Dual Channel makes little difference on Athlon chips? This however isn't a con of the ram? The reason is because the memory controller on Athlon processors is built into the cpu?
211028
The big difference is the thruput that Dual channel gives you. That only really happens when you you're running MASSIVE Data crunching on your computer. If you're doing basic web browsing and document creation, you'll see almost no difference.
37187
Athlon is faster than pentium.
1967
If you rate speed by Ghz then, yes, your brother's computer is faster by 200 mhz.  Note, however, that your Athlon64 has more cache and faster bus speed which should translate in running programs faster.
295894
There is no Athlon 64x2 3200+, the lowest end Athlon 64x2 is a 3800+ with two cores running at 2.0GHz.  First of all, the socket 939 motherboards only support up to PC3200 so you're fine there.  It's true that a single application can only use one core at a time but Windows can split different applications between the two cores.  Like all your background stuff (firewall, anti-virus and so on) run on one core and if you're playing a game, it runs on the other core so one doesn't slow the other down.  If you do a lot of multi-tasking a dual core will speed things up because put simply half will be running on one core and half on the other.  But if you only run one or two applications at a time then a single core is probably best.  An argument can be made for both, single cores are good for now.  But when multi-threaded applications come out at the end of this year and next year a single core will begin to show its age, oh it'll still run them without the multithreading but you'll see a performance decrease for sure.  I reccomend taking a look at Tomshardware and seeing which processor you like best (but keep in mind all these applications are single threaded so they slow the dual cores down, had they been multithreaded the dual cores would have appeared faster), http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_charts_2005/page24.html
203807
Chip 1 ??, chip 2 is 4mb. They both are old, so even if you wanted to use them, they most likely (99.999% sure) wont work in a modern computer.
505581
Excellent deal here.  The purpose of the double RAM set is that the computer will be reading faster, and this takes the stress off of just using one chip.  You will have plenty of speed with this demon, and more than enough memory for even some of the most tasking programs.  Hope this helps
503281
no. not even if both cores can process the same task. but the CPU is faster when processing multiple tasks but not at the double speed. keep in mind that both cores uses one and the same resource - the system bus.
358873
In Amd The are two good processor amd athlon 64 dual core & amd athlon x2 both the processors have very high performance i should prefer u amd athlon 64 dual core processor.
498136
dont use ur old stuff unless its ddr2 ... if its older than 6 months it isnt ... dont mix the types or you'll slow everything down , just add another 512 if you have a SINGLE stick, and check out the site the guy above mentioned to get the same speed memory ... if you have two sticks of mem now they are 256 each and most likely in dual channel configuration ... in that case i would get the same speed memory but buy (2) 512s' or (2)1gig sticks ... if you break up a pair of sticks in dual channel or add a third you will slow things down also ...
14436
There is a big difference depending on what you do.  I just upgraded 100 systems at our work place to AMD 4 Ghz dual cores and we have not crashed one yet.\n\nDual cores are great if you are doing numerous things at the same time.  One department where I work edits video and sound.  Before they had trouble having both programs doing stuff at the same time, now one core will be working with the video and the other with the sound.  The dual cores are good at load balancing between the two cores, almost like having two processors in one system.
413165
Different in speed. do the 2x1Gig for dual channel purposes..
226990
well!! nice config! but the AMD Athlon FX60 outperforms the X2 4800+, and it is not exactly the best as new Turion 64 X2 supports DDR2 and in future AMD is coming up with a new series of processors codenamed the "M2". these are rumoured to have support for DDR3-800 MHz! and these will be on the socket 940 though the current mobo's with s940 will not support it! it looks like ur frend's gona have a tough time!!
537837
Not much, I bet! You can't maximize the dual-processor capability if you are just using windows xp unless you are planning to install a windows server software. \n\nBesides, a motherboard with dual-processor capability is much more expensive than an ordinary m/board. You might need a new CPU case as well to fit the dual-processor board.
496183
Well the second guy is half right, you can of course install them in different sizes.  However to call the performance gain "amazing" is a bit of a stretch.  Plus, you would be forfeiting dual channel mode if you install in different sizes, which is a bad thing.  My suggestion is to save up until you can afford the full upgrade to 2GB.
219159
that's the test report Pentium Extreme Edition 955 versus Athlon 64 FX-60\nThe conclusion in one phrase: the test results make it clear, however, that Intel probably won't be able to catch up with AMD using processors based on the Netburst microarchitecture.\n\nhttp://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/fx60-vs-955xe/index.x?pg=1
290095
Hi,\n\nHere is the specs of your motherboard: Athlon XP/Duron, Socket A, Via KT600/VT8237, ATX, 3GB DDR, 400MHz FSB - SKU: A7V600X. So as you can see your motherboard has a 400MHz FSB that means you can get a CPU with a 400MHz and that is also Socket A(462). I have posted the best cpu there is for your motherboard. The fastest CPU for your motherboard is the AMD ATHLON XP 3200+.\nBut I highly recommend you on upgrading to a newer motherboard and than also newer cpu.\nI recommend a socket 939 motherboard with the nforce 4 chipset. And the cpu has to be the AMD Athlon 64 buy the one you can afford. BTW you can keep using your current ram sticks on the newer socket 939 motherboard
210801
The difference between a Sempron and an Athlon is cache size and also, Semprons are not 64-bit processors but all Athlons are nowadays.  Semprons are comparable to Intel Celerons and Athlon 64s are comparable to the Intel Pentium 4/D.  AMD also has the Athlon 64x2 chips which aren't really comparable to anything made by Intel because Intel has yet to produce a competent dual core processor.\n\nTo keep it simple a Sempron 3100+ will be slower than an Athlon 64 3000+ because the Sempron has less cache it will be slower than the Athlon even if the Athlon is rated at a slower clock speed.\n\nAMD is also working on quad core chips which are due out later this year and Intel is still fumbling around 64-bit and dual core, beat by AMD again, Intel just sucks no wonder they sit at the bottom of every single benchmark.  Don't buy an Intel chip and don't even bother with a Sempron.  Buy an Athlon 64 or Athlon 64x2.  It's a little hard to tell you what to get because prices will drop and new hardware will be out by the time you get around to building your system.  So, check back here in August and I (or someone) will tell you exactly what to buy.