PDA

View Full Version : Pentium 3 or 4 ???



JunoJIm
25th Jul 2002, 22:57
Now that the P4 has been out for a while, what's your experience ??? Is the P3 still better, as I've heard ??? (for gaming, of course...)

ShirleyC
26th Jul 2002, 01:43
I prefer my Pentium 3 with Windows 98 over my Pentium 4 with XP. Just my opinion but the games (even DOS ones) seem to play better.
Shirley

Rose662
26th Jul 2002, 03:38
on my current PC I have Pentium 4 with Windows Me.

With games, the action and loading on the Pentium 4 seems much quicker than on my Gateway - which is a Pentium 2 and Windows 98. The games sometimes dragged, especially while they were loading.

The graphics seem better on the Pentium 4, but the graphics card may have more to do with that.

JunoJIm
26th Jul 2002, 04:54
Shirley - I'm surprized DOS plays at all on XP - I heard it has no "DOS" anymore... maybe they emulate DOS - LOL !!!

Rose - Hi - are you still playing COTW ??? psiko's game is what started me looking for a faster CPU !!!

Thanks for the info - I'm trying to figure out what to upgrade to...

LazyLion
26th Jul 2002, 10:27
P4 with SDram, you might as well stick to your P3.

P4 with DDR, BIG improvement.

P4 with RD, this is what P4 was made for. more expencive then DDR, but still a lot faster.

P4-533MHz with RD, dream-machine. And I just built one :)

GoranAgar
26th Jul 2002, 12:51
Originally posted by LazyLion
P4-533MHz with RD, dream-machine. And I just built one :)

533MHz is the FSB I hope ;) . Is it the 2.53 GHz CPU?

With a two months old Windows installation and the current Motherboard setups you won't notice any difference between 2,53 and 2 GHz (without using a benchmark).

I know better ways to waste my money than giving it to Intel :p But once I don't know where else to put it, I will probably buy the fastest machines available too. ;)

JunoJIm
27th Jul 2002, 03:42
Thanks, guys !!! I was hoping some experts would comment, as well !!!

I just talked to a guy at "Motherboard Express", who said the same thing, P4 2.0G 533MHz with RD 512M, also he said that supposedly, the next, faster Intel CPU (3G ???) is planned to have the same socket... of course, he's selling them...

I plan to keep my Win98SE tho - :D

DaveJ
27th Jul 2002, 07:17
My new PC has a P4 with DDR and XP.....the first time I've used a Pentium.

It plays all games fine.

Stick a GeForce 4 in there too and I'm away!

DanO-mulder
27th Jul 2002, 21:59
Athlon XP :D

JunoJIm
28th Jul 2002, 06:27
XP - I've heard complaints about that OS - it's also strange, but all the people trying to sell me computer hardware say it's the greatest...

I just bought an HP T45 printer cheap from a woman that couldn't get it to talk to her XP OS...

Anyhoo - I'm debating whether to go cheap, and get a P3 1.2GHz, which I think will be able to play AOD, or go for a P4 2.0 for about twice the price ???

Then there's LCO who says I should hold out for next month, when the P4 2.5 will be on sale - what to do ???

DaveJ
28th Jul 2002, 08:52
Some people have had problems with XP...usually because another part of their set up (printer, scanner etc) is not compatible.

Usually there are new drivers available, and as it has been out about a year now there should be less and less problems.

Personally I've never had a problem running anything on it. Even the TR games work un-patched now.

GoranAgar
28th Jul 2002, 12:07
Originally posted by GoranAgar
With a two months old Windows installation and the current Motherboard setups you won't notice any difference between 2,53 and 2 GHz (without using a benchmark).
Get yourself a 2 GHz CPU and spend the saved money for a better graphic card.

Lara Croft Online
28th Jul 2002, 12:55
http://www.theregus.com/content/3/25603.html

There is one of the articles on the cpu price cuts

DanO-mulder
28th Jul 2002, 16:47
I don't use XP.....I play lots of games so I use me still......but no problems whatsoever......so i'm happy....

When I said xp I meant the athlon xp proccessers....no windows xp

JunoJIm
29th Jul 2002, 05:10
Well, I've always shyed from the very latest, hottest "anything" (except Brittney) - usually has bugs... (except Brittney, I hope)

I'm thinking P4 2.0 right now, but if the others are reducing in price, like the article says, then the 2.0 will too - decisions, decisions, at least I'm not in the "buy a whole new tower" mode - that IS a waste of money...

Think I'll stick with Win98SE tho'...

ELEN
30th Jul 2002, 21:31
**POSTED BY <ShirleyC>**

I prefer my Pentium 3 with Windows 98 over my Pentium 4 with XP. Just my opinion but the games (even DOS ones) seem to play better.

DOS??? http://216.40.241.68/ups/kamikaze/smilie_barf.gif

Win XP made especially for P4.
XP is a new OS, so we must "forgive" bugs. I have P4/XP and I have played all tr games without having a problem...

JunoJIm
31st Jul 2002, 04:29
Yes, DOS - that's what you load Wolfenstein to from a floppy and play, when a virus eats up your OS...

I doubt you've played TR1 thru TR5 without having to modify XP in some way, now have you ???

Besides, I can't switch now, that I've practically memorized Win98SE !!! :D

ELEN
31st Jul 2002, 04:55
I'm not talking about the functionality of DOS. I still use it through Windows to execute same prog. I'm talking about the interface... Sorry guys, I can't compare this black screen to the one that Win offers you.

About playing tr games. Believe me or not, had no problem. And every time I see other people having one I feel lucky... :)

NZrevenge
31st Jul 2002, 05:50
I find DOS more comforting sometimes... Atleast you can feel safe knowing that you will never face a BSoD on DOS...

