I personally think the P4C's are fine chips but sadly enough they're gonna get dropped soon.
The northwood core has to be my faverate core any manufacture has ever used
the presscott sucks (its a step backwards for mp3 encodeing overclocking and and gaming) I will never get another intel untill i see a better core then the presscott
I have a amd atholon 3500+ newcastle core atm
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited January 2005
Intel also got the Pentium M right too
Agreed. Major omission on my part. I've had two laptops with that chip - both provide very good, balanced performance.
Thanks for the replies earlier,Thrax & profdlp. Ihave to say that this thread is an eye-opener. I love to tinker so I will probably build my next PC, and if AMD is that far ahead, why should I give my money away??? Even if it was neck-and-neck, saving a ton of cash on just that one component is a no-brainer.
I just checked the local shop near my work (well actually I checked their website) and the "Athlon 64 3400+" is $338.88 CDN. The "P4 540 3.4GHz" is $318.88, and the "P4 550 3.4GHz" is $398.88. Can I assume that 540 and 550 is the socket? I thought I read that an AMD is good for 400MHz or something in clockspeed so in this comparison, the AMD is much better bang for the buck. The store listed a P4 3.6GHz for $618.88, so if the 400MHz advantage is what I read about (I couldn't find the reference) then the AMD is a smokin' deal, to the point that I would save enough to get a honkin' vid card...
Thanks for the replies earlier,Thrax & profdlp. Ihave to say that this thread is an eye-opener. I love to tinker so I will probably build my next PC, and if AMD is that far ahead, why should I give my money away??? Even if it was neck-and-neck, saving a ton of cash on just that one component is a no-brainer.
I just checked the local shop near my work (well actually I checked their website) and the "Athlon 64 3400+" is $338.88 CDN. The "P4 540 3.4GHz" is $318.88, and the "P4 550 3.4GHz" is $398.88. Can I assume that 540 and 550 is the socket? I thought I read that an AMD is good for 400MHz or something in clockspeed so in this comparison, the AMD is much better bang for the buck. The store listed a P4 3.6GHz for $618.88, so if the 400MHz advantage is what I read about (I couldn't find the reference) then the AMD is a smokin' deal, to the point that I would save enough to get a honkin' vid card...
If you're in the Toronto area... try Infonec Computers (www.infonec.com) @ Warden & McPherson (just south of the 407) -> Cheapest component prices I can find in this area...
If you're in the Toronto area... try Infonec Computers (www.infonec.com) @ Warden & McPherson (just south of the 407) -> Cheapest component prices I can find in this area...
That looks like a good site for Canadian purchases. From that site I found this: AMD64 3500 2.2Ghz 512K 400fsb box S939 329.00
I just paid $265 US for one of these at newegg.com. Judging by the current exchange rate it looks like their deal is equally good. The Socket 939 systems will also be viable long after Socket 754 becomes obsolete.
The Athlon 64 is pretty much superior to the p4 in every way (A few things nonwithstanding) at a 1.1GHz clock deficit. That is to say, 2.5GHz Athlon 64 > 3.6GHz Pentium 4.
mmm I just hope that when the next generation processors come out that the clock speeds will mean the same for both types of processors.
4.5ghz P4 is equal to a 4.5ghz AMD64 as in clock speeds of course.
or if the AMD64 is faster then
5.2ghz AMD64>4.5 P4
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited June 2005
On a note that goes with the title but is not relevant to current processors, AMD is suing Intel on Antitrust grounds (IN THE USA). I have this from more than one source, both reliable, but do not have links handy right now.
The problem is that speed != performance, and coming up with a single standard to which all processors are compared is difficult. AMD's offerings beat Intel's handily in some categories, barely in other, and lose in others. I suppose the best way to do it would be to get some independent firm to benchmark all the processors (in lots of different areas) and come up with some comparative chart. That way you could look for what the best processor for what you're doing is.
Although, that shouldn't be necessary. You don't compare the 6800 to the x800 based on the model number, you look at performance.
