like two processors). This makes the Computer more responsive when running multiple tasks. I have not worked with a P4 myself, so I cannot say how noticable this is in real life. However, the Athlon64 is much better in almost any other respect.

HT will become less interesting when real dual core processors will be introduced later this year. The ones from AMD will work in Socket 939 mobos. So you could go for a cheap A64 3000+ now and upgrade later to a dual core Athlon.

This is actually the course I will be taking with my new computer. Socket 939 mobos might be more expensive though.

 

[uzziah]

i think the sempron is an ideal suggestion. getting dual core cpu's for a socket 939 is overkill in a big way. he's not going to be doing "massive" multitasking; we just want overall consistent speed. any other thought in other parts of this pc?
300w seasonic psu enough? i'll go to newegg and figure out exact parts i'll plan on buying. then i'll list them. thanks, everyone

 

[AdamWill]

btw, the celeron D 2.4GHz is an interesting option; CAN$100, less crippled than previous Celerons have been, and apparently it overclocks like a beaut (I read of one guy who has it at 3.6GHz on stock cooling in a Shuttle case). I'm planning to build myself a quick desktop box in the next couple of weeks, and I think it'll be my first Intel system for a long time, with one of these puppies and a Shuttle Zen quiet case...

 

[uzziah]

overclocking is not really being considered here. i'm sure he won't want to do it. thanks, anyway.

i'm thinking that 300gb should be about right for hd space for him

so i'm thinking:
2 Samsung 160gb 8mb buffer IDE in RAID config. this woulc be $20 cheaper than a 300gb seagate, 20gb more space, faster specs, and RAID if i can get that to work.

i'm estimating about 150gb space needed in FLAC for his entire cd collection

 

[uzziah]

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduc...130-449&depa=1

this is the mobo i'm considering

I trust MSI and we won't be overclocking, so i figure this is a good bet.

total cost from newegg is $675 shipped. not bad

 

[uzziah]

http://secure.newegg.com/app/shoppin...promotionCode=

doubt that's readable. maybe.

 

[AdamWill]

I just mentioned the overclocking on the basis that it's neat (it's easy as falling off a log on Intel, anyway, you can't futz about with multipliers, you just stick the FSB up till it falls over and you're done). Even at 2.4GHz the chip's a decent value, and I'm an AMD user since the first Duron chips came out saying this.

 

[uzziah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamWill I just mentioned the overclocking on the basis that it's neat (it's easy as falling off a log on Intel, anyway, you can't futz about with multipliers, you just stick the FSB up till it falls over and you're done). Even at 2.4GHz the chip's a decent value, and I'm an AMD user since the first Duron chips came out saying this.

I appreciate the different opinion. thanks for taking the time to explain that to me

 

[diefree]

Without question, Intel P4 2.4A Prescott.

Used to be around $110, now it's more like $130ish

You can overclock this processor to 3.6Ghz, and it's been well documented on many websites that this is possible. Just use some good high end aftermarket fans, or you could go water and thus go silent. And that's 3.6 TRUE Ghz, not some AMD fraction thereof.

I suggest buying from newegg or zipzoomfly

 

[llmobll]

Quote:

Originally Posted by diefree Without question, Intel P4 2.4A Prescott. Used to be around $110, now it's more like $130ish You can overclock this processor to 3.6Ghz, and it's been well documented on many websites that this is possible. Just use some good high end aftermarket fans, or you could go water and thus go silent. And that's 3.6 TRUE Ghz, not some AMD fraction thereof. I suggest buying from newegg or zipzoomfly

You do realize with older processors in this range that Athlons do more clock per clock right. It wasn't that anyone was doing fractions of a hz, it was that of the cpu architecture Athlons could do more. Plus i don't think the thread starter had OCing in mind. The 2.4 is a good chip, no doubt there, but you could get a $50 amd Xp chip and not notice any difference. as far as Non-gaming is concerned.

edit: i think you were refering to the wierd naming scheme AMD has for CPU's 2100+ and the like. but they only did this cause ignorant people didn't know Athlons could do more than intels at the same clock.

 

[uzziah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by llmobll You do realize with older processors in this range that Athlons do more clock per clock right. It wasn't that anyone was doing fractions of a hz, it was that of the cpu architecture Athlons could do more. Plus i don't think the thread starter had OCing in mind. The 2.4 is a good chip, no doubt there, but you could get a $50 amd Xp chip and not notice any difference. as far as Non-gaming is concerned. edit: i think you were refering to the wierd naming scheme AMD has for CPU's 2100+ and the like. but they only did this cause ignorant people didn't know Athlons could do more than intels at the same clock.

exactly. everything i was about to respond to previous post

yes, my father may not need a $90 processor, but he is not the kind of person to skimp. he would rather spend a little more. i'll keep these in consideration. can anyone see the link i posted. i'm interested on opinions on the mobo.

 

[uzziah]

the epox 8KDA3J is a nice looking board. i think i'll make that my top pick. 6 pci slots - oh my!

 

[llmobll]

Well if you take the Athlon 64 support away you could get a great nForce 2 board. That nForce 3 board is a decent board, but i bet you could find a nForce 2 board with more extras such as Firewire. They're all about the same though.