So I'm living in 2003. My current setup is...
An overclocked Barton @ 2.2Ghz
AGP Radeon X1650
The way it is right now, to replace anything I'd have to replace everything. My CPU is about as good as Socket A gets. All the new motherboards don't even have AGP or DDR1. My video card is the most recent thing I have, but I bought a cheap one on purpose because I knew I wouldn't be using it for very long. It's really a stopgap so I can at least play TF2 and portal.
I really want a Athlon X2 5000+ Black Edition
. I should be able to ramp that thing up to a bit over 3Ghz with a nice heatsink. Not bad for $130 (cheaper with mobo bundles).
My question is, should I bother getting an AM2+ motherboard (like the Asus M3A
for example) in preparation for the Phenoms eventually not sucking? I would like to, one day, get a quadcore phenom, because I do a lot of video encoding, and x264 would use all the cores.
However, Phenoms do (in theory
) just drop into regular (i.e. cheaper) AM2 motherboards, but those only have HT2.0, not HT3.0. Does anyone know if that makes any difference for gaming? For video encoding?
Intel is better per clock now, and they have the high-end wrapped up, but in the <$150 market it seems like AMD might be a better call, and AMD motherboards are cheaper, too.
Also, by not being limited to AGP, I've suddenly got way more options for video cards than I did last time. I tend to lean ATI, but I'm open. I have an absolute ceiling of $200, i'd much prefer something ~$130. I'm poor.
"I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho