Processor AMD vs. Intel

[batmanuel]

Originally posted by: BriGy86
"For example

3200+ Newcastle, 2.2GHz, 512k cache
3200+ Clawhammer, 2.0GHz, 1meg cache "

that brings another question, which is better high frequency or more cache?

It did just get a bit more complicated with the recent release of the Winchester cores. Now we have a 0.09 micron die S939 3200+ chip which runs at 2 GHz with 512k of cache, but with dual channel memory. Now you have to take into account not just cache and clock frequency, but also the memory bandwidth when you are comparing chips with the same PR.

 

[Frew]

Originally posted by: oldman420
I think it depends on what you are going to be using the system for.
If I were building a strictly gaming rig I would go with Intel as the 800 MHz Prescott smokes almost any amd .but get ready to spend 600 bucks or so for a CPU/MB combo and now with ddr2 ram it gets even more expensive.
AMD on the other hand will give almost non perceivable less performance losses and some gains.
its really a tossup but with a a64 3500 you probably could match a p4 3.2 at stock.
IMO memory and not CPU come into play and will weigh heavily at these rates of speed the bus of each will do way more than most games can take these days.
wow this post sucks sorry.
so in conclusion I would if I could afford it get a Prescott over an a64 for gaming right now.

Kidding? Confused? Stupid? Ignorant? Fanboy? What made you post this BS?

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: LeadFrog

Originally posted by: oldman420
I think it depends on what you are going to be using the system for.
If I were building a strictly gaming rig I would go with Intel as the 800 MHz Prescott smokes almost any amd .but get ready to spend 600 bucks or so for a CPU/MB combo and now with ddr2 ram it gets even more expensive.
AMD on the other hand will give almost non perceivable less performance losses and some gains.
its really a tossup but with a a64 3500 you probably could match a p4 3.2 at stock.
IMO memory and not CPU come into play and will weigh heavily at these rates of speed the bus of each will do way more than most games can take these days.
wow this post sucks sorry.
so in conclusion I would if I could afford it get a Prescott over an a64 for gaming right now.

Kidding? Confused? Stupid? Ignorant? Fanboy? What made you post this BS?

Ditto. Almost every site on the web ranks a AMD 3000+ at the same gaming speed or more than a 3.2c. A 3400+ newcastle will absolute smoke any Intel, even the 3.6 in gaming.

 

[imported_goku]

I think this is what ppl mean, Pentium 4 Northwood on Socket 478 will beat an Athlon XP but athlon is still pretty damn good. Pentium 4 Prescott on any socket is suppose to be the equivalent/direct competition of an AMD 64, the AMD 64 should win but the high memory bandwidth should help prescott (I dunno cuz I dont have either of those)

P4 Northwood>Athlon XP
P4 Northwood>P4 Prescott (until about 3.5GHz)
P4 Northwood<AMD 64 (I think)
P4 Prescott =/< AMD 64 (I think)
P4 Prescott EE (Just plain stupid)

This can be debated but overall I would much rather have an AMD 64 than pay the high price for the precotts because AMD 64 is a better buy. On a budget , I would choose the athlon XP but the P4 will provide more memory bandwidth (Dual channel). I am open to corrections on what I have posted.

 

[BriGy86]

"I would choose the athlon XP but the P4 will provide more memory bandwidth (Dual channel). I am open to corrections on what I have posted. "

what i got from that, is that intel takes advantage of dual channel memory, is that right?

and i have a CPU picked out and mobo but i have to go to work, so ill post it in about a half hour

 

[iwantanewcomputer]

Originally posted by: oldman420
I think it depends on what you are going to be using the system for.
If I were building a strictly gaming rig I would go with Intel as the 800 MHz Prescott smokes almost any amd .but get ready to spend 600 bucks or so for a CPU/MB combo and now with ddr2 ram it gets even more expensive.
AMD on the other hand will give almost non perceivable less performance losses and some gains.
its really a tossup but with a a64 3500 you probably could match a p4 3.2 at stock.
IMO memory and not CPU come into play and will weigh heavily at these rates of speed the bus of each will do way more than most games can take these days.
wow this post sucks sorry.
so in conclusion I would if I could afford it get a Prescott over an a64 for gaming right now.

where do you people come from?

get an amd 64 3000 90 nm on socket 939 and overclock it to 2.5 or 2.6 GHz. this will beat ANY p4 in most things, especially office apps/internet browzing and games.

it's about equivalent to a 3.8 or 3.9 GHz pentium 4, which takes a watercooling or expensive air cooling to overclock to. it also requires less expensive Ram and motherboard.

the 90 nm overclocking ability and lower price has basically eliminated any reason to buy a pentium 4 right now

 

[User5]

Originally posted by: BriGy86
"I would choose the athlon XP but the P4 will provide more memory bandwidth (Dual channel). I am open to corrections on what I have posted. "

what i got from that, is that intel takes advantage of dual channel memory, is that right?

and i have a CPU picked out and mobo but i have to go to work, so ill post it in about a half hour

Dual Channel memory is maybe a 3% performance increase. Socket 939 AMD 64s have Dual Channel. Socket 754s dont. Nothing to worry about, since it really isnt much of a performance difference.

