Intel vs. AMD: Best bang for buck, at the moment

How about 64 bit image editing? This application runs 25%
faster using the 64 bit version rather than the 32 bit version
on an Athlon 64.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=2

With some larger files, using the 32 bit version and a 32 bit OS,
the task can't even run.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=1

JAD wrote:

LOL your very selective on what you chose to comment on...

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release of the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will imo be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software available to
go
along with it.

Hey YO!!!! anybody in there....that is merely AN OS,, whoopee so
what? play 64 bit solitaire? type a 64 bit letter?

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll never
happen!

Very funny. Large amounts of 64 bit X86-64 software is in
development
now.




yeah LOL reminds me of HDTV...........get it? just now and its
been
drummed for 10 years

HDTV sets are finally about to become affordable for the average
person.
Some are predicting 32" lcd tv prices dropping to as low as $1,200
within
2005. While $1,200 would still be considered a high price for a
television

by many people, it is still affordable for large numbers of people,
while
around $4,000 is totally out of the question for most people.



! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like fun....?

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release of the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will imo be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software available to
go
along with it.



Most people buy computers to last 2 to 5 years.

what does that have to do with that statement?

Do you think that 64bit will still be thought of as NEW in 3
years?
You guys are saying that the price of the 64 bit chips will remain
the
same for three years? So buy NOW with limited stuff to do

There is plenty of 32 bit bit software that runs great on an Athlon
64 or
Opteron.
The Athlon 64 is already inexpensive. An Athlon 64(socket 754) at
around
$150
is around the same price as a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz which is only 32
bits.

, except test
for filthy rich companies, limited amounts of everything else, at
a
higher price, OR wait until the prices fall and there is
mainstream
everything to go with it?

"Matt" wrote in message
...
JAD wrote:


Now let's see ... if a 64-bit system costs no more than a 32-bit
system
... which should I buy ... hmmm ... I just don't know ... let me
get
back to you on that ...

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll never
happen!

Freaking benchmarks......get over that old ****
I really really care about microseconds yeah right




"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

OK so what if the price is so low you can't resist now......LOL
it
will only go down, and the headaches decreased. MB variety
INCREASED -
SOFTWARE availability INCREASED
Huge players in the worlds economy don't make huge mistakes. You
may
think you have the whole story ha ha jokes on Intel/AMD which
ever
the flavor of the moment but we only hear what is released.
Things
are done for a reason.......64bit.......why not a completely NEW
platform,,,,,dare I say 128bit? or something completely unlike
anything before? Do you think Usenet people have all the inside,
hell
no. Its our opinions and speculations. Even Intel/AMD employees
don't
have all the info on any given project.

Obviously there are reasons to build NEW and paying high for the
bragging rights of 64bit. Without quoting prices its fair to say
that
an athalon32 would be cheaper still and scream out 32bit
processing,

Not for demanding applications such as games, Photoshop, CAD, etc.
The Athlon 64 chips are faster than the 32 bit Athlon XP chips
at running 32 bit software not because of the 64 bit ability, but
because

of the integrated memory controller(s), SSE2, and other refinements.
Look at these Doom 3 benchmarks for example.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2149&p=7


so bang for the buck = using 64bit to run 32bit at a high price.

The price on the Athlon 64 3000+(socket 754) is quite low. Only
around
$55 more than an Athlon XP3000+(okay, the socket 754 motherboard
is around $20-25 more than one for an Athlon XP).

The Athlon 64 3000+ outperforms an Athlon XP3000+ even at Business
Winstone 2004.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2065&p=6

and by a much larger margin in more processor intensive software.



An Athlon 64 3000+(socket 754) is very close in price to a 32 bit
Pentium
4 2.8 ghz,
so this nonsense about paying a high premium for a 64 bit processor
doesn't make much sense.


instead of a reasonable Intel or Athalon to do the same thing.
Then 2
years from now you update your MB and CPU. In the box you have.
MAYBE
even find a board that has dual processor support
(64or32bit)...... I
can get outrageous too...........

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Well you may be able to buy a new CPU everytime a new flavour
comes
out, but
I would be looking for at least 3 years out of a new
purchase -
and
even
then I just move the older one onto the home network. It's
called
future
proofing - if you are buying a new chip NOW and don't want
to
pay
silly
money for a 64-bit only Intel which would be pretty useless
anyway
with
todays software.


well DUH that's why I'm saying 'use what you have' and wait
for
the
real 64bit software to be out.

Why do that when an Athlon 64 3000+ is so inexpensive(only
around
$150 for a socket 754 one) and such a great performer running 32
bit software. An upgrade to an Athlon 64 makes sense for many
people
even if they don't plan on ever upgrading to 64 bit software.

Then if you want to do this with an AMD
go for it, but do you think by then that Intel will have
leaked
and
dropped unto the market their next scheme, then somewhere down
the
line AMD drops a bomb, then Intel then AMD then Intel then
amd....with
the stock market teetering on the brink, do you think this
stuff
is
decided by a bunch of high schoolers on a class project? Hype
hype
hype, and god knows that without that 1 in 100,000(completely
fictitious) doing their testing for them (FOR FREE, or should
I
say
for a profit, reminds me of buying a tee-shirt with a
company's
logo
on it), we would be paying more and waiting even longer for
tech/software to catch up to one another.

"GTS" wrote in message
...

"JAD" wrote in message
...
Tell me, are you just really trying to use up what time
you
have
before Intel releases its 64 line? Or is it you believe
that
Intel
won't enter the market? R&D costs a bunch, letting amd
'Take
the
point' for once, is IMO, good marketing strategy( let
alone
the
increased practicality in waiting for 64bit software). Let
them
get
wounded. ! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like
fun....?


"GTS" wrote in message
...

SNIP
Who cares if the Intel chips are faster in some
benchmarks?
The
results are
so close, but the AMD's can run 64-bit software, which
the
Intel's
cannot.
Many are already running 64-bit software - either Linux
or
beta
Windows64.
Why buy a chip that only supports 32bit, for the same
price
as
one
that does
32&64 well.
Also Windows XP SP2 has enhanced AV capabilities with
the
AMD64
chips...

Panorama Factory brand spanking new....so now RUN out and by all new
software..
,,, yes there is a main stream, piece of software. What did they do go
through a list of editors till they found one that fit there scheme or
maybe contacted the programmer and had it tweaked. And is it the
software making the microsecond differences or the CPU64bit? PERCENTS
ARE A FUNNY THING...used many times to cloud the issues.
what was the resolution of the output?
/cut and paste/

Conclusions and things that go bork

The benchmarks were executed on the bare operating systems. 64-bit
drivers are still in beta and not without problems. The clean install
of build 1069 of the Windows XP 64-bit evaluation OS produced the
predictably better results. The introduction of the nVIDIA NForce3
4.34a 64-bit chipset drivers threw the benchmark into a tailspin
producing consistently poor results. The 64-bit road will be good to
walk down but it's still under construction; nVIDIA left a few
potholes.

Panorama Factory demonstrates the advantages in speed and ability of
an application requiring large memory chunks in a 64-bit environment
versus a 32-bit environment.

64-bit computing will bring about speed increases to a number of
applications. It's just how much and with what application is yet to
be fully realized. The other exciting promise is the ability to
address more memory. Bigger chunks of data could mean better games or
increasingly sophisticated multimedia tools.

The lesson has been taught and class is dismissed. 64-bit means big
bites of big data. It's do more and do more right now. Because of the
increase in addressable memory a program that requires larger chunks
of memory to complete a task is faster in the 64-bit world; AMD's
world.

forever? complete delusional thinking...very naive
either intentionally or they were dropped on their head at birth.


"JK" wrote in message
...
How about 64 bit image editing? This application runs 25%
faster using the 64 bit version rather than the 32 bit version
on an Athlon 64.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=2

With some larger files, using the 32 bit version and a 32 bit OS,
the task can't even run.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=1

JAD wrote:

LOL your very selective on what you chose to comment on...

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software available
to
go
along with it.

Hey YO!!!! anybody in there....that is merely AN OS,, whoopee so
what? play 64 bit solitaire? type a 64 bit letter?

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll never
happen!

Very funny. Large amounts of 64 bit X86-64 software is in
development
now.




yeah LOL reminds me of HDTV...........get it? just now and
its
been
drummed for 10 years

HDTV sets are finally about to become affordable for the average
person.
Some are predicting 32" lcd tv prices dropping to as low as
$1,200
within
2005. While $1,200 would still be considered a high price for a
television

by many people, it is still affordable for large numbers of
people,
while
around $4,000 is totally out of the question for most people.



! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like fun....?

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software available
to
go
along with it.



Most people buy computers to last 2 to 5 years.

what does that have to do with that statement?

Do you think that 64bit will still be thought of as NEW in
3
years?
You guys are saying that the price of the 64 bit chips will
remain
the
same for three years? So buy NOW with limited stuff to do

There is plenty of 32 bit bit software that runs great on an
Athlon
64 or
Opteron.
The Athlon 64 is already inexpensive. An Athlon 64(socket 754)
at
around
$150
is around the same price as a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz which is only
32
bits.

, except test
for filthy rich companies, limited amounts of everything else,
at
a
higher price, OR wait until the prices fall and there is
mainstream
everything to go with it?

"Matt" wrote in message
...
JAD wrote:


Now let's see ... if a 64-bit system costs no more than a
32-bit
system
... which should I buy ... hmmm ... I just don't know ...
let me
get
back to you on that ...

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll never
happen!

JAD wrote:

Panorama Factory brand spanking new....so now RUN out and by all new
software..

Can you show me benchmarks for the Pentium 4 running video editing
software
that is a few years old compared to how an Athlon 64 runs it? Why is it
okay
to test the Pentium 4 using using new software, but not to test an Athlon
64
running new software?


,,, yes there is a main stream, piece of software. What did they do go
through a list of editors till they found one that fit there scheme or
maybe contacted the programmer and had it tweaked. And is it the
software making the microsecond differences or the CPU64bit? PERCENTS
ARE A FUNNY THING...used many times to cloud the issues.
what was the resolution of the output?
/cut and paste/

Conclusions and things that go bork

The benchmarks were executed on the bare operating systems. 64-bit
drivers are still in beta and not without problems. The clean install
of build 1069 of the Windows XP 64-bit evaluation OS produced the
predictably better results. The introduction of the nVIDIA NForce3
4.34a 64-bit chipset drivers threw the benchmark into a tailspin
producing consistently poor results. The 64-bit road will be good to
walk down but it's still under construction; nVIDIA left a few
potholes.

In other words expect the 64 bit performance to be even better once better

drivers are available.



Panorama Factory demonstrates the advantages in speed and ability of
an application requiring large memory chunks in a 64-bit environment
versus a 32-bit environment.

64-bit computing will bring about speed increases to a number of
applications. It's just how much and with what application is yet to
be fully realized. The other exciting promise is the ability to
address more memory. Bigger chunks of data could mean better games or
increasingly sophisticated multimedia tools.

The lesson has been taught and class is dismissed. 64-bit means big
bites of big data. It's do more and do more right now. Because of the
increase in addressable memory a program that requires larger chunks
of memory to complete a task is faster in the 64-bit world; AMD's
world.

forever? complete delusional thinking...very naive
either intentionally or they were dropped on their head at birth.

That review is just a taste of things to come. Even when Intel drops
the price on its 64 bit Pentium 4, a version of the P4 with integrated
memory controllers might not be available for a very long time.

Take a look at this article.

http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2163&p=1



"JK" wrote in message
...
How about 64 bit image editing? This application runs 25%
faster using the 64 bit version rather than the 32 bit version
on an Athlon 64.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=2

With some larger files, using the 32 bit version and a 32 bit OS,
the task can't even run.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=1

JAD wrote:

LOL your very selective on what you chose to comment on...

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software available
to
go
along with it.

Hey YO!!!! anybody in there....that is merely AN OS,, whoopee so
what? play 64 bit solitaire? type a 64 bit letter?

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll never
happen!

Very funny. Large amounts of 64 bit X86-64 software is in
development
now.




yeah LOL reminds me of HDTV...........get it? just now and
its
been
drummed for 10 years

HDTV sets are finally about to become affordable for the average
person.
Some are predicting 32" lcd tv prices dropping to as low as
$1,200
within
2005. While $1,200 would still be considered a high price for a
television

by many people, it is still affordable for large numbers of
people,
while
around $4,000 is totally out of the question for most people.



! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like fun....?

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software available
to
go
along with it.



Most people buy computers to last 2 to 5 years.

what does that have to do with that statement?

Do you think that 64bit will still be thought of as NEW in
3
years?
You guys are saying that the price of the 64 bit chips will
remain
the
same for three years? So buy NOW with limited stuff to do

There is plenty of 32 bit bit software that runs great on an
Athlon
64 or
Opteron.
The Athlon 64 is already inexpensive. An Athlon 64(socket 754)
at
around
$150
is around the same price as a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz which is only
32
bits.

, except test
for filthy rich companies, limited amounts of everything else,
at
a
higher price, OR wait until the prices fall and there is
mainstream
everything to go with it?

