The last time I purchased a cpu one would always use the GHz. speed among different versions for a fair comparison. At least with Intel. But now looking at the new AMD Athlon 64's I see their speeds are so much lower (2.2 to 2.4 GHz.). Yet I am reading of amazing things from these.So I am confused. Why are they so good? Sure they got dual-core but FS can't take advantage of that yet.What would be the equivilent to my Intel P4 3.4 Prescott? Thx & Merry Xmas

Athlons have different ratings system, so P4 3.4 would be equivalent to Athlon64 3400+ which runs at 2.2 Ghz (11x200). The explanation of how can it run at lower freq. is a bit too technical for me, but experts say it is because:- more level-1 high-speed cache memory than the Intel Pentium IV, - shorter pipeline- more functional units- more instruction decoders(but don't ask me any details, better visit Google)For more than two years AMD had far better, faster, and techologically advanced processors so some 16 months ago, when I got myself a new rig, there was not much doubt about what to choose IMHO. However today Intel has some nice options too.

ah... interesting and helpful. Really comparing apples and oranges when trying to use GHz as a baseline. I was pretty blown away on the pricing for something like a 2.2 GHz but now I see why. I would assume they also run a bit cooler?I'm pretty sure my next major PC upgrade will include an AMD next time around. Extremely happy with what I have for now but I'm sure about 6 months after FS10 comes out, the dust will settle and we'll know what direction MS has taken. Then I will upgrade accordingly rather than trying to guess now.