Questions about a 64-bit rig

[[TiG]the_syco]

Hi,
Got ?700 tax back, so I'm going to get a new rig, mainly a new mobo, new memory, and new CPU. I already have a PSU, and case from an older system. I'm going to use a PVM to hook my current monitor up to it, so I don't need to buy a new one.

I'm looking at a AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0GHz Socket 939.

The questions:

Do I need a 64-bit OS, or can I run a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit CPU? I'm not going to shell out ?300 on a bug ridden system, and I'm not going to talk about warez. Also, cos I like Win2K, and XP is meant to eat up your resources like a pig with munchies.

Can I play a 32-bit game on a 64-bit OS? Or do I have to wait for some patch? I mainly want to ensure what I spend my cash on can can play games for at least 2 years, but also want to play the games that I have now (BF42, BF2, HL2, NFS:MW).

Oh, and I want a simple answer for this, not a 2 page one: is the "AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0GHz" better than the "P4 2.0GHz"? To me, they're both 2.0GHz, yet one costs ?355 whilst a Pentium 3.4Ghz costs less than ?300 (both are 64-bit).

The last question leads me onto the next bit:
Upgrade Kit AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+, nForce4 SLI, 1024MB, PCI-Express - ?562

 Pentium 4 660 3.6GHz, I915P, 1024MB DDR2, PCI-Express -?589
Which of the two will be better for gaming? Both upgrades cost more or less the same, but one is 2GHz, whilst the other is 3.6GHz.

[[TiG]Molc]

Basically 64-bit processors can run 32 bit applications fine. Install a 32-bit OS (the 64 bit version of windows is still not up to scrach) and just use it as a fast 32bit chip. Maybe in a few years they will be exploited but really the only use is the larger memory address space...

[[TiG]valen]

AMD shows 2.ghz but is actually a lot faster than the intel.

AMD 64 bit works perfect with XP. 64 bit means that when a 64 vit OS becomes the standard, your CPU will come into its own.

So I can say go for the AMD rig. It's the dogs balls tbh. Also, the X2 duel core is the shitz!! Class CPU!!

[tig|Bosco]

The rule that applied this time last year was: AMD for good value in games and multimedia, Intel for pure power in number crunching

I haven't heard anything to the contrary since

[PJ=]

Yes. AMD is clocked at lower speeds for better performance, that is why they are ideal for games. The equivilent for 2.0ghz AMD would be around 3.2Ghz pentium but AMD still performs better.

Also, don't bother going for the 64 bit edition of windows when vista comes out next year anyway.

[[GiT]Hellrazer]

Im an Intel man and personally Id go with the Intel system.Put a decent Zalman cooler on that CPU and you should hit 4.0 ghz and possibly more(Ive seen some reports of 4.3-4.5 on stock cooling--god knows what you would hit if you stuck a decent cooler on it)

That AMD chip is the equivalent of a p4 running at 3.8 ghz so the AMD is the slightly faster of the 2.

If you can afford the extra Syco go for the 4800+ amd which is the best cpu available at the minute.It will beat anything Intel can throw at it at present.

[[TiG]the_syco]

If you can afford the extra Syco go for the 4800+ amd which is the best cpu available at the minute.It will beat anything Intel can throw at it at present.

Dude, the X2 4800+ package is ?1,090! I'll stick with the X2 3800+, tbh, as its only ?562 (within my budget).