"Matt" wrote in message
...
JAD wrote:


Now let's see ... if a 64-bit system costs no more than a
32-bit
system
... which should I buy ... hmmm ... I just don't know ...
let me
get
back to you on that ...

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll never
happen!

man forget it.......you fail to see my point and at this point its
more like a phishing expedition.
Of course things get better of course things get cheaper when the
newness wears off
of course you can buy now deal with the headaches. Talk about 'bang'
and your willing to pay more NOW to FUTURE PROOF for later, for
something that has no variety NOW, but will GET BETTER next
year???????????????????????/



"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Panorama Factory brand spanking new....so now RUN out and by all
new
software..

Can you show me benchmarks for the Pentium 4 running video editing
software
that is a few years old compared to how an Athlon 64 runs it? Why is
it
okay
to test the Pentium 4 using using new software, but not to test an
Athlon
64
running new software?


,,, yes there is a main stream, piece of software. What did they
do go
through a list of editors till they found one that fit there
scheme or
maybe contacted the programmer and had it tweaked. And is it the
software making the microsecond differences or the CPU64bit?
PERCENTS
ARE A FUNNY THING...used many times to cloud the issues.
what was the resolution of the output?
/cut and paste/

Conclusions and things that go bork

The benchmarks were executed on the bare operating systems. 64-bit
drivers are still in beta and not without problems. The clean
install
of build 1069 of the Windows XP 64-bit evaluation OS produced the
predictably better results. The introduction of the nVIDIA NForce3
4.34a 64-bit chipset drivers threw the benchmark into a tailspin
producing consistently poor results. The 64-bit road will be good
to
walk down but it's still under construction; nVIDIA left a few
potholes.

In other words expect the 64 bit performance to be even better once
better

drivers are available.



Panorama Factory demonstrates the advantages in speed and ability
of
an application requiring large memory chunks in a 64-bit
environment
versus a 32-bit environment.

64-bit computing will bring about speed increases to a number of
applications. It's just how much and with what application is yet
to
be fully realized. The other exciting promise is the ability to
address more memory. Bigger chunks of data could mean better games
or
increasingly sophisticated multimedia tools.

The lesson has been taught and class is dismissed. 64-bit means
big
bites of big data. It's do more and do more right now. Because of
the
increase in addressable memory a program that requires larger
chunks
of memory to complete a task is faster in the 64-bit world; AMD's
world.

forever? complete delusional thinking...very naive
either intentionally or they were dropped on their head at birth.

That review is just a taste of things to come. Even when Intel drops
the price on its 64 bit Pentium 4, a version of the P4 with
integrated
memory controllers might not be available for a very long time.

Take a look at this article.

http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2163&p=1



"JK" wrote in message
...
How about 64 bit image editing? This application runs 25%
faster using the 64 bit version rather than the 32 bit version
on an Athlon 64.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=2

With some larger files, using the 32 bit version and a 32 bit
OS,
the task can't even run.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=1

JAD wrote:

LOL your very selective on what you chose to comment on...

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release
of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port
many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will
imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software
available
to
go
along with it.

Hey YO!!!! anybody in there....that is merely AN OS,, whoopee
so
what? play 64 bit solitaire? type a 64 bit letter?

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll
never
happen!

Very funny. Large amounts of 64 bit X86-64 software is in
development
now.




yeah LOL reminds me of HDTV...........get it? just now
and
its
been
drummed for 10 years

HDTV sets are finally about to become affordable for the
average
person.
Some are predicting 32" lcd tv prices dropping to as low as
$1,200
within
2005. While $1,200 would still be considered a high price
for a
television

by many people, it is still affordable for large numbers of
people,
while
around $4,000 is totally out of the question for most
people.



! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like fun....?

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release
of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port
many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will
imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software
available
to
go
along with it.



Most people buy computers to last 2 to 5 years.

what does that have to do with that statement?

Do you think that 64bit will still be thought of as NEW
in
3
years?
You guys are saying that the price of the 64 bit chips
will
remain
the
same for three years? So buy NOW with limited stuff to do

There is plenty of 32 bit bit software that runs great on an
Athlon
64 or
Opteron.
The Athlon 64 is already inexpensive. An Athlon 64(socket
754)
at
around
$150
is around the same price as a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz which is
only
32
bits.

, except test
for filthy rich companies, limited amounts of everything
else,
at
a
higher price, OR wait until the prices fall and there is
mainstream
everything to go with it?

"Matt" wrote in message
...
JAD wrote:


Now let's see ... if a 64-bit system costs no more than
a
32-bit
system
... which should I buy ... hmmm ... I just don't know
....
let me
get
back to you on that ...