On a note that goes with the title but is not relevant to current processors, AMD is suing Intel on Antitrust grounds (IN THE USA). I have this from more than one source, both reliable, but do not have links handy right now.
why would you hope that a 4.5 GHz Intel chip == a 4.5 GHz AMD chip? what you would essentially be asking Intel to do is to dump hyperthreading and engineer multiple core Dothan-style chips. AMD's advantage has always been IPC -- or Instructions Per Clock -- where Intel's extremely long instruction pipelines hinder the Pentium 4. The Dothan was engineered in the fashion of the Pentium 3 (one of the best chips made to date), and rivals AMD's A64 chips in clock for clock comparisons.
to me it seems like Intel has diverged too far on the "frequency sells" path to ever come back in the consumer market. Unfortunately for them, when they end up having to release several 4.5 GHz chips or whatever because that speed is the theoretical clock limit for their manufacturing process, no one is going to be the "new 4.5" when they can just get the "old 4.5". see what I'm saying?
Some game crazy kids will go out and buy intel's highest overcost chip just because it is intel highest like the Pentium 4 extreme edition.
It seemed to me to be a overclocked p4 pentium 3.2ghz processor.
But I think they should set a standard even with HT enabled so that all of them compare (clock speeds) to each other.
Performance wize the firm benchmarking is very good.
I wan't to be able to goto the store and buy a 4.5ghz processor and I don't want to have to try and decifer the difference between an AMD and P4 at all ever.
2.2ghz AMD64 is equal to what for a Pentium 4 "2.2ghz" is what some of the people that I know think tha the two are the same, and we know they are not the same.
That is why p4 sells more because some people think they are faster "3.2"
...But I think they should set a standard even with HT enabled so that all of them compare (clock speeds) to each other...
That's basically what AMD is doing with their power rating. My Athlon 64 3500+ runs at 2.2GHz. It's called a "3500+" because it is comparable to a 3.5GHz processor.
The best thing to do is look at a broad variety of benchmarks, then choose the CPU which best fits the type of computing you intend to use it for. You can't measure all of the aspects of a CPU by one benchmark.
Think of it like race cars. A car with a faster rpm engine will not necessarily move down the track at a higher speed than one with lower rpm's. A dragster will beat anything in the quarter-mile, but isn't going to win the Indy 500 or do well on the turns at Le Mans. An Indy type car isn't going to do much at all off-road at Baja. All of these cars excel at some things and are lacking in others. Measuring them by one standard, whether it's rpm, engine displacement, or the suspension and steering system isn't going to give you a clear champion under every type of racing.
Some game crazy kids will go out and buy intel's highest overcost chip just because it is intel highest like the Pentium 4 extreme edition.
It seemed to me to be a overclocked p4 pentium 3.2ghz processor.
But I think they should set a standard even with HT enabled so that all of them compare (clock speeds) to each other.
Performance wize the firm benchmarking is very good.
I wan't to be able to goto the store and buy a 4.5ghz processor and I don't want to have to try and decifer the difference between an AMD and P4 at all ever.
2.2ghz AMD64 is equal to what for a Pentium 4 "2.2ghz" is what some of the people that I know think tha the two are the same, and we know they are not the same.
That is why p4 sells more because some people think they are faster "3.2"
So which company do you want to completely re-design their processor?
you're saying they need a third party to evaluate their relative speeds, sort of like JEDEC does for validating new ram.
I agree with you, because it sucks to ahve to figure out how a 3200+ compares to a 3.2GHz p4, when according to AMD's naming convention they should be the same. bottom line? be an informed consumer
yeah but what about my friends that don't know anything about computer's at all and want a really fast computer that meets the recommended requirments that they want.
3.2ghz processor now we know that a pentium 4 3.2ghz is a p4 that runs at 3.2ghz but what is that for an atholon and sometimes the 3200 stuff is not listed at all on some websites it just says 2.2ghz.
...for an athlon...sometimes the 3200 stuff is not listed at all on some websites it just says 2.2ghz.
The actual speed at which the chip runs is useful information when choosing a MB. It also covers the retailer's butt when someone reads the Power Rating speed (3200+) and assumes that the chip runs at an actual 3200MHz. Of the many dingalings in the world, half would fry their chip by accidentally massively overclocking it to 3.2GHz; the other half would hire a lawyer and sue for false advertising.
Our job here at Short-Media is to educate people, thereby reducing the number of dingalings in the world.
The actual speed at which the chip runs is useful information when choosing a MB. It also covers the retailers butt when someone reads the Power Rating speed (3200+) and assumes that the chip runs at an actual 3200MHz. Of the many dingalings in the world, half would fry their chip by accidentally massively overclocking it to 3.2GHz; the other half would hire a lawyer and sue for false advertising.
Our job here at Short-Media is to educate people, thereby reducing the number of dingalings in the world.
Thank god for people like you, I've seen it happen before my friend destroyed his mother board buy trying to overclock an AMD up to 3.8 and oh man was it nasty, kind of like the smell of burning flesh, poor kid he was a newbie computer man.
You cant fry a cpu cause of a overclock though. It's dead on impossible. Either it boots at the selected speed or it won't. Either it passes a stresstest or it won't.
yeah but what about my friends that don't know anything about computer's at all and want a really fast computer that meets the recommended requirments that they want.
3.2ghz processor now we know that a pentium 4 3.2ghz is a p4 that runs at 3.2ghz but what is that for an atholon and sometimes the 3200 stuff is not listed at all on some websites it just says 2.2ghz.
I think you are the one that doesnt know about computers. AMD and Intel are different and thats that. They design their CPUs to be different and to do different things on each clock cycle. We will NEVER be able to measure them by MHz alone. Those days are long gone.
To me it looks like you are the people you described and went out and bought the highest number P4 since higher numbers obviously mean a faster computer.
Uhmm no and the reason I said this is because burning out hardware is very possible no matter what it is CPU, Graphics card, anything. He just had to much crap going wires everywere improper flow of air.
And why would I go out and buy the highest clocked processor, doesn't make any since. Everything in a computer can fail, don't belive me try dumping your computer in water with it still on and tell me what happens. Or maybe you can leave it on forever and turn your graphics card up to Maximum settings, rum doom3, Half-life2, Counter-Strike, 3Dstudio MAX, AMerica's ARMy, the whole Microsoft Office, open 50 websites, run Defrag, GTA3, GTA Vice City, GTA san andreas, and do all of this and anything else you can thing of, and never ever turn off your monitor(make sure all of those setting are all the way up to). And if you have a sound card play all the music you have in multiple programs over and over again at the max volume player. don't forget to run All the anti virus programs you can find repeatidly.
Then do this for about a year, 6 months and tell me how your computer is doing.
Please don't insult me I didn't do anything to deserve your horrible comments, lets try and keep it nice and clean like the other people in the forum.
Putting the computer into water won't harm the pc actually, as long as the water is clean. And there is no OS in the world that can run all those apps and games at the same time either, but the system wouldn't die of it. I have never burned out any hardware because of usage in my entire life. I have had parts die on me, yes, but i was the one who killed it, not overclocks or long-time usage.
I vote for a moderator to close the thread or simply just to delete it as it doesn't serve any purpose at all.
cool, good response but I have one question for you what is the speed for the AMD FX-55 and what is the advantages of running a server on an AMD processor (for forums) than a Pentium
and this thread is doing really good I like I have learned so much here, I love to hear the different opinions especially from the moderators and admins, it shows that they really know their stuff.
A webserver/emailserver won't put any modern Amd or Pentium processor at full load so the difference would be none at the most. The FX-55 defaults to 2.6 ghz but has an unlocked multiplier so that you can adjust it to the speed you want.
If webserver is your thing, a Amd Turion or a Pentium M Dothan would be the best choice cause ti doesn't need much voltage at all and can be used close to totally silent. Both are cheap and powerful enough to run the most games out there.
umm those processors are for notebooks not servers, not well equipped servers that is. Those are ok if your hosting low processor intensive games, or apps. Why do you suggest mobile processors for labtops instead of processors made for servers.
