[new cpu] -

Posted by: benzimm86

what is the fastest cpu i can get. i currently have an AMD athlon xp 2100.

Posted by: Dark_Sniper*

HOw much do you want to spend. And waht socket do you want?

Posted by: Apokalipse

the fastest CPU depends on what applications you run.
for gaming, the Athlon 64 FX-57
for gaming + multimedia, the Athlon 64 X2 4800+
for raw CPU power, and multitasking in 8 threads, the Opteron 852

and like Dark_Sniper* said, it also depends on your budget. you might not be able to pay for really high-end CPU's. especially the 852, which is about $1500 US on its own

the fastest CPU you can get in your motherboard (Socket A) depends on how high the FSB goes in it. you'd be lucky if you have 400, but I'd say you probabbly have 266 and maybe 333.
the highest-end Athlon XP is the 3200+ (400 FSB)
the highest end Sempron in Socket A, I think is the 3100+ (that might be only socket 754 though)
there is the 2800+ with a 333FSB

Posted by: benzimm86

i have socket a and my fsp goes to 266/200 mhz
here is more info about my mb
[url]http://usa.asus.com/prog/spec.asp?m=A7V333&langs=09[/url]

Posted by: benzimm86

They are the same price so if they both would work i would take the 2800. do you think they will work?

amd 2600
[url]http://www.icreseller.com/detail.aspx?ID=1439[/url]
amd 2800
[url]http://www.compuvest.com/Description.jsp;jsessionid=XU1iDXolgqbaw62-?iid=122278[/url]

Posted by: SHAWN

How much can you spend?

You would be better off with a new cpu, motherboard combo and upgrade to socket 939.

Posted by: BColes

If the moneys are there i would upgrade more than just the processor. Spread your money around on getting a mobo, ram, and processor. maybe even an upgrade on the video card if that's in the budget.

Posted by: benzimm86

i just found that i can go up to an athlon xp 3000 barton as long as i have the latest bios which i do and i can get it for $90

Posted by: daRcer

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by benzimm86 [/i]
[B]They are the same price so if they both would work i would take the 2800. do you think they will work?

amd 2600
[url]http://www.icreseller.com/detail.aspx?ID=1439[/url]
amd 2800
[url]http://www.compuvest.com/Description.jsp;jsessionid=XU1iDXolgqbaw62-?iid=122278[/url] [/B][/QUOTE]

Both of those processors will work with your motherboard. The 333MHz FSB will simply reduce to the maximum of your motherboard, 266MHz. As you guessed, the 2800+ is a better choice than the 2600+, but I'd recommend buying from Newegg unless you prefer CompuVest. The same model CPU may be found [URL=http://www.newegg.com/OldVersion/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-103-377&depa=1]here[/URL], but it is in a retail box rather than OEM, meaning it will come with a stock heatsink and fan. Even though your current ones should work as well, it wouldn't hurt to install the new ones. It is $7 more on Newegg, but the shipping is free and very fast; don't be surprised if it comes a day early.

The other posters are right though, this isn't too big of an upgrade. If possible, a whole new system should be built. Of course, financial issues prevent a new computer, but for $100, is a 300MHz boost worth it to you?

Posted by: Rich M

As the others suggest, I doubt seriously you will see that much speed difference going from 2100 to 3000...wait save and do it as a toatl upgrade, and you will be much happier.

Posted by: Dark_Sniper*

I'm pretty sure you can use a XP3200. But if not i had a feeling it was to upgrade yours lol. A 3000 will suit you fine man.

Posted by: benzimm86

so you dont think i will notice much difference from 1733 mhz to 2.16 ghz

Posted by: daRcer

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by benzimm86 [/i]
[B]so you dont think i will notice much difference from 1733 mhz to 2.16 ghz [/B][/QUOTE]
It's just not really worth it for $100 that could be put towards a good $800 system. Unless you cant afford the cash for a new computer within the next four or five months it's not worth it. I'm not trying to be a jerk but according to your sig, your computer isn't worth upgrading. The only part I'd upgrade on it is the video card if thats an AGP. Although, that's only if you use this for gaming or graphical editing.

