Athlon 1.1 GHz System Upgrade

Title: Athlon 1.1 GHz System Upgrade Category: Hardware/Systems Author: Ron "Cage" Griffith Date: December 15, 2000

Introduction

Almost two months ago I came to the realization that it was time once again to upgrade my system. I'd been using a self-built Pentium III 500 MHz system overclocked to 750 MHz. I had initially wanted to go with another Intel CPU, but I quickly came to the realization that the AMD Athlon CPU's were far cheaper and available now at faster MHz ratings. It didn't particularly break my heart that I would have to buy a new motherboard, since the Abit VA6 motherboard that I was currently using was unreliable at times even when it wasn't overclocked.

Below is a listing of the components that went into the system. The parts that came from my old system are marked "old" and of course "new" means that they were part of the upgrade. As a side note I want to point out that nothing was given to me by any company or sponsor. I have no axe to grind, and call 'em like I see 'em.

Motherboard

For the motherboard I selected the Abit KT7. I had received very good reviews from a number of sites, and I was partial to Abit boards in general. I was able to use the same Corsair PC133 memory that I had used in my old system, which also was a factor.

Everything went in without a hitch. I have a number of legacy peripherals for my system, and I was quite happy that the KT7 has 6 PCI slots.

Installing the VIA 4-in-1 drivers didn't go smoothly the first time around. The first time I installed the drivers I did so from the CD that accompanied the motherboard. The second time I went to VA's web site and downloaded them and installed them without any problems - and with a dramatic increase in performance. With the up to date VIA 4-in-1 drivers installed I saw a hefty increase in frame rates and system speed.

Central Processing Unit - AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1.1 GHz

The first Athlon 1.1 GHz cpu that I installed died an untimely death after the first few weeks of use. As others have reported, the CPU is extremely fragile. Even with the utmost care you don't want to remove the CPU fan once you've installed it. There is a high risk that when you re-apply the cpu fan that it will crack or damage the cpu.

I'd had some problems after the first few weeks that I had my system up and running with general system instability. I feared that the cpu might be overheating, especially when I checked the system BIOS and saw what temperatures that it was running at. The Cooler Master DP5-6H51 fan that I was using was indeed rated for my CPU, according to AMD's web site. I removed the fan, and I noticed an area around the core that didn't look "quite right." After applying thermal paste again, and replacing the fan the system wouldn't boot. Of course I was mortified. The last thing I wanted to do was to pay for another CPU. Fortunately Multiwave gave me a replacement chip no questions asked. Less then 2 weeks later I had a new CPU, and entered gaming Nirvana. Even installing Windows Me went much smoother the second time around.

Windows Me

You have to admire Bill Gates. What other company could make so much money while causing so much pain to it's customers. When Windows works, things are great. But hardly a day goes by that some ill mannered application crashes Windows.

Taking the suggestions from the users who went before me, and based on my previous experiences upgrading to a new version of Windows, I started with a freshly formatted hard drive. The first time around I had a persistent problem with prolonged Windows Me shut down times. After making the appropriate sacrifices to the computer gods I tried once again after I received my replaced CPU. The second time was a charm, and I went off to download the latest Windows Me drivers. Even though my legacy devices worked, I found out that using more recent drivers from the manufacturers web site gave Windows Me added stability. Even upgrading the mouse driver helped.

TDK Velo CD-RW

I hadn't planned on it, but I ended up replacing my Pioneer 103S DVD drive. It had a been acting up a little for some time. Certain game and applications would not install from my old Pioneer drive, and it seemed to rattle a bit more then usual under heavy access. I also noticed that it would continue to spin for apparently no reason.

I considered my options, and decided that I would go with a new CD-RW drive. I had been keeping an eye on CDR's, and had watched with interest as my friends created custom CD's and backups of valued discs.

The TDK Velo was unknown to me at the time that I bought it. I had heard about the new Plextor CD-RW drives with "burn proof" technology, and I was pretty sure that I wanted a drive with that feature. I called up my friend who had quite a bit of experience burning CD's, and dragged him down to the local CompUSA. When I came across the TDK Velo I was pleasantly surprised to see that it featured "burn proof" technology, and that it appeared to have the same functionality and speeds as the Plextor drive. TDK drives have been pretty solid for most folks, so I took the risk and made the plunge.

The TDK Velo comes with everything you need. It included cables, mounting screws, and several CD's worth of software. There was even a VHS tape included in the package. The manual thoroughly covered installing the drive, but was a bit lacking when it came to documenting the accompanying software. Of course complete documentation was provided in files on the CD, but I prefer to have something that I can read without firing up my computer.

My first attempt to burn a CD was a success at 12x using TDK media. My wife had a music CD that was no longer available, and had started to skip while playing. I cleaned the disc up, burned a copy, and it played flawlessly. I was hooked. I've had at least one game (Unreal Tournament) where the CD became damaged and I ended up having to buy another copy of the game. Using a CD-RW I could now make a backup copy of my most important CD's. I also will be able to join the masses of people who make their own custom mix music CD's.

Leadtek GeForce 256 GTS 32 MB

I was torn about which video card to get. Up until July or so I had hoped that the Voodoo 5-6000 would make it to retail. I had been using a Voodoo 3-3000, and had been quite happy with it. Most of the games that I played ran best with the Voodoo series of card. For example Red Baron 3D requires a Voodoo card in order to run in 3D accelerated mode. Tribes and Unreal Tournament were also optimized for Voodoo cards. I really didn't want to get an Nvidia card.

My hand was forced by the need to get a new video card, so that I could build another computer with the components from my old system. After looking around and reading reviews from several sites it became apparent that the Nvidia GeForce GTS was the best choice. The first reviews of the GeForce Ultra were making the rounds, but it came with a hefty price premium. Besides, rumor had it that the newer NV20 would hit the store shelves in early 2001.

The Leadtek GeForce 256 GTS was one of the cheaper and faster cards available. I got quite a deal at Multiwave - at less then half the price of what a GeForce Ultra would have cost.

I've been relatively happy with my choice. There is no denying the sheer speed of the card. I do notice an occasional graphic anomaly when playing Unreal Tournament. It's also the standard now by which all other graphic cards are judged. The news of 3dfx's core graphics group being bought up by Nvidia last week only further proved that 3dfx was on shaky financial ground. I still dream of what might have been, but alas, it was not meant to be.

On to the system specs and benchmarks!

UT Benchmarks

Well let me get right down to the meat of the results. For the purposes of this review I used Unreal Tournament, which currently is my First Person Shooter of choice. I realize it's heavily dependent on the cpu speed, but I don't see the point of benching a game such as Quake Arena that I don't play. I might add further benchmarks later on. I'm particularly interested in benchmark demos for Microsoft's Combat Flight Sim: 2 and Mech Warrior 4.

The benchmarks below were obtained using Reverend's UT demo file - Thunder. AnandTech also uses Thunder to obtain it's UT benchmarks. For example, see AnandTech's Budget Video Card Comparison - November 2000. I used version 4.36 of UT, since that is the"Real World" version that I'm using right now. The benchmark was run three times at each resolution, and the average of the reported "average frames per second" is listed below.

You can really notice the difference between 1280x1024 and the lower resolutions. I actually thought that it was much slower then that when I was watching the demo run.

Overall I am quite pleased with how my new system runs. It should hold me for at least another 6 months. I expect the next upgrade will require new memory, and perhaps a new case. Since I'm developing a nasty MP3 habit I expect I'll need to add a new Hard Drive in the near future.