I thought the whole point of having a great server was to have a great processor as a part of it, that means it needs to be top of the line or close to it to be able to handle the load that needs to taken, especially for no lagg videogames.
umm those processors are for notebooks not servers, not well equipped servers that is. Those are ok if your hosting low processor intensive games, or apps. Why do you suggest mobile processors for labtops instead of processors made for servers.
A 2500+ CPU is a 2500+ CPU, whether it's designed for a notebook or for a server.
Have you ever seen a 1U server case? Kinda cramped in there for a Zalman HSF on your CPU isn't it? Ever seen a 1U server PSU? They are pretty small. Now gee, what would be an ideal CPU for those conditions.
Hey, I know! A low power-consumption CPU that generates less heat. Just like a...uh...mobile CPU!!!!111 lol
I thought the whole point of having a great server was to have a great processor as a part of it, that means it needs to be top of the line or close to it to be able to handle the load that needs to taken, especially for no lagg videogames.
Lag refers to latency over a network or the Internet. It is a factor of data transfer speed, not raw processing power. The 1GHz PIII on my test bench connects to the Internet just as fast as the Athlon 64 3500+ I'm using right now. A big fat hairy sweaty muscular steroid-laden CPU makes no difference.
Comments
the presscott sucks (its a step backwards for mp3 encodeing overclocking and and gaming) I will never get another intel untill i see a better core then the presscott
I have a amd atholon 3500+ newcastle core atm
I just checked the local shop near my work (well actually I checked their website) and the "Athlon 64 3400+" is $338.88 CDN. The "P4 540 3.4GHz" is $318.88, and the "P4 550 3.4GHz" is $398.88. Can I assume that 540 and 550 is the socket? I thought I read that an AMD is good for 400MHz or something in clockspeed so in this comparison, the AMD is much better bang for the buck. The store listed a P4 3.6GHz for $618.88, so if the 400MHz advantage is what I read about (I couldn't find the reference) then the AMD is a smokin' deal, to the point that I would save enough to get a honkin' vid card...
If you're in the Toronto area... try Infonec Computers (www.infonec.com) @ Warden & McPherson (just south of the 407) -> Cheapest component prices I can find in this area...
A64 3400 (ClawHammer 754) - $275.00 CDN OEM
A64 3400 (Newcastle 754) - $299.00 CDN Retail
P4 540 (Prescott 775) - $282.00 CDN Retail
P4 550 (Prescott 775) - $349.00 CDN Retail
P4 560 (Prescott 775) - $549.00 CDN Retail
AMD64 3500 2.2Ghz 512K 400fsb box S939 329.00
I just paid $265 US for one of these at newegg.com. Judging by the current exchange rate it looks like their deal is equally good. The Socket 939 systems will also be viable long after Socket 754 becomes obsolete.
I don't think that there are too many people around here that sell CPU's, and surprisingly enough Future Shop doesn't.
AMD Athlon64 FX-57 (2.8 GHz) is equal to what speed for a p4
I think that intel and AMD should come out with a standard for clock speeds.
If they both say 3.6ghz, 3.6ghz is the speed for both of them
4.5ghz P4 is equal to a 4.5ghz AMD64 as in clock speeds of course.
or if the AMD64 is faster then
5.2ghz AMD64>4.5 P4
Although, that shouldn't be necessary. You don't compare the 6800 to the x800 based on the model number, you look at performance.
...it's in the news forum.
to me it seems like Intel has diverged too far on the "frequency sells" path to ever come back in the consumer market. Unfortunately for them, when they end up having to release several 4.5 GHz chips or whatever because that speed is the theoretical clock limit for their manufacturing process, no one is going to be the "new 4.5" when they can just get the "old 4.5". see what I'm saying?
It seemed to me to be a overclocked p4 pentium 3.2ghz processor.
But I think they should set a standard even with HT enabled so that all of them compare (clock speeds) to each other.
Performance wize the firm benchmarking is very good.
I wan't to be able to goto the store and buy a 4.5ghz processor and I don't want to have to try and decifer the difference between an AMD and P4 at all ever.
