1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

AMD Athlon XP Processor 3200+

By j17neo · 19 replies
Sep 3, 2003
  1. Is the AMD Athlon XP Processor 3200+
    a worthy processor for gaming?
    Or is Intel Pentium 4 the way to go??


    I was looking at the specs of:

    AMD Athlon XP Processor 3200+
    1GB DDR SDRAM PC-3200
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra 256MB

    for gaming... would that do good? or do I need to go with the Pentium.

  2. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Posts: 4,909   +8

    Firstly, please can we NOT HAVE another AMD vs Intel debate. And if we have to, can it get appended to existing threads?

    Secondly, that AMD chip you mention is likely a great piece of equipment. Of course it will be good for games. I've got an Athlon 2100+ and its fine for games, and you (apparently) will have 50% more raw processing power - go get 'em , tiger!

    This does not answer the question of whether an Athlon or P4 is the best for you. You'd have to tell us a lot more about your requirements, your budget and your expectations first.
  3. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,519

    The soon to be released Athlon FX is worth waiting for, otherwise the Athlon 3200+ is a fine and cheap processor. Top end Pentiums are a little faster, but cost a lot more, and you won't even notice the difference,even when playing games, as then your graphics card is the limiting factor. Personally, I'd buy a cheaper, slower, cpu and overclock it. I am currently running a £45 Athlon 1700+ at speeds equivalent to the 3200+ model and save a few hundred quid doing so. If money isn't an issue, then go for the Pentium instead.
  4. XtR-X

    XtR-X TS Rookie Posts: 829

    But then with a faster processor you can overclock higher with conventional cooling.
  5. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,519

    That's true, but the amount of extra overclocking potential is not worth the significantly higher cost IMHO. It doesn't much matter now anyway, as he already ordered his new system. :)
  6. ---agissi---

    ---agissi--- TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,929   +15

  7. j17neo

    j17neo TS Rookie Topic Starter

    AMD and Intel are ONE

    Thanks for the info guys...

    Haha... well, from what I can see with the newest of Intel and AMD. They both look exactly the same, with MINOR differences.

    Not too continue the war (if any). But JUST exactly 'what' can you notice in these MINOR differences when using the two?

    They both run so good... where is there to notice anything really?
  8. Deception`

    Deception` TS Rookie

    The main difference between the two that some might notice could be the significant memory different between the P4 and Athlon XP. This has a bearing not only in benchmarks (Sandra, ex.) but also in certain games (Q3, UT2003, ex.)
  9. Steg

    Steg TS Rookie Posts: 268

    wot i dont understand is that the pentium 4 3.2ghz (800fsb) performs not huge amounts faster that the XP 3200+ (2.03ghz & 400fsb) - the difference here is huge yet the performance difference isnt anything like as high - while intel have the raw speed advantage - in terms of technology advancement and power per mhz then AMD wins hands down - again

  10. awsskater892

    awsskater892 TS Rookie Posts: 95

    HAHAHA, I know that this is an old forum but its very funny looking back on the 3200 being good for gaming!! now its the 5200!
  11. F1N3ST

    F1N3ST TS Rookie Posts: 593

    No its not, its the Core 2 Duo.
  12. tweakboy

    tweakboy TS Guru Posts: 467

    The CPU is powerful enough to couple with a top 6th gen card,

    The geforce 5900 is a slow motio budget card, that can not play todays games,

    Try for a gf 6800 or ati x800 ,, gl,
  13. F1N3ST

    F1N3ST TS Rookie Posts: 593

    Wtf are you talking about?
  14. cfitzarl

    cfitzarl TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,892   +9

    Agreed F1N3ST :)
  15. MetalX

    MetalX TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,364

    Lol, clearly the guy who wanted answers hasn't been on TS for like 3 years. Why give him some random answer like that?
  16. beef_jerky4104

    beef_jerky4104 Banned Posts: 782

    Why would somebody go for old cards like those?

    Its funny though looking back at this. Man it brings old memories back. Deep breath. I miss those days.
  17. _FAKE_

    _FAKE_ TS Rookie Posts: 116

    Not for long, -erm- ok it wont be in 2008, AMD is bringing out a new CPU quad core maybe but its only 32 bit per core instead of intels fastest processor 64 bit per core which is also quad core. AMD's new processor will be a lot faster than any core 2 duo out. I know Intel is making improvements on their core 2 duo's but it wont stop AMD from releasing a more powerful, less power hungry, cooler, and better overclocking cpu. Intel did it to AMD when they released core 2 duo, now AMD will do it to Intel when they release Torrenza
  18. wolfram

    wolfram TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,831   +8

    We just have to wait and see. Anyway, I will buy a Core 2 E4300 :)
  19. _FAKE_

    _FAKE_ TS Rookie Posts: 116

    Yes, well i have an AMD X2 5000+ and not going to upgrade for a while, there is no need to have a super fast cpu and get frame rates way above 100, when the human eye cannot tell the difference between 60 and 100 fps. An E4300 is an excellent choice when it comes to price vs performance.
  20. wolfram

    wolfram TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,831   +8

    Exactly, it now costs $169 ;) And I plan to overclock it to E6600 speeds or beyond :)
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...