Intel or AMD?

it depends on what you wana do, the new p4s kick as in games, but are rather slow(not completely, but compared to amd) if you do actual work, word, exel, amd is the winner... but that **** is boring... and with the new granite bay chipset, you get rambus bandwidth using ddr2100, so, its your choice, wait for a 2.2ghz athlon, or get a new 3.5ghz p4 when the athlons are released...
 
Posted by wyrlwyn
if you look at the benchmarks, p4s actually are better AT THE SAME SPEED as an athlon, such as the article in the new maximum pc magazine for this year, example: the 2.2ghz p4 got 320fps in q3, the new 2.2thoroughbred got around 290.... they had intel beat, but, they're lagging behind now...
why i'm switchin to intel

for same speed? the 2.2 ghz is competing with a 1.8ghz in your scenario... same performance rating perhaps... also granite bay is intel's answer to the nforce2... dual channel DDR... not rdram...

here is the fact about intels... they are better for gaming... no question about it... they are tops in all gaming benchmarks... even if the performance delta is only around 5%-10%... they dominate... its the way the architecture handles the raw data...

intel also does very well on multimedia benchmarks though this is the area where amd starts to catch up to the p4's... still intel... specially with the new HT ebabled 3.06ghz behemoth pulls ahead in many benches.. not all mind but most...

it is in office productivity and real world apps that amd shows it superior mathematical processing power...

so you are totally correct that intel is a good solution for gaming... look @ the top 10 lists for 3dmark2001 and note what cpu they are all running... it is intel...

now amd gets a lot of flak for its naming system which incorporates performance ratings v/s intels speed rating... however amd does more work per clock cycle than intel... 9 instruction to 6 instructions... and therefore is able to compete @ lower clock speeds... the scalability of the intel processors makes them very good overclockers... the thoroughbred A core from AMD was not a great overclocker... the 2200+ was the last product with that core design... the new tweaked core, the thoroughbred b revision is a lot better...scales better... runs a little cooler...

intel currently has the fastest solution... no doubt... the p4 northwoods scale to around 3.2 ghz and have a little trouble after that... the current amd thoroughbred core scales to around 3000-3200+ obviously @ lower clock speeds... intel is obviously not too worried about the limitations to its scaling past 3.2 ghz since the prescott core comes out in the not too distant future... 2h03 per reports...

you have to understand the limitations of each cpu's architecture... they can't scale up forever hence all teh core design changes..

core revisions can well take the p4 northwoods past the 3.2 ghz theoretical plateau... no doubt... but at the time it is expected that the barton's sporting 512k l2 cache and 400mhz fsb (200 ddr) will debut...
 
if an body when to an amd reality check, mybe you would understand my frustration with them, the kept knocking intel, but didn't back themselves up, intel sucks, intel sucks... but why... very unprofessional... and all the computers there were running games really choppy and all pixelated... meaning they were showing off the speed at low resolutions... and plus, after getting lost in philly for 5 hours, all the **** gobblers gave me were some mints... and can pull a maralyn mansion and suck themselves...
 
and the dual ddr on the e7205 would make up for the loss of rdram, 4.2gbs bandwidth for memory would help out the 4.2gbs of the p4, 2.1X2(dualddr266) matches the theoretical bandwidth of rdrampc1066, for the cost of ddr.
 
Thanks for everyone's comments. Admittedly, yes, I like the newest Intel chips. However, at this point, they are too price prohibitive for me. I think (?) But, yes, if price wasn't an issue for me, I would likely get the Intel 3.03 GHz chip with hyperthreading. Neat concept.

Question about the GeForce 4 MX. Is it really that terrible of a video card? See...I'm currently running a ATI Radeon 32 MB DDR. Benchmarks are terrible (I think the 3D benchmark was like 1600, while the Chaintech board hit 16000). What I'm really looking for is a vast improvement over my existing card at not a terrible price. I'm really just saving my money for when the GeForce FX comes down in price, etc (I'm still drooling over this card...lol). With it being onboard, the total cost of the motherboard might turn out to be cheaper in the long run (?). That's really what I was thinking about on that.

So far, I'm thinking of getting an AMD Athlon 2400+ with either the Gigabyte GA-7VAXP or the Chaintech nForce2 Zenith board. 512 MB of DDR400 RAM.

Thoughts?