I have managed to get most of my games to run on XP, though I can't emulate digitised sound on my DOS games (which isn't as bad as some other people who can't get their mice working). I'm pretty certain that if I get a real sound card (as opposed an integrated one), I'll be able to set up an IO address as opposed to an IO range, then I'd be sweeeet... I could however just be talking out of my rear-end. Not sure on that just yet.

As for getting games to work, you wouldn't believe the fiasco involved in getting Tribes 2 running... I had to uninstall all my spyware (a good side-effect I suppose), delete all the .dso files, swap around a .dll, manually update, put the original .dll back so the update would work, spend about 30 mins getting update after update, swap the .dll file again...

Civ III still crashes at random... Tiberian Sun is stable enough, but I have to reboot every time I close the game (or it wont reopen).

After getting infected by klez (I even knew it was a virus before I opened it, but I thought I had received it from a programmer buddy and the email had "Check this out, it's pretty funny!" as the subject (and the attachment was called F***ER!.BAT (without the censoring)). After looking through file in notepad, and then trying to open it with Visual Studios (because I spotted a reference in there about the C++ Runtime libraries), I accidentally double clicked it instead of right clicking... Ouch.

It ended up deleting my task manager (which I really like in Win XP), so after removing the virus I did a Win XP repair. It deleted my modem drivers, and refused to let me reinstall the old ones due to compatibility issues (makes no sense). I'm now using generic drivers incapable of turning my modem speaker off, so I'm constantly hearing what it's like to be online... Lovely...

Aside from these horror stories here, I really like Win XP. It's stable-ish, it's useful-ish, and handles multiple logins really well.

JunoJIm
1st Aug 2002, 03:29
I just read those multi logins, and the restore feature eat up your overall power, so you should turn em off to play games (Computer Games - Aug).

Anyhoo - I was trying to decide what to upgrade to CPU's not OS's, but this is a good forum for game capabilities...

The mag also said "requirements for the next year or so" will be:

1.5G P4, 256M RAM, Geforce3, 30G HDD, 32X CDROM, any sound card, AND Win XP - altho I think a smaller HDD, slower CDROM and Win98 will do fine... but since people have been asking what the reqts for AOD will be, I think I'll post this...

NZrevenge
1st Aug 2002, 05:26
30Gb fills up FAST. I have a 40Gb harddrive with only 14.9GB left (though it's only really 37.2Gb total space). Most games will take about a 1-2 Gb install, and if you have 5, then it'll be 5-10Gb of space gone. Once you factor in all the little programs and endless downloads you make (my "My Documents" folder takes up 2 gig alone), you begin to see that you have a lot less than you first thought...

DaveJ
1st Aug 2002, 07:36
I currently have 9 games installed fully on my PC:
Alice
DS9: The Fallen
Quake 3
Quake 3 Team Arena
Voyager: Elite Force
Soldier of Fortune II
Tomb Raider 3
Max Payne
Jedi Outcast

and yet only 9.5Gb of a 60Gb drive is taken up.
That includes several movie trailers and 100's of photos in Photoshop too.


Bliss.
:)

NZrevenge
1st Aug 2002, 09:19
I think I need to take back my previous statement. I've figured out where all my hard-drive space has gone:
Medal of Honour: Allied Assault
Halflife (with Counter Strike, Team Fortress and Day of Defeat)
StarTopia
Dungeon Seige
Starcraft (with Brood War)
Warcraft III
Cossacks
Operation Flashpoint (with Red Hammer)
Black & White (with Creature Isle)
Tiberian Sun (with Firestorm)
Red Alert
Red Alert 2 (with Yuri's Revenge)
Sim City 3000
The Sims
Starlancer
Civilization III
Empire Earth

About a third of that list are games that I borrowed from friends and never uninstalled. I just left them there...

I have 1Gb of music, and a whole bunch of other stuff I really don't need. I think I need to have a clean up... There are two accounts on this computer along with a Guest account (yes we do need them all).

JunoJIm
3rd Aug 2002, 05:38
Ahh Sooo !!! I have two 8G HDDs, and move less used stuff to my backup drive, then delete... housekeeping Glasshoppa...

rimfire
4th Aug 2002, 07:40
My experience with CPU's is that, for a given clock-speed, the AMD (ie: Athlon) chips will out perform the Intel chips. Making direct comparisons is tricky, but for a given benchmark an AMD K6-500 ran about three times as fast as a PII-350 when the raw numbers suggest it should have been less than twice as fast.

Here's what I've heard (and a little from personal experience) about DOS on XP: Microsoft doesn't include any of the DOS commands (files) with XP, but you can still copy them over from a DOS system and use them, and I know for a fact you can still get a command prompt. I'm referring to the command files (usually in the C:\DOS directory) like "xcopy" and "format."

I don't know about games on XP. I didn't like XP and didn't keep it long enough to try any games.

ShirleyC
4th Aug 2002, 15:52
I could be wrong, but I believe DOS came before any of the Windows OS. My first computer didn't have Windows, just DOS. Had to type commands to manuver to the different games, etc. The DOS prompt on Windows Me, is a shell and not a true DOS. If I'm wrong, anyone please enlighten me. I love to learn.
Shirley :)

Learning DOS did help me later on.

ELEN
4th Aug 2002, 17:14
You are absolutely right!!! DOS came before any Windows OS. In fact, DOS (Disc Operating System) is an OS and Windows are existed because of it. They "sit" on DOS.

Billy just "took" all DOS commands and converted them into Windows with colors and tried to make our lives easier. In DOS we write <cd_the name of the directory> and in Windows we just click.

My first reply to this topic was not to debase DOS. The truth is that we did everything manually which means that we knew where the fault was. Now we don't know with all these "bugs"... I just said that Windows are better in appeance. And in functionallity of course cause it's an OS which is upgraded all the time...