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll
never
happen!

JAD wrote:

man forget it.......you fail to see my point

What is your point? let's make specific comparisons, not just blanket
statements such as 64 bits is expensive, especially when that really
isn't the case.

and at this point its
more like a phishing expedition.
Of course things get better of course things get cheaper when the
newness wears off
of course you can buy now deal with the headaches. Talk about 'bang'
and your willing to pay more NOW

An Athlon 64 3000+(socket 754) isn't more expensive than a
Pentium 4 2.8 ghz though.

to FUTURE PROOF for later, for
something that has no variety NOW, but will GET BETTER next
year???????????????????????/

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Panorama Factory brand spanking new....so now RUN out and by all
new
software..

Can you show me benchmarks for the Pentium 4 running video editing
software
that is a few years old compared to how an Athlon 64 runs it? Why is
it
okay
to test the Pentium 4 using using new software, but not to test an
Athlon
64
running new software?


,,, yes there is a main stream, piece of software. What did they
do go
through a list of editors till they found one that fit there
scheme or
maybe contacted the programmer and had it tweaked. And is it the
software making the microsecond differences or the CPU64bit?
PERCENTS
ARE A FUNNY THING...used many times to cloud the issues.
what was the resolution of the output?
/cut and paste/

Conclusions and things that go bork

The benchmarks were executed on the bare operating systems. 64-bit
drivers are still in beta and not without problems. The clean
install
of build 1069 of the Windows XP 64-bit evaluation OS produced the
predictably better results. The introduction of the nVIDIA NForce3
4.34a 64-bit chipset drivers threw the benchmark into a tailspin
producing consistently poor results. The 64-bit road will be good
to
walk down but it's still under construction; nVIDIA left a few
potholes.

In other words expect the 64 bit performance to be even better once
better

drivers are available.



Panorama Factory demonstrates the advantages in speed and ability
of
an application requiring large memory chunks in a 64-bit
environment
versus a 32-bit environment.

64-bit computing will bring about speed increases to a number of
applications. It's just how much and with what application is yet
to
be fully realized. The other exciting promise is the ability to
address more memory. Bigger chunks of data could mean better games
or
increasingly sophisticated multimedia tools.

The lesson has been taught and class is dismissed. 64-bit means
big
bites of big data. It's do more and do more right now. Because of
the
increase in addressable memory a program that requires larger
chunks
of memory to complete a task is faster in the 64-bit world; AMD's
world.

forever? complete delusional thinking...very naive
either intentionally or they were dropped on their head at birth.

That review is just a taste of things to come. Even when Intel drops
the price on its 64 bit Pentium 4, a version of the P4 with
integrated
memory controllers might not be available for a very long time.

Take a look at this article.

http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2163&p=1



"JK" wrote in message
...
How about 64 bit image editing? This application runs 25%
faster using the 64 bit version rather than the 32 bit version
on an Athlon 64.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=2

With some larger files, using the 32 bit version and a 32 bit
OS,
the task can't even run.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=1

JAD wrote:

LOL your very selective on what you chose to comment on...

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release
of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port
many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will
imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software
available
to
go
along with it.

Hey YO!!!! anybody in there....that is merely AN OS,, whoopee
so
what? play 64 bit solitaire? type a 64 bit letter?

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll
never
happen!

Very funny. Large amounts of 64 bit X86-64 software is in
development
now.




yeah LOL reminds me of HDTV...........get it? just now
and
its
been
drummed for 10 years

HDTV sets are finally about to become affordable for the
average
person.
Some are predicting 32" lcd tv prices dropping to as low as
$1,200
within
2005. While $1,200 would still be considered a high price
for a
television

by many people, it is still affordable for large numbers of
people,
while
around $4,000 is totally out of the question for most
people.



! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like fun....?

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release
of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port
many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will
imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software
available
to
go
along with it.



Most people buy computers to last 2 to 5 years.

what does that have to do with that statement?

Do you think that 64bit will still be thought of as NEW
in
3
years?
You guys are saying that the price of the 64 bit chips
will
remain
the
same for three years? So buy NOW with limited stuff to do

There is plenty of 32 bit bit software that runs great on an
Athlon
64 or
Opteron.
The Athlon 64 is already inexpensive. An Athlon 64(socket
754)
at
around
$150
is around the same price as a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz which is
only
32
bits.

, except test
for filthy rich companies, limited amounts of everything
else,
at
a
higher price, OR wait until the prices fall and there is
mainstream
everything to go with it?

"Matt" wrote in message
...
JAD wrote:


Now let's see ... if a 64-bit system costs no more than
a
32-bit
system
... which should I buy ... hmmm ... I just don't know
...
let me
get
back to you on that ...

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll
never
happen!

is it more expensive that current 32 bit processors?

AMD sells cheaper CPUs I am not saying that they don't. so why
compare to a Intel chip? compare it to a state o the art 32bit AMD
cpu. My point is why are you drumming a 64 bit more expensive, proven
to have its BORKS, solution to run 32bit applications? You could get
BORKED at the git go, as your 400$ video card won't run under beta64.
But don't worry, shelve it till next year when YOU guarantee there
will be better drivers.



"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

man forget it.......you fail to see my point

What is your point? let's make specific comparisons, not just
blanket
statements such as 64 bits is expensive, especially when that really
isn't the case.

and at this point its
more like a phishing expedition.
Of course things get better of course things get cheaper when the
newness wears off
of course you can buy now deal with the headaches. Talk about
'bang'
and your willing to pay more NOW

An Athlon 64 3000+(socket 754) isn't more expensive than a
Pentium 4 2.8 ghz though.

to FUTURE PROOF for later, for
something that has no variety NOW, but will GET BETTER next
year???????????????????????/

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Panorama Factory brand spanking new....so now RUN out and by
all
new
software..

Can you show me benchmarks for the Pentium 4 running video
editing
software
that is a few years old compared to how an Athlon 64 runs it?
Why is
it
okay
to test the Pentium 4 using using new software, but not to test
an
Athlon
64
running new software?


,,, yes there is a main stream, piece of software. What did
they
do go
through a list of editors till they found one that fit there
scheme or
maybe contacted the programmer and had it tweaked. And is it
the
software making the microsecond differences or the CPU64bit?
PERCENTS
ARE A FUNNY THING...used many times to cloud the issues.
what was the resolution of the output?
/cut and paste/

Conclusions and things that go bork

The benchmarks were executed on the bare operating systems.
64-bit
drivers are still in beta and not without problems. The clean
install
of build 1069 of the Windows XP 64-bit evaluation OS produced
the
predictably better results. The introduction of the nVIDIA
NForce3
4.34a 64-bit chipset drivers threw the benchmark into a
tailspin
producing consistently poor results. The 64-bit road will be
good
to
walk down but it's still under construction; nVIDIA left a few
potholes.

In other words expect the 64 bit performance to be even better
once
better

drivers are available.



Panorama Factory demonstrates the advantages in speed and
ability
of
an application requiring large memory chunks in a 64-bit
environment
versus a 32-bit environment.

64-bit computing will bring about speed increases to a number
of
applications. It's just how much and with what application is
yet
to
be fully realized. The other exciting promise is the ability
to
address more memory. Bigger chunks of data could mean better
games
or
increasingly sophisticated multimedia tools.

The lesson has been taught and class is dismissed. 64-bit
means
big
bites of big data. It's do more and do more right now. Because
of
the
increase in addressable memory a program that requires larger
chunks
of memory to complete a task is faster in the 64-bit world;
AMD's
world.

forever? complete delusional thinking...very
naive
either intentionally or they were dropped on their head at
birth.

That review is just a taste of things to come. Even when Intel
drops
the price on its 64 bit Pentium 4, a version of the P4 with
integrated
memory controllers might not be available for a very long time.

Take a look at this article.

http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2163&p=1



"JK" wrote in message
...
How about 64 bit image editing? This application runs 25%
faster using the 64 bit version rather than the 32 bit
version
on an Athlon 64.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=2

With some larger files, using the 32 bit version and a 32
bit
OS,
the task can't even run.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=1

JAD wrote:

LOL your very selective on what you chose to comment on...

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the
release
of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to
port
many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction
will
imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software
available
to
go
along with it.

Hey YO!!!! anybody in there....that is merely AN OS,,
whoopee
so
what? play 64 bit solitaire? type a 64 bit letter?

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll
never
happen!

Very funny. Large amounts of 64 bit X86-64 software is
in
development
now.




yeah LOL reminds me of HDTV...........get it? just
now
and
its
been
drummed for 10 years

HDTV sets are finally about to become affordable for the
average
person.
Some are predicting 32" lcd tv prices dropping to as low
as
$1,200
within
2005. While $1,200 would still be considered a high
price
for a
television

by many people, it is still affordable for large numbers
of
people,
while
around $4,000 is totally out of the question for most
people.



! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like fun....?

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the
release
of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to
port
many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction
will
imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software
available
to
go
along with it.



Most people buy computers to last 2 to 5 years.

what does that have to do with that statement?

Do you think that 64bit will still be thought of as
NEW
in
3
years?
You guys are saying that the price of the 64 bit chips
will
remain
the
same for three years? So buy NOW with limited stuff to
do

There is plenty of 32 bit bit software that runs great
on an
Athlon
64 or
Opteron.
The Athlon 64 is already inexpensive. An Athlon
64(socket
754)
at
around
$150
is around the same price as a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz which
is
only
32
bits.

, except test
for filthy rich companies, limited amounts of
everything
else,
at
a
higher price, OR wait until the prices fall and there
is
mainstream
everything to go with it?

"Matt" wrote in message
...
JAD wrote:


Now let's see ... if a 64-bit system costs no more
than
a
32-bit
system
... which should I buy ... hmmm ... I just don't
know
...
let me
get
back to you on that ...

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream!
It'll
never
happen!

Ralph Wade Phillips wrote:

Howdy!

"JK" wrote in message
...

Good post! The Intel supporters seem to be cluless. Will they be
advising those with a 32 bit processor to upgrade to Intel's 64
bit processors early next year when 64 bit Windows is released?


a) Intel's been shipping a 64 bit processor. Sales stink. Because
it stinks for 32bit software (the place AMD outdid Intel)

b) 64bit Windows has been available since 2001 - for the Itanium
(Intel's 64 bit processor). Doesn't work with the AMD 64 extensions.

c) Intel has shot itself in the foot, true enough. No need to lie
or tell falsehoods about it ... better to just tell the truth.

RwP



There's always more than one side to a story and I can hardly wait for the
arguments between those who think supporting 32 bit technology is great and
those wondering why the hell things are 'burdened' with supporting 'old'
archaic instruction sets instead of doing a 'proper', wholly new, 64 bit
processor.

Just as the debate raged over 'compatibility' through the i386 line.

JK wrote:


JAD wrote:


Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll never happen!


Very funny. Large amounts of 64 bit X86-64 software is in development
now.




yeah LOL reminds me of HDTV...........get it? just now and its been
drummed for 10 years


HDTV sets are finally about to become affordable for the average person.
Some are predicting 32" lcd tv prices dropping to as low as $1,200 within
2005.

I can see right off that your definition of "affordable for the average
person" and mine don't match up.

While $1,200 would still be considered a high price for a television

by many people, it is still affordable for large numbers of people, while
around $4,000 is totally out of the question for most people.



! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like fun....?


That will probably change within 6-9 months with the release of the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to port many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction will imo be much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software available to go
along with it.

Optimism is a wonderful thing to see.

JAD wrote:

is it more expensive that current 32 bit processors?

AMD sells cheaper CPUs I am not saying that they don't. so why
compare to a Intel chip?

Okay. I could compare the Athlon 64 to the state of the art 32 bit cpu,
the Sempron 3100+, which is basically an Athlon 64 with half the L2
cache of the Athlon 64 and the 64 bit functions disabled. Since the
Sempron 3100+ is so close in price to an Athlon 64 2800+ or 3000+,
one may as well get the Athlon 64.

compare it to a state o the art 32bit AMD
cpu. My point is why are you drumming a 64 bit more expensive, proven
to have its BORKS

What?

, solution to run 32bit applications?

It is a great processor for running 32 bit software.

You could get
BORKED at the git go, as your 400$ video card won't run under beta64.

What?


But don't worry, shelve it till next year

What? One can run it now in 32 bit mode if they have a problem
running it under the beta Windows X64.

when YOU guarantee there
will be better drivers.

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

man forget it.......you fail to see my point

What is your point? let's make specific comparisons, not just
blanket
statements such as 64 bits is expensive, especially when that really
isn't the case.

and at this point its
more like a phishing expedition.
Of course things get better of course things get cheaper when the
newness wears off
of course you can buy now deal with the headaches. Talk about
'bang'
and your willing to pay more NOW

An Athlon 64 3000+(socket 754) isn't more expensive than a
Pentium 4 2.8 ghz though.

to FUTURE PROOF for later, for
something that has no variety NOW, but will GET BETTER next
year???????????????????????/

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Panorama Factory brand spanking new....so now RUN out and by
all
new
software..

