Final Thoughts

Conclusion

With today's ultra-high performance memory controllers, adding extra memory modules can actually cause a decrease in performance. On all non-registered systems, the use of 2 DIMM slots should be considered the optimal configuration.

Since the Pentium 4 dual channel DDR system requires memory to be installed in pairs, your options are 2x256MB, 4x256MB and 2x512MB. We expect 512MB to be the bare minimum for a high-end gaming system and so if your budget allows, you should build your Pentium 4 system around 1GB of RAM. Going with 512MB is reasonable if you are willing to accept the fact that 256MB memory modules will have limited use in the future. These Pentium 4 systems are now nearing their performance peak, with a 3rd generation Socket 478 DDR-chipset and memory bandwidth, FSB, core clock speeds, and L3 cache that have at least doubled since its introduction.

In contrast, the AMD 64 bit platforms are still very new. We are still on the first generation of chipsets and it is likely that there are bugs that are still being worked out, such as no USB 2.0 on the AMD 8000 chipset. The single-DDR channel Athlon64 platform in this regard ends up being an excellent platform for enthusiast PC building. It performs excellently in our tests, and surprisingly maintains a respectable amount of speed when going beyond 2 DIMMs in comparison to Intel's i875P Canterwood chipset. Since the Athlon64 is a single channel design, it is possible to start with a 1x512MB configuration and then move up to 2x512MB in the future. Due to this flexibility and performance characteristics of the Athlon64, we give it our Bull's Eye recommendation so long as you can accept a limit of 1GB of system memory or are willing to wait for a greater availability of 1GB DDR 400 modules.

If more than 1GB of RAM is necessary now, our recommendation is to consider the Athlon64 FX or Opteron 100-series CPUs or Intel Dual Xeons for their registered DDR memory support.

Final Verdict

Chenbro SR-205 - 84%
The SR205 is a great workhorse case because of its great cooling capabilities and extended ATX support. In addition, it's thick steel construction provides excellent EMI shielding.

Optorite DVD-/+R - 85%
The Sanyo/Optorite DVD-/+R is exactly what you'd want in a basic optical drive. You can spend more if you're really interested in getting the top-of-the-line equipment, but we have no complaints. Other good low-cost DVD+/-R burners include the Pioneer DVR-106.

Opteron 200 series - 90% Editor's Choice




The Opteron 246 is not an ideal CPU for the enthusiast given its high price and so we're admittedly uneasy giving the Opteron our Editor's Choice award. We usually like to keep our Editor's Choice for those wonder products that also happen to give a lot of bang for the buck. We see the Opteron 200 series as being on par with the Saleen S7 or Audi RS6. None of the three will ever earn an award from Consumer Reports, but in their respective markets they are leaders. It's hard to find fault with the architecture. It's highly scalable with the 2nd CPU, supports Registered DDR400 RAM, and is capable of true data-critical applications with ECC Chip Kill support (Chip Kill is like RAID for memory; it's a step above ECC). The Opteron doesn't receive Editor's Choice for use as a gaming PC, but it does earn Editor's Choice for a workstation CPU.

The AMD64 platform is a true milestone for AMD. For most of AMD's life, the business model seems to have been the role of underdog to Intel, offering the Intel alternative at a lower cost. Despite this sentiment, AMD engineers have never settled for second-best and worked to produce "better-than-Intel" products despite having a smaller R&D budget.

AMD has overtaken Intel a few times in the past. In the 486 era, the AMD DX2/80 and DX4/120 had no competition from Intel's DX2/66 and DX4/100. In the mid-Athlon era, AMD won the race to 1GHz and in that period, there was no argument for the Pentium III. Indeed, AMD 1GHz processors launched at $1300 and it was Intel who had to play the underdog for a moment by pricing the Pentium III 1GHz at only $999. Now with the Opteron, AMD has again produced an excellent core.

What's changed is timing. AMD's lead in the 486 era came at the end of the architecture's life. It was not until the second generation Thunderbird Athlon processors did AMD truly have a strong argument for becoming the CPU of gamers; the Slot A boards had nowhere near the same respect. With the Opteron, AMD is delivering a first strike attack against Intel. For the first time, AMD has shown a superior architecture at the beginning of the 64 bit processor life cycle. This is even more apparent with the Athlon64 Clawhammer core.

One of the most common complaints about the Opteron is its slow native clockspeed, but the despite the perceived sluggishness, the clockspeed of the Opteron has been increasing at a faster rate than the original Athlon and the Pentium 4. There isn't magic AMD pixie dust that's bringing this ramping up of clock speed - it's the fact that AMD's Athlon XP architecture had enough momentum to keep it going while the 0.13 SOI process was refined. The Opteron had been delayed for some time before launching… as always, the challenge will be in keeping this momentum and continuing to ramp up clock speed at the appropriate pace. Hopefully as applications are able to support 64 bit instruction sets we will see the performance of the Athlon 64 and Opteron increase. Think of it as a software upgrade that will make your system much faster.

If you are a forward thinker and an optimist you'll go with the AMD 64 bit chips, for the greater potential upside as software engineers catch up to the hardware engineers. If you prefer saving bonds vs stocks, and are more conservative than a lower cost, more mature, Intel Pentium 4 system will be excellent for your current needs.

Thank you for reading through this entire article.