Personally I do it this way: I enjoy a certain game, and when the PC
becomes too slow, I'll upgrade the bottleneck so I can play it. I
never buy the latest and greatest.
Another thing to take into consideration: Windows 32-bit will be
replaced with a 64-bit version. I've no idea what impact that will
have on games, but it would be a bit sad if you just bought the
fastest 32-bit CPU you can get, only to discover it's useless within a
few months...
Ok, lots of text from me, and no answer to your question....sorry.
Cheers!
Remco
32bit windows won't be useless for several years yet. And the
64bit windows will only be of use if you have a 64bit chip. The
64bit AMD's CAN and DO work quite well in a 32bit enviroment.
Realize if you get a 64bit chip now, you are getting the slowest
version available. Within a year the speeds will be picking up some
more. But if you keep waiting for a newer cpu or faster os, then you
will never upgrade.
By the fastest cpu you can afford and a good high quality motherboard.
Those two will make a big difference in the long run in regard to
performance.
dave henrie
It sure should. The 3.2 is a faster front side bus and the Barton chips
have double the on chip cache. I noticed the difference from a 1.4 T-bird to
a XP2100. You may not want to buy the fastest CPU. If you drop back a step
or two you'll usually save a pretty good amount of cash. You'll also have
room to grow by dropping in a faster CPU down the road.
MadDAWG