Can you show me benchmarks for the Pentium 4 running video
editing
software
that is a few years old compared to how an Athlon 64 runs it?
Why is
it
okay
to test the Pentium 4 using using new software, but not to test
an
Athlon
64
running new software?


,,, yes there is a main stream, piece of software. What did
they
do go
through a list of editors till they found one that fit there
scheme or
maybe contacted the programmer and had it tweaked. And is it
the
software making the microsecond differences or the CPU64bit?
PERCENTS
ARE A FUNNY THING...used many times to cloud the issues.
what was the resolution of the output?
/cut and paste/

Conclusions and things that go bork

The benchmarks were executed on the bare operating systems.
64-bit
drivers are still in beta and not without problems. The clean
install
of build 1069 of the Windows XP 64-bit evaluation OS produced
the
predictably better results. The introduction of the nVIDIA
NForce3
4.34a 64-bit chipset drivers threw the benchmark into a
tailspin
producing consistently poor results. The 64-bit road will be
good
to
walk down but it's still under construction; nVIDIA left a few
potholes.

In other words expect the 64 bit performance to be even better
once
better

drivers are available.



Panorama Factory demonstrates the advantages in speed and
ability
of
an application requiring large memory chunks in a 64-bit
environment
versus a 32-bit environment.

64-bit computing will bring about speed increases to a number
of
applications. It's just how much and with what application is
yet
to
be fully realized. The other exciting promise is the ability
to
address more memory. Bigger chunks of data could mean better
games
or
increasingly sophisticated multimedia tools.

The lesson has been taught and class is dismissed. 64-bit
means
big
bites of big data. It's do more and do more right now. Because
of
the
increase in addressable memory a program that requires larger
chunks
of memory to complete a task is faster in the 64-bit world;
AMD's
world.

forever? complete delusional thinking...very
naive
either intentionally or they were dropped on their head at
birth.

That review is just a taste of things to come. Even when Intel
drops
the price on its 64 bit Pentium 4, a version of the P4 with
integrated
memory controllers might not be available for a very long time.

Take a look at this article.

http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2163&p=1



"JK" wrote in message
...
How about 64 bit image editing? This application runs 25%
faster using the 64 bit version rather than the 32 bit
version
on an Athlon 64.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=2

With some larger files, using the 32 bit version and a 32
bit
OS,
the task can't even run.

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=257&p=1

JAD wrote:

LOL your very selective on what you chose to comment on...

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the
release
of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to
port
many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction
will
imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software
available
to
go
along with it.

Hey YO!!!! anybody in there....that is merely AN OS,,
whoopee
so
what? play 64 bit solitaire? type a 64 bit letter?

"JK" wrote in message
...


JAD wrote:

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream! It'll
never
happen!

Very funny. Large amounts of 64 bit X86-64 software is
in
development
now.




yeah LOL reminds me of HDTV...........get it? just
now
and
its
been
drummed for 10 years

HDTV sets are finally about to become affordable for the
average
person.
Some are predicting 32" lcd tv prices dropping to as low
as
$1,200
within
2005. While $1,200 would still be considered a high
price
for a
television

by many people, it is still affordable for large numbers
of
people,
while
around $4,000 is totally out of the question for most
people.



! beta OS or linux....WOW!!!!! sounds like fun....?

That will probably change within 6-9 months with the
release
of
the
64 bit version of Windows XP. My opinion on this is that
Microsoft
probably
delayed 64 bit Windows XP to give them enough time to
port
many
applications to 64 bit. The Windows 64 bit introduction
will
imo
be
much
more successful if there is plenty of 64 bit software
available
to
go
along with it.



Most people buy computers to last 2 to 5 years.

what does that have to do with that statement?

Do you think that 64bit will still be thought of as
NEW
in
3
years?
You guys are saying that the price of the 64 bit chips
will
remain
the
same for three years? So buy NOW with limited stuff to
do

There is plenty of 32 bit bit software that runs great
on an
Athlon
64 or
Opteron.
The Athlon 64 is already inexpensive. An Athlon
64(socket
754)
at
around
$150
is around the same price as a Pentium 4 2.8 ghz which
is
only
32
bits.

, except test
for filthy rich companies, limited amounts of
everything
else,
at
a
higher price, OR wait until the prices fall and there
is
mainstream
everything to go with it?

"Matt" wrote in message
...
JAD wrote:


Now let's see ... if a 64-bit system costs no more
than
a
32-bit
system
... which should I buy ... hmmm ... I just don't
know
...
let me
get
back to you on that ...

Oh! I know! 64-bit software is a pipe dream!
It'll
never
happen!