Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: AMD 64 3200+ vs. Pentium 4 3.2ghz.....who is the best?




  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    41

    Default

    I'm looking into buying a new computer and every benchmark site I look up gives me less than conclusive results.

    I'm trying to build a computer that can handle multiple task at once (i.e. using Microsoft Office), play high end video games, and have the best internet/networking capablities. I've narrowed my processor choice down to a Pentium 2.8c that can be overclocked to 3.2 ghz very easily, or a 2 ghz AMD 64. The only thing I truly know about the AMD is that it runs off a 64 bit chip...maybe somone can enlighten me on to what makes it so special.

    My question is which one of these processors is going to get what I want done and be the best bang for the dollar. They would both run off compareable systmes, so simply put...which processor is better?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    4,543

    Default

    http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTI0LDM=
    I'd say go for an Athlon 64 3200 or better. It seems to be better than the Pentium 4 in many areas, and it leaves much better upgrading options. And you can get them for under $300.
    Here's one:
    http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduc...103-413&depa=0

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,393

    Default

    I would go with a 2.4c..and some good ram to oc to 3.4 on good air...if your going with a p4 that is..but the AMD can spank it at stock....so you choose! i would go with the amd.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AsianBatman
    I would go with a 2.4c..and some good ram to oc to 3.4 on good air...if your going with a p4 that is..but the AMD can spank it at stock....so you choose! i would go with the amd.

    The only thing I'm really worried about the AMD is the instances where a faster core speed is necessary; P4 beat AMD in several benchmarks because of this factor (it beat the FX and totally destroyed the basic 64 processor). With that in mind, does the ability to read 64 bits of code make up for almost 1.4 ghz of slack against the P4's? Can these AMD's be overclocked?


    I've narrowed it down the the 2.4c and the AMD 64 3200 +......which one will get the job done the best?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,393

    Default

    you can't compare amd and intel by clock! They both have different core structures and how they perform, so keep that in mind...amd 64 gets 20k with a 9800 stock.....at 2.2 i think...while 2.4c gets around 17k at stock. And when you clock it to 3.4 it should hit 21k...i would go with the 64..but then it wont leave you for future upgrades due to the release of a amd64 version that allows you to get dual channel with unregisterred ram.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    4,543

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by werley_123
    With that in mind, does the ability to read 64 bits of code make up for almost 1.4 ghz of slack against the P4's? Can these AMD's be overclocked?
    There's also HyperTransport and more L1 Cache to account for that clock speed. I don't know if they are overclockable without doing something (sodering something), but they are better at stock anyway.


    Quote Originally Posted by werley_123
    I've narrowed it down the the 2.4c and the AMD 64 3200 +......which one will get the job done the best?
    If you're talking about a 2.4c, it's hardly a comparison. Most benchmarks have been done on a 3.2, and the Athlon 64 3200 even beat that in some benchmarks. The Athlon 64 is more powerful, more upgradable, and better for the price.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AsianBatman
    you can't compare amd and intel by clock! They both have different core structures and how they perform, so keep that in mind...amd 64 gets 20k with a 9800 stock.....at 2.2 i think...while 2.4c gets around 17k at stock. And when you clock it to 3.4 it should hit 21k...i would go with the 64..but then it wont leave you for future upgrades due to the release of a amd64 version that allows you to get dual channel with unregisterred ram.
    Do you have any idea when and if AMD will put their 64's into retail notebook computers (i've seen a few custom built laptops with them in there but i prefere retail when it comes to laptops). My other option is to build this desktop with the 2.4c right now and get a laptop with the 64 in this time next year (or i could do it the other way around). Either way, does anyone have any idea when the mobile AMD 64's will be going retail?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •