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 25

Thread: P4 V Amd




  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Actually the nForce2 mobo's are no dearer than any other mobo ($125-$130us approx.) when not equiped with onboard video (which most arn't and few are so more homework required for you I can see). ;)
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Which is the same as buying a Brookdale-PE. Now why can't these guys make a chipset that can do graphics down and still use the AGP slot they throw on the board. I think that would be a nice feature to have to spead your work out over 2 monitors. But the logistics are probably pretty screwed when trying to get AGP and integrated graphics talking over the same bus. :D

    As for doing my homework, I read up just as much on AMD related stuff as Intel, got to keep up on the competition you know. And I do remember now reading somewhere that the Nforce chipset was going to have either integrated graphics or not. I'm surprised though that most of the boards out there don't have integrated graphics. I guess people are still scared of integrated graphics even though they have come a long way in the past few years. I think I read an article somewhere that Nvidea told their employees not to call it Integrated Graphics, but something else. Can't remember exactly what the new phrase was, but they didn't want to be labled with the wrong image or something like that.

    One thing I don't remember is if the Nforce can have integrated graphics but still have an AGP slot for external graphics if the owner wants that? Like the 815E and 845G chipsets can do. I know lots about Intel chipset because I have a great job working for Intel on Intel boards everyday. AMD stuff, I just have to read and read and read. I was thinking about buying an AMD at one time and I ran it by a co-worker, he about tore my head off. :laugh:

    Like I've said before, I'm a total Intel fan and not changing sides any time soon. But it's good to see AMD keeping the pressure on Intel with their own high performing products. It keeps the US Feds off Intel's back and keeps pushing the technologies that much faster for us, the consumers.
    Where's my drink?

    Morgan

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

    Default

    Well if I can build myself a P4 setup to find out what they're all about then maybe ya should stop readin' and build an AMD setup for ya self. :devil win

    Oh and when onboard video can match my R9000 I may consider gettin' one but if they can match my GF4 Ti4200 VIVO I'll certainly get one. :D
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Ofcourse integrated graphics aren't going to match the latest and greatest cards out there. For people like us, integrated graphics can go lick some hairy donkey..... But they have come a long way in terms of performance since the P-200 Compaq I bought with 1 meg RAM integrated graphics. For the average joe looking to have a desktop to do spread sheets and web surfing, Nforce or 845G graphics are just fine. Hell, I do all my work work on a PII 366 laptop with extremely poor ATI integrated graphics. I'm cussing at it most of the time because I'm always running out of RAM, but it gets the job done.

    I'm going to be moving in with a new roommate and I think he went and bought an AMD. It's a Compaq or something like that, so it won't really show the true performance, but I'll have to fiddle around with it and see what it's like.

    I saw that post a while back that you built a P4 system and I'm happy you took that big step. :D To tell you the truth, I still wouldn't mind building an AMD, but I'm a broke SOB. I said I had a great job, didn't say I got paid worth a damn. :(
    Where's my drink?

    Morgan

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    39

    Default

    OH yea, I know what you're going say, "all the better to go with AMD because it's cheaper." :-) But in my case it's not because since I work for Intel, I get to take a system home for, "working at home". So, right now I'm running a D850MV board with a gig of PC800 RDRAM and a P4 2.2/400 FSB. I have a Geforce4 TI 4600 in their and a Audigy 1 card. I plan on bringing this one back to work as a work station and build myself a Springdale-G or -PE with probably a P4 2.8/800 FSB and a gig of PC3200 DDR for home. Dual Channel DDR all the way! That is going to be my gamer. As for my work station at home, I have a dual PIII 933 running on a Via chipset mobo, 512 Meg of PC133 and a Geforce2 GTS vid card. On that one I bought everything myself a couple of years ago before I went and bought a new truck. Truck payments and school loan payments just suck me dry right now.
    Where's my drink?

    Morgan

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggo
    (which most arn't and few are so more homework required for you I can see). ;)<center>:cheers:</center>
    Did you mean CaptMorgan or me? If you meant me guess what... your right! :D

    I've been reading a lot on different sites, it's just that a couple of things still escape me.

    Here is a big question.

    Why is the P4 so Memory bandwidth hungry even on a 533 fsb with 333 or better RAM, while a Athlon is happy with a 266 FSB? And performs equally.
    :confused:

    thanks,
    :bounce:

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Well I'll let ya know how my equivalent cost AMD setup goes in a few weeks with the only difference between the two bein' the CPU and mobo. :devil win

    <center> </center>

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    39

    Default

    It's all about the structure of the CPU. Intel, as much as I hate to say this, is still in the mode of selling their CPUs on Gigaherts alone. So, they wanted to really ramp up the clock frequencies of their CPUs with the P4. By doing this they had to make a longer pipeline. I'm reading about here at: Tomshardware to brush up. If this pipeline has an error because it mispredicted what the next instruction was, it has to reload again. So that takes time, which cuts down on performance. The faster the FSB, the faster these errors can be fixed which means the better the CPU performs. There are other reasons to, but I think this is one of the major factors.
    Where's my drink?

    Morgan

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Another reason for the P4's high clock rate is because it can only carry out 6 instructions per cycle while an Athlon/Duron do 9 but wait till ya see the IPC rate that the Hammer family has. :devil:
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptMorgan
    It's all about the structure of the CPU. Intel, as much as I hate to say this, is still in the mode of selling their CPUs on Gigaherts alone. So, they wanted to really ramp up the clock frequencies of their CPUs with the P4. By doing this they had to make a longer pipeline. I'm reading about here at: Tomshardware to brush up. If this pipeline has an error because it mispredicted what the next instruction was, it has to reload again. So that takes time, which cuts down on performance. The faster the FSB, the faster these errors can be fixed which means the better the CPU performs. There are other reasons to, but I think this is one of the major factors.
    But isn't this equally true with the Athlons?:confused:

    Basically I was wondering if the high FSB doesn't get P4's an advantage here. And does that advantage equate to higher overall performance. Esp. in Floating point calc.’s

    Also, that article from Tom’s is 3 years old. Aren’t the Northwood B and Athlon Thoroughbred substantially different from their originals?

    I saw in Tom’s article that the original P4 is about half as “powerful” as the Athlon in floating point calculations. I would like to see the same type of comparison using modern CPU’s.

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
  •