Posted by: benzimm86

i dont game at all and i just started to edit video from my mini-dv camcorder. I guess i am not really looking for a super increase, just dont like the choppy video when i play what i have edited. when i press play to watch the vid it takes like 15 sec for it to start and my cpu goes to 100% usage while i use barly any of my ram. how could i get my ram to be utilized more to put less stress on my cpu

Posted by: daRcer

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by benzimm86 [/i]
[B]i dont game at all and i just started to edit video from my mini-dv camcorder. I guess i am not really looking for a super increase, just dont like the choppy video when i play what i have edited. when i press play to watch the vid it takes like 15 sec for it to start and my cpu goes to 100% usage while i use barly any of my ram. how could i get my ram to be utilized more to put less stress on my cpu [/B][/QUOTE]
Well, it seems like you don't do much with your computer that requires any newer hardware, maybe just some slightly older parts. I'm assuming you've scanned for spy/adware and viruses/trojans. Seeing as you don't want to spend too much, you can only really upgrade one piece of hardware. The two apparent choices I see are processor and video card. First, a question: do DVDs take as long to start as your recorded videos? I can't see a GeForce 4 having trouble with playing videos, maybe editing. Otherwise maybe a socket A 2800 or higher would be worth it if you plan on keeping this computer for a while.

Posted by: benzimm86

No i do not have any problems playing dvd and after i burned the same video file that i was editing on to a dvd it played fine. it just that when i am in the program ulead video studio 9 and try to view the video is when i have mass cpu usage.

Posted by: daRcer

[quote] * Intel Pentium III 800 MHz or higher
* Microsoft Windows 98 SE, 2000, Me, XP
* 256 MB of RAM (512 MB or more recommended)
* 1.2 GB of available hard drive space for program installation
* 4 GB+ hard drive space for video capture and editing
* Windows-compatible display with at least 1024x768 resolution
* Windows-compatible sound card[/quote]
Minimum system requirements for Ulead VideoStudio 9
You meet all those easily.

Have you scanned for spyware, adware, viruses? Defragged? Are you running low on hard drive space? Also, do you know you hard drive's model number or info such as RPMs and cache?

Posted by: DJ-CHRIS

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by benzimm86 [/i]
[B]No i do not have any problems playing dvd and after i burned the same video file that i was editing on to a dvd it played fine. it just that when i am in the program ulead video studio 9 and try to view the video is when i have mass cpu usage. [/B][/QUOTE]

Some software will eat up 100% of your CPU usage no matter what.

If I play a sound file in any version of sound forge, on any computer, uses 100% CPU usage.

I think it's something to do with realtime programs.

Posted by: benzimm86

I have microsoft antispyware, runs everynight. nortan antivirus, not sure how often that runs. i use diskeeper and that runs as needed by smart schedules. I have more than enough hard drive space prob have a total of 65 gig available of my 160 total. i am not sure on the models but i think one is a western digital 40 gig which i hear kinda suck but it is from when i first built my pc 3 years ago.

Posted by: daRcer

[QUOTE]I have microsoft antispyware[/QUOTE]
That's usually not enough. While spy/adware might be the problem, I doubt it can cause one program to perform that poorly. Check out [URL=http://www.tech-forums.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36259]this[/URL] thread for Spybot Search & Destroy and Ad-Aware SE Personal 1.06. Download them, update the definitions like you would in Norton, then full scan your system when you have a chance, then update and scan about once per week or even once a month if you're lazy. Seeing as you bought your computer three years ago, the hard drives should be at least 5,400 and shouldn't have a problem in this situation. The last thing I can think of is to check out the program's developers to be sure they're legit.

Posted by: benzimm86

what you mean legit. like someone made a spoofed copy of the program or what?

Posted by: daRcer

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by benzimm86 [/i]
[B]what you mean legit. like someone made a spoofed copy of the program or what? [/B][/QUOTE]
No, like the company doesn't have a bunch of deals with advertisement companies that stealth-installed during the program's installation.

Probably a useless idea, but open task manager, check how many processes are running, open the program and check again.