You can compare performance:
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ath … GHz/m7063vsm293
I would pick AMD-Athlon-64-3200 - it has lower power consumption. I think one-core CPU is enough for Win XP period games.
But used motherboards, based on nForce chipsets of that period, often become unreliable.

Depends. Prescott is slower in general, but Prescott G1 can be overclocked pretty far (4ghz and more).

*looks awkwardly at my nforce 4 based S939 motherboard that I was hoping would be more reliable than the Intel based S478 one*

VIA KT880 is quite reliable.

What's wrong with nForce 4? One of my AM2 boards is an Asus M2N-MX SE+ which currently has 1200 hours uptime.

An athlon 3200+ will perform pretty much the same as the prescott. The power consumption on that chip is pretty low - it is a 90nm variant. You can probably get a very decent overclock out of it even with a stock cooler.

If you want more performance, you can also get a 4000+, or a 3500+ venice or manchester core which are only about 10 more watts.

I have never had trouble with 939 sockets in XP.

Don’t most socket 939 also support a few dual cores, if you were looking for an improved XP experience.

BinaryDemon wrote:

Don’t most socket 939 also support a few dual cores, if you were looking for an improved XP experience.

Manchester and Toledo Athlon 64 X2's come in that socket, but it's all AM2 after that I think.

What's wrong with nForce 4?

Prone to die often due to manufacturing quirks of that time. Also bad for legacy support.

I can vouch for KT880, rock solid in my Socket 754 system.

You might be thinking of the K8T800. KT880 is the penultimate VIA socket A chipset and interfaces using the EV6 bus instead of Hypertransport.

Indeed.

Uh.. True, my bad.. 🙁