PDA

View Full Version : Who's faster, Intel or AMD?



elrado1
09-26-2003, 03:30 AM
Here's an interesting read (http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD02MjUmdXJsX3BhZ2U9Nw= =) of a review at HEXUS.net (http://www.hexus.net/), as posted on the [email protected] (http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/) home page.

"News Septmber 23, 2003 Who's faster, Intel or AMD? Benchmarks of [email protected] on various current CPU chips are here. (http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD02MjUmdXJsX3BhZ2U9Nw= =)"

minibubba
09-26-2003, 05:16 AM
well done amd :thumb:

The__tweaker
09-30-2003, 02:11 AM
quote:
"Loading the work unit into cache is a tremendous help to overall performance"

Then I wonder how the Intel EE would run seti.. :eek:

:beer:

elrado1
09-30-2003, 08:39 PM
From Tom's Hardware: The Intel v. AMD Performance War: You Lose (http://www6.tomshardware.com/column/20030923/index.html). A column some may find interesting. :argue:

"Is the enthusiast community being taken for a ride in this latest round of the CPU wars? Does AMD want enthusiasts to give it an interest free loan while they wait for 64-bit computing to go mainstream? Has Intel lost the PR battle before it has begun? Only a few hours remain before the launch of the Athlon 64 and the P4 EE, and we're wondering whether we got here for the right reasons. "

Nosferatu
10-01-2003, 06:34 PM
When I saw the post I thought this would be a flaming war from the word go, but those are some nice links you provided:thumb:

Nosferatu
10-01-2003, 06:38 PM
Mmm. I assumed Hexus was using Intel's EE Pentium. But they didn't. That explains the gap between the FX en P4

elrado1
10-01-2003, 11:00 PM
Then I wonder how the Intel EE would run seti.. Can't wait to find out either. The L2/3 cashe definitely won't be a hindrance. The difference will come in their math processing capabilities.


Originally posted by Nosferatu
[B]Mmm. I assumed Hexus was using Intel's EE Pentium. But they didn't. That explains the gap between the FX en P4 I'm sure they didn't have a sample in their hot little hands, otherwise they would have.

Wiggo
10-02-2003, 07:31 AM
Ya's may like to check this review (http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/index.html) out then which this chart comes from. :beer:

elrado1
10-02-2003, 10:44 AM
Thanks Wiggo. I've been wading through that review, but had not gotten to that chart yet. Looks like there is something there for both factions. Realistically, however, I think Intel has clinched the title in this arena. :argue:

Wiggo
10-02-2003, 05:26 PM
Well while I was in Sydney I went to the PC Markets there and grabbed a 2.4C and ASUS P4P800Deluxe just to see if I could do better than the 2hr av. the XP2600+ @ 2.26GHz turns in but also it should be the 1st PC put together in the new PC workshop (I hope it does a hell of a lot better than the 2.4B did and I don't get it online b4 the workshop). :beer:

elrado1
10-02-2003, 08:39 PM
...grabbed a 2.4C and ASUS P4P800Deluxe just to see if I could do better than the 2hr av. the XP2600+ @ 2.26GHz turns in... It should do a little better, especially w/ a mild OC. By the chart, the 2.4C comes in at about 10 minutes faster, although with your setup, you've shaved off 36 minutes from the standard XP 2600+ time. That sounds like a lot with only a .13 GHz increase. If only the 2.4C would respond as well. Hope you can get it together soon. :)

Wiggo
10-02-2003, 10:35 PM
Well the 2.4B did let me down some what badly a while back but I'm willin' to give 2.4C ago and see what happens. :D