2.2ghz AMD64 is equal to what for a Pentium 4 "2.2ghz" is what some of the people that I know think tha the two are the same, and we know they are not the same.
That is why p4 sells more because some people think they are faster "3.2"
The best thing to do is look at a broad variety of benchmarks, then choose the CPU which best fits the type of computing you intend to use it for. You can't measure all of the aspects of a CPU by one benchmark.
Think of it like race cars. A car with a faster rpm engine will not necessarily move down the track at a higher speed than one with lower rpm's. A dragster will beat anything in the quarter-mile, but isn't going to win the Indy 500 or do well on the turns at Le Mans. An Indy type car isn't going to do much at all off-road at Baja. All of these cars excel at some things and are lacking in others. Measuring them by one standard, whether it's rpm, engine displacement, or the suspension and steering system isn't going to give you a clear champion under every type of racing.
So which company do you want to completely re-design their processor?
I agree with you, because it sucks to ahve to figure out how a 3200+ compares to a 3.2GHz p4, when according to AMD's naming convention they should be the same. bottom line? be an informed consumer
3.2ghz processor now we know that a pentium 4 3.2ghz is a p4 that runs at 3.2ghz but what is that for an atholon and sometimes the 3200 stuff is not listed at all on some websites it just says 2.2ghz.
Our job here at Short-Media is to educate people, thereby reducing the number of dingalings in the world.
Thank god for people like you, I've seen it happen before my friend destroyed his mother board buy trying to overclock an AMD up to 3.8 and oh man was it nasty, kind of like the smell of burning flesh, poor kid he was a newbie computer man.
I think you are the one that doesnt know about computers. AMD and Intel are different and thats that. They design their CPUs to be different and to do different things on each clock cycle. We will NEVER be able to measure them by MHz alone. Those days are long gone.
To me it looks like you are the people you described and went out and bought the highest number P4 since higher numbers obviously mean a faster computer.
And why would I go out and buy the highest clocked processor, doesn't make any since. Everything in a computer can fail, don't belive me try dumping your computer in water with it still on and tell me what happens. Or maybe you can leave it on forever and turn your graphics card up to Maximum settings, rum doom3, Half-life2, Counter-Strike, 3Dstudio MAX, AMerica's ARMy, the whole Microsoft Office, open 50 websites, run Defrag, GTA3, GTA Vice City, GTA san andreas, and do all of this and anything else you can thing of, and never ever turn off your monitor(make sure all of those setting are all the way up to). And if you have a sound card play all the music you have in multiple programs over and over again at the max volume player. don't forget to run All the anti virus programs you can find repeatidly.
Then do this for about a year, 6 months and tell me how your computer is doing.
Please don't insult me I didn't do anything to deserve your horrible comments, lets try and keep it nice and clean like the other people in the forum.
I vote for a moderator to close the thread or simply just to delete it as it doesn't serve any purpose at all.
and this thread is doing really good I like I have learned so much here, I love to hear the different opinions especially from the moderators and admins, it shows that they really know their stuff.
GO SHORT MEDIA
If webserver is your thing, a Amd Turion or a Pentium M Dothan would be the best choice cause ti doesn't need much voltage at all and can be used close to totally silent. Both are cheap and powerful enough to run the most games out there.
I thought the whole point of having a great server was to have a great processor as a part of it, that means it needs to be top of the line or close to it to be able to handle the load that needs to taken, especially for no lagg videogames.
Have you ever seen a 1U server case? Kinda cramped in there for a Zalman HSF on your CPU isn't it? Ever seen a 1U server PSU? They are pretty small. Now gee, what would be an ideal CPU for those conditions.
Hey, I know! A low power-consumption CPU that generates less heat. Just like a...uh...mobile CPU!!!!111 lol
Lag refers to latency over a network or the Internet. It is a factor of data transfer speed, not raw processing power. The 1GHz PIII on my test bench connects to the Internet just as fast as the Athlon 64 3500+ I'm using right now. A big fat hairy sweaty muscular steroid-laden CPU makes no difference.