A64s just rock. For less than 215 bucks, you can get an AMD 64 3200+. It will beat out Athlon XP, Any Pentium 4, and even the $950+ Pentium EE's when it comes to gaming performance. They even come with some of the best stock heatsink/fans ever. 32c idle/45c load average temps is just great. 45c is what some people get with their Pentium 4s idling.

 

[rshoemaker]

Or you can get a Prescott and grill hamburger if you mod the case just right!

 

[AnotherGuy]

Originally posted by: iwantanewcomputer

Originally posted by: oldman420
I think it depends on what you are going to be using the system for.
If I were building a strictly gaming rig I would go with Intel as the 800 MHz Prescott smokes almost any amd .but get ready to spend 600 bucks or so for a CPU/MB combo and now with ddr2 ram it gets even more expensive.
AMD on the other hand will give almost non perceivable less performance losses and some gains.
its really a tossup but with a a64 3500 you probably could match a p4 3.2 at stock.
IMO memory and not CPU come into play and will weigh heavily at these rates of speed the bus of each will do way more than most games can take these days.
wow this post sucks sorry.
so in conclusion I would if I could afford it get a Prescott over an a64 for gaming right now.

where do you people come from?

get an amd 64 3000 90 nm on socket 939 and overclock it to 2.5 or 2.6 GHz. this will beat ANY p4 in most things, especially office apps/internet browzing and games.

it's about equivalent to a 3.8 or 3.9 GHz pentium 4, which takes a watercooling or expensive air cooling to overclock to. it also requires less expensive Ram and motherboard.

the 90 nm overclocking ability and lower price has basically eliminated any reason to buy a pentium 4 right now

:thumbsup:

 

[FishTankX]

Not true. The prescott starts throttling at 72C. So you're 'Grill' will never get past 72C.

I don't see how a 30% difference in heat production over the Athlon64's is 'Massive'.

 

[BriGy86]

CPU

Motherboard

let me know what you think, i was told that, that CPU was comparable to a pentium 3.0

 

[FishTankX]

The AthlonXP's have been superseeded by the Athlon64's. A sempron 3100+ will perform comparably to a 2.8-3.0GHz P4, and costs $100. Why not get that with a cheap socket 754 motherboard?

 

[Blain]

* AMD is better because Intel sucks... No, wait I've got an Intel rig.
* Intel is better because AMD sucks... No, wait I've got an AMD rig.

They each have their own strengths and weaknesses. You'll have to judge for yourself which one fits your needs better.
You've got more issues than just CPU's to think about. There are things like chipsets to consider also.
That CPU won't do a thing, just laying there on your desk, alone.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: FishTankX
Not true. The prescott starts throttling at 72C. So you're 'Grill' will never get past 72C.

I don't see how a 30% difference in heat production over the Athlon64's is 'Massive'.

The Prescott I evaluated at work throttled at 93C.

[edit] Throttling started in seriousness at 80C in this test, this difference is most likely due to the measuring abilities of the differing diodes.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: goku2100
I think this is what ppl mean, Pentium 4 Northwood on Socket 478 will beat an Athlon XP but athlon is still pretty damn good. Pentium 4 Prescott on any socket is suppose to be the equivalent/direct competition of an AMD 64, the AMD 64 should win but the high memory bandwidth should help prescott (I dunno cuz I dont have either of those)

P4 Northwood>Athlon XP
P4 Northwood>P4 Prescott (until about 3.5GHz)
P4 Northwood<AMD 64 (I think)
P4 Prescott =/< AMD 64 (I think)
P4 Prescott EE (Just plain stupid)

This can be debated but overall I would much rather have an AMD 64 than pay the high price for the precotts because AMD 64 is a better buy. On a budget , I would choose the athlon XP but the P4 will provide more memory bandwidth (Dual channel). I am open to corrections on what I have posted.

No. The A64 is faster than all P4s of the same speed. When they first came out, only the P4Cs were avalible.
An AMD processor was comparable with the next line up for th ePentium 4. A 3000+ BEAT a 3.0C, and was VERY competitive with a 3.2C. It would win some, whereas the P4C would win others. But then compare the 3200+ and it was all AMD

so AMD64>ALL Pentium 4 derivatives in 90% of things.
FX53>P4EE

Even in encoding the P4s are losing, and programs that are heavily biased to the P4 show negligible advantages. Of course there will be the random program that does better, but then the questoin is "if 90% of things run faster on an A64, is going 3% slower on this specific program going to kill me?" and of course not