Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Facts about AMD




  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    White Bird, ID
    Posts
    332

    Default

    Best Buy sucks! Never ask them anything.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fincastle, IN, USA
    Posts
    3,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chaos
    How come the AMDs are not as seemingly fast in Ghz but run just as well?

    Chaos
    I believe it has to do wtih a better FPU and because it does 9cycles a sec while intel only does 6

    In case you dont know they use a PR (performance rating) scale to rate thier cpus. This mean even though you have a 2100 it performs as or better than competitive 2.1ghz processors when in fact, it only goes 1.73ghz

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Almost right there ya were but yes an Athlon will execute 9 instructions per cycle to a P4's 6 and the Athlon has 3 FPU's.

  4. #14

    Default

    Just on a side note to expand on what wiggo said :) Yes the athlon's have 3 fpu's, the p4 has 1. The P4's FPU is more powerful on a 1:1 ratio. If the P4's had 3 FPU's as powerful as their 1... :) It'd be a whole other ballgame right now. Anyway, not trying to pour gas on the BBQ as Wiggo so kindly put it... just had to say something :D

    *Takes a handfull of chips from The__Tweaker*
    <font size=1>Pentium 4 2.53GHz @ 3.515GHz (FSB: 185; VCore: 1.725)</font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.thermaltake.com/products/heatsink/v7plus.htm">ThermalTake Volcano 7+</a></font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.albatron.com.tw/product/PX845PEV_800.asp">Albatron PX845PEV-800</a></font>
    <font size=1>512MB Samsung DDR333 @ DDR370</font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.ati.com/products/pc/radeon9700pro/">Radeon 9700 Pro 128MB</a></font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.adaptec.com/worldwide/product/proddetail.html?prodkey=ASC-29160">Adaptec 29160 Ultra160 SCSI Controller</a></font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.seagate.com/cda/products/discsales/marketing/detail/0,1081,321,00.html">Seagate ST373405LW 73GB U160 SCSI</a></font>
    <font size=1>Enermax EG465P-VE 450watt PSU</font>
    <font size=1>CPU Temp (100%): 39 C; HDD Temp (100%): 31 C (100%); Chipset Temp (100%): 32 C</font>

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    And I'll have another beer while the snags & onions are sizzlin'.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,296

    Default

    Another reason Amd is faster at lower mz is cpu's derive some of there speed from what's called branch prediction. When running ordinary apps like office apps and games, cpu's make a lot of mistakes in branch prediction and have to start over processing an instruction. Amd's architecture allows it to correct a bad prediction much faster than Intel and thereby accomplish more work per clock cycle. Intel is often faster in multi-media manipulation as these apps are usually very predictable about what they will do next. An example is video conversion. The cpu will perform the exect same series of operations over and over, for billions (trillions?) of cycles, making it very predictable.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    White Bird, ID
    Posts
    332

    Default

    Thank you guys! I now have a lot more info on CPU stuff. That was nice so here is the question: AMD or Intel? I want to hear it from you!

  8. #18

    Default

    You should be able to decern that yourself from the info you got from all of everyone. You know what you'll use your machine(s) for, and we don't... Thus, if you want us to spell it out for, tell us EVERYTHING you'll be using your machine for (please don't :D) Meaning, you can make up your mind which is the better processor for you.
    <font size=1>Pentium 4 2.53GHz @ 3.515GHz (FSB: 185; VCore: 1.725)</font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.thermaltake.com/products/heatsink/v7plus.htm">ThermalTake Volcano 7+</a></font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.albatron.com.tw/product/PX845PEV_800.asp">Albatron PX845PEV-800</a></font>
    <font size=1>512MB Samsung DDR333 @ DDR370</font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.ati.com/products/pc/radeon9700pro/">Radeon 9700 Pro 128MB</a></font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.adaptec.com/worldwide/product/proddetail.html?prodkey=ASC-29160">Adaptec 29160 Ultra160 SCSI Controller</a></font>
    <font size=1><a href="http://www.seagate.com/cda/products/discsales/marketing/detail/0,1081,321,00.html">Seagate ST373405LW 73GB U160 SCSI</a></font>
    <font size=1>Enermax EG465P-VE 450watt PSU</font>
    <font size=1>CPU Temp (100%): 39 C; HDD Temp (100%): 31 C (100%); Chipset Temp (100%): 32 C</font>

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    White Bird, ID
    Posts
    332

    Default

    I already know what processor is best for best for me, the Pentium 4. I was just asking why some of you like AMD.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Well that comes back to "certain horses for certain courses".

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

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
  •