Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: P4 V Amd




  1. #1
    thomson1968 Guest

    Default

    Go back a few months to when the pentium 4 -533fsb-ddr333 cpu came on realise, I think it started at 2.2hz, right ??

    Anyway, I'am trying to find out what AMD's closest contender for the champ was at that moment in time, maybe a 2.2hz or something, correct ?
    so it would have been p4 2.4 V's amd 2.2, probably something like that cause Amd was/is always faster.

    Althought I can see that the AMD cpu usually always beats the intel one hands down on certain tests etc,,, would I not be right in saying that Intel totally blew away AMD with its new design at the time ?

    I'am open to persuasion either way,, but I'am led to believe that the Intel chip was better round about that time but nowdays (feb 2003) AMD looks as though they may have taken control again ????
    Please advize !

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    It's all about what you do with your computer. I think amd and it's 2700+ doesn't keep up with a P4 3 ghz with hyper thread enabled in tests like video/audio encoding. But in everyday apps and gaming i don't think there is to mutch difference between them due to the fact that not many games (if any) could benefit from hyper tread. It is also a big difference what memory you choose for a 533 fsb p4, i run the first cpu that came out with this bus, it's the 2,26 ghz one togheter with rdram 1066. I noticed that within gaming i get the same fps that my friend does with his xp2400+.

    But if i put this cpu on a board with ddr memory i would probably get beaten by that 2400+ amd.

    A P4 2,53 ghz with ddr 333 should perform about equal to a
    amd 2400+ in gaming, not saying that it will perform equal in all tests, the different cpu's are good at different stuff.

    It's mutch about how to feed the p4 with enough memory bandwith, now we will start to see some dual channel ddr motherboards on the market. But the price has to come down, as they now are even more expensive than the rdram solution, and not yet shown to perform 100% in line with them either.

    :cheers:

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

    Default

    Of course there is another big benefit from using a hyperthread cpu, if you for example use 80-90% of the cpu time to one application then you can just forget gaming or doing anything else that demands mutch cpu power at the same time, unless you have this tequinice wich let's your pc work just like it were a dual cpu setup. There is no problem to play games etc even if you run some apps in the background that eats up cpu time.

    Read about it here:

    http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/200...eading-02.html

    :cheers:

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,297

    Default

    While HyperThreading is great, do realize that it's not the same has having 2 CPU's of the same speed. It's a step forward, but it's not exactly the same as having 2 CPU's.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Of course not, it about 20-30% more cpu power within some activitys. But that is pretty mutch.

    :cheers:

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Along these same lines. Does anyone have links to direct comparisons between the P4 3.06 (with HT) and the Athlon XP (whatever the latest one is) that shows how they compare in a non Hyperthreaded test?

    I ask because I'm upgrading and have to make that choice, AMD vs. Intel. I'm having a hard time deciding. I basically wanna see which chip performs the best in regular (non HT) applications.

    I wanna leave HT out of it for one main reason. It's basically "this program will perform at this level but, IF you have HT, it will perform a little better. Plus the program has to be written to use it.

    Any info would be appreciated.

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

    Default

    I really should've merged these two threads (and may still do so if more show up), http://forums.tweaktown.com/showthre...;threadid=8071. :devil win
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    39

    Default

    The P4 is always memory bandwidth hungery. The more the better. So with the Springdale line of boards (Dual Channel 400MHz DDR) coming out this spring along side the 800 FSB P4 CPUs, which are going back to something like 2.2/800 I believe, we should see a large jump in performance. I also heard a rumor that HT is going to be in slower processors, something like back to 2.6Ghz with 800 FSB. Intel got scared with how well AMD's CPUs perform, so they've been working doubletime to keep their own CPUs performing either as well or better.

    I myself haven't played with anything from AMD since a K6-400. Now that thing was POS, crashed all the time. Ran like a dog with only 2 legs, one in front and one in back. Thank god it wasn't my system, it was a friend of mines.

    Anyways, even though I'm a diehard Intel fan, I do hope that AMD keeps making good performing equipment because in the end, we the consumers benifit from the competition by getting to play with cutting edge stuff that kicks ass.
    Where's my drink?

    Morgan

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    251

    Default

    Does the intel platform have anything equal to what the nForce 2 offers for AMD?

    Would people agree/disagree that a nforce 2 MoBo gives similar performance as MoBo for P4 with an Audigy 2 and a good NIC. Both fitted with an ATI 9500 MODed and OCed to ~9700 Pro or FireGL(Maybe use a jumper)

    This comp. will be used for 3D games, FPS, Flight/driving Sim.s/etc. and also be used with 3D applications Maya PLE and XSI.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    39

    Default

    I don't if I would go and say that the audio on the Nforce compares to an Audigy 2. I don't think that the Nforce Chipset has true 24bit/96khz like the Audigy 2. Also, most P4 mobos out there come with good integrated LAN. LAN is integrated into the ICH so protentionaly any P4 mobo with a Intel chipset can have LAN.

    As far as performance, the Nforce is a nice performing chipset, but what's the use of having it if you're going to be throwing a Radeon card in it? You're paying a lot of money for the Nforce compared to other AMD chipsets, and a lot of that money goes to the integrated graphics. But, how am I supposed to know how these AMD guys think? :cool: More power to ya.

    But yes, these 2 systems excluding the Audio and NIC could have similar performance in terms of speed benchmarks.
    Where's my drink?

    Morgan

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •