Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 93

Thread: amd vs intel article




  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    494

    Default

    the k7 core is soo damn old, and being able to still compete with intel's p4 is pretty impressive. the k7 started at like 600 mhz? i think..and now all the way up to 2ghz+. thats pretty amazing for one old ass core;) cant blame amd too much. and mhz isnt everything, those g4s and g5s..drool. intel went from 1.4ghz to 3+. good feat, but the architecture is a lot newer too..

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    4,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aznx
    amd vs intel article
    what article :confused:

    the K7 line of processors has had serveral different cores...thunderbird, palamino, thoroughbred, barton,...and that is just the Athlon line, the Duron's had a few upgrades too
    I've gone too far and need to move on!

  3. #3
    Beefy Guest

    Default

    I'm guessing he's talking about the Intel 3.2Ghz vs AMD 3200+ review on TT.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    4,308

    Default

    Cameron "Mr.Tweak" Wilmot
    Managing Director
    Tweak Town Pty Ltd

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    494

    Default

    k7 core is exactly the same though..whoopie, on core l2 and more l2 =)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Anyway great review, Intel opened up a can of god ol' spankin as usual..
    Exept for this darn MP3 encoding.. :rolleyes2

    BTW I read that the P4 runs cooler than AMD's counterpart, that was news to me.. :shrug:




  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    4

    Default

    The conclusion was certainly overstated.

    "While supporting a 400MHz FSB, this [AMD 3200+] is no where near enough to handle what is needed by today’s games and applications."

    Funny. Looking at the benches the games are pushing over 200 fps. I'd say either chip is more than capable. Better upgrade though since to handle today's games a 3200+ isn't powerful enough.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    No where
    Posts
    445

    Default

    200 FPS.. thats a dream for me.. when im hitting 25 im in heaven! I really do not think anything about 50 matters.. I mean I will be keeping my 1700+ for a long time.. untill the clawhammer get well underway, and you know what, ill bet you once i get my 9800 pro seated in here ill be doing 100FPS easy.. so whats the point at looking at game benchs for a CPU? One word.. picky!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1

    Default

    While supporting a 400MHz FSB, this is no where near enough to handle what is needed by today’s games and applications.
    Great stuff you're smoking.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samlind
    Great stuff you're smoking.
    It was a quote.. :devil win

Page 1 of 10 123 ... 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
  •