Melon
 
Posted by wyrlwyn
and the dual ddr on the e7205 would make up for the loss of rdram, 4.2gbs bandwidth for memory would help out the 4.2gbs of the p4, 2.1X2(dualddr266) matches the theoretical bandwidth of rdrampc1066, for the cost of ddr.

hmm... didn't know that... always thought that even with dual channel and top-of-the-line ddr... the rdram had more theoretical bandwidth...

now to melon lol :)

the chaintec board hits 16000 with my video card... not the onboard turned on.. if you read the test specs you will see the radeon 9700pro as the card installed... 16000 though seems quite high...

if you are looking for a stop gap between your current card and the upcoming GF FX line form nvidia... stick with the onboard... the gf4 mx series is not bad...

if you can increase your cpu to incl a 2600+ with 333fsb it would be a nice solution.. but the setup you have is pretty nice still...

on a regular top of the line test system... you might hit around 8000ish 3dmarks/non overclocked of course... with the onboard gf4mx... which is a pretty good score... can play all of todays games pretty much @ decent performance levels...
 
1st of All - I'm not having a go at you Sazar
Wot I'm saying Sazar is that the P4's even are a better chip than the AMD equivalent. In todays world there are not many ppl that will Only play a game, Only download or Only write cd's. You'll generally find that most ppl will want to do all these things at the same time which is where they will find the difference. The AMD is fine and will run most things better than the P4 with the larger FSB this is expected, this means that there is a larger pipe for the info, BUT the P4 dispite having a smaller pipe it has 4 of them, which allows multiple progs to run simultaneously with hardly any probs. Now funnily enough my brother has the same chip as you he's got 512mb DDR2100, GF2/GTS and 1900+ and it is much quicker than my P4 2.0g but when I started to write a CD whilst D/Ling it started to go for cigarette breaks, I tried to open MSWord and the PC went for a COFFEE. I'm sure that somebody had replaced his chip with a P2 166. Now I on the other hand am currently burning a CD, Pink Floyd - DSOTM, D/ling and Im also using MSWord and I can still open CMRC2 and play it, No Probs

Don't get me wrong I have just bought my 6yr old a AMD+ chip for his christmas because they are cheeper than Intel and do more or less the same, If he shows me he can look after it next year he can have an Intel.
[joke]A proper 1[joke]
 
Posted by Goldy
1st of All - I'm not having a go at you Sazar
Wot I'm saying Sazar is that the P4's even are a better chip than the AMD equivalent. In todays world there are not many ppl that will Only play a game, Only download or Only write cd's. You'll generally find that most ppl will want to do all these things at the same time which is where they will find the difference. The AMD is fine and will run most things better than the P4 with the larger FSB this is expected, this means that there is a larger pipe for the info, BUT the P4 dispite having a smaller pipe it has 4 of them, which allows multiple progs to run simultaneously with hardly any probs. Now funnily enough my brother has the same chip as you he's got 512mb DDR2100, GF2/GTS and 1900+ and it is much quicker than my P4 2.0g but when I started to write a CD whilst D/Ling it started to go for cigarette breaks, I tried to open MSWord and the PC went for a COFFEE. I'm sure that somebody had replaced his chip with a P2 166. Now I on the other hand am currently burning a CD, Pink Floyd - DSOTM, D/ling and Im also using MSWord and I can still open CMRC2 and play it, No Probs

Don't get me wrong I have just bought my 6yr old a AMD+ chip for his christmas because they are cheeper than Intel and do more or less the same, If he shows me he can look after it next year he can have an Intel.
[joke]A proper 1[joke]

np... my thing is I work with both setups @ work... we have 2.4ghz B intel cpu's and 2200+ amd cpus in our rigs that we put together and stick out there as 'clients'... I don't do the networking component... and from hands on experience I have slightly different feelings towards intel than you do... but perhaps its just the usage :)

hope yer son manages to earn that intel bro lol... give him some marshmellows to toast on the amd hsf as well..
 

Members online

Latest profile posts

Also Hi EP and people. I found this place again while looking through a oooollllllldddd backup. I have filled over 10TB and was looking at my collection of antiques. Any bids on the 500Mhz Win 95 fix?
Any of the SP crew still out there?
Xie wrote on Electronic Punk's profile.
Impressed you have kept this alive this long EP! So many sites have come and gone. :(

Just did some crude math and I apparently joined almost 18yrs ago, how is that possible???
hello peeps... is been some time since i last came here.
Electronic Punk wrote on Sazar's profile.
Rest in peace my friend, been trying to find you and finally did in the worst way imaginable.

Forum statistics

Threads
62,015
Messages
673,494
Members
5,621
Latest member
naeemsafi
Back