AMD Sempron ships

Keith wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:33:37 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:



Keith wrote:

[...]

True I just want a computer so I will stick to my Northwood.

You didn't research before you bought and now don't want to be told that
you made a mistake? Burry your head deeper. The world will ignore you.

Not a mistake. The Northwood was quite a good choice everything considered.
The performance issue is not as clear cut as you seem to suggest, you can
probably find favourable benchmarks in both directions, depending on which
team you belong.

You haven't been around here long, have you? Good grief! (as another
cartoon character, to be named later, once said)

I have also built using Northwoord, but belong to neither team.

Now there is a laugh! ...and on many levels! ;-))

Once the computer was completed, the processor type was not foremost
in my mind.

Well, duh! You're saying that once you made your decisions youu
didn't look back? At least you make *some* sense.

--
Keith

I know you're winding me up and it's stupid to answer your post. But what's
the big deal? Are the AMD light years ahead of the Intel Northwood at the
same affordable price? I doubt it. As I said, there are certainly arguments
and official benchmarks both ways - yes I said both ways. So far I've had
no problems with my Northwood system, not even minor niggles. It works and
I'm now getting on with interesting software projects. Have a nice day.

Lee Waun wrote:
No if we want to learn about AMD we can go research it. We don't need
you AMD lovers cramming it down our throats. If I want a space heater
for I computer I would have bought a AMD years ago. Now Intel has the
prescotts which are even better space heaters than the AMD's so once
again Intel is superior.

No, actually it's more like, historically comp.sys.intel was *never* just
about Intel. It was always about the architecture that Intel started. So
competing products that are compatible with Intel's products are on-topic.
When the group was originally started it seemed like a good idea to call it
"Intel", it seemed generic enough while being descriptive enough at the
time.

Similarly, a group called comp.sys.IBM.PC.hardware is not limited to the
discussion of IBM products, let alone IBM PC products. In fact, very little
IBM products discussions actually ever goes on in this group. Again, at the
time the group was created, it seemed like a good description, but that
market has evolved since then.

Yousuf Khan

"Keith" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:33:37 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:

You haven't been around here long, have you? Good grief! (as
another
cartoon character, to be named later, once said)

You're obviously referring to Amadeus Mozart Drobnik. Having failed
(despite his parents' expectations) as a professional musician, he
learned that there was a B-25 Mitchell twin-engine bomber stuck in the
side of the Empire State Building, a few floors beneith King Kong's
former perch. So he donned a colorful leotard-cap outfit, and rode
the elevator to the location of the stuck bomber.

Alas, while struggling heroically to displace the B-25, he slipped and
fell. The cape, a cheap Chinese knock-off, bore a label stating "If
cape fails to function properly, return to Pei Ping for free
replacement." Wouldn't you know it, the cape did malfunction in an
aerodynamic sense. Poor Drobnik.

[Sternly] Keith, you know better to bring up this Drobnik episode!
Obviously, AMD belongs in another newsgroup!

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 23:10:54 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote:

"Keith" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:33:37 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:

You haven't been around here long, have you? Good grief! (as
another
cartoon character, to be named later, once said)

You're obviously referring to Amadeus Mozart Drobnik.

Felger, you're always giving answers for free! Where's the fun in
teasing kidz when you soil the punch line? I doubt the kidz of today even
read Drobnik's strip in the Sunday comics. ...much less anything more
sophisticated.

Having failed
(despite his parents' expectations) as a professional musician, he
learned that there was a B-25 Mitchell twin-engine bomber stuck in the
side of the Empire State Building, a few floors beneith King Kong's
former perch. So he donned a colorful leotard-cap outfit, and rode the
elevator to the location of the stuck bomber.

Alas, while struggling heroically to displace the B-25, he slipped and
fell. The cape, a cheap Chinese knock-off, bore a label stating "If
cape fails to function properly, return to Pei Ping for free
replacement." Wouldn't you know it, the cape did malfunction in an
aerodynamic sense. Poor Drobnik.

Felg! We all know how badly GWB has screwed up the economy by sending
cape manufacturing off-shore, but can you really blame the
Chi-Comms on the Mitchell's navigation system too? oops, that was
Clinton that sold the INS stuff

[Sternly] Keith, you know better to bring up this Drobnik episode!
Obviously, AMD belongs in another newsgroup!

comp.sys.alternate.reality?

--
Keith

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 11:37:35 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:



Keith wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:33:37 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:



Keith wrote:

[...]

True I just want a computer so I will stick to my Northwood.

You didn't research before you bought and now don't want to be told that
you made a mistake? Burry your head deeper. The world will ignore you.

Not a mistake. The Northwood was quite a good choice everything considered.
The performance issue is not as clear cut as you seem to suggest, you can
probably find favourable benchmarks in both directions, depending on which
team you belong.

You haven't been around here long, have you? Good grief! (as another
cartoon character, to be named later, once said)

I have also built using Northwoord, but belong to neither team.

Now there is a laugh! ...and on many levels! ;-))

Once the computer was completed, the processor type was not foremost
in my mind.

Well, duh! You're saying that once you made your decisions youu
didn't look back? At least you make *some* sense.

--
Keith

I know you're winding me up and it's stupid to answer your post.

NOt as long as we understand each other. ;-)

But what's the big deal? Are the AMD light years ahead of the Intel Northwood at the
same affordable price? I doubt it.

Other than some specific uses, your doubts would be unsubstantiated. The
only place a P4 has *ever* had an advantage over an AMD processor is in
video streaming. ...and that advantage evaporates when one brings in
price. If you've been around the block here (.chips) a few times you
would have understood this. In short, if your business is video and
graphic-arts, buy an Apple. ;-)

As I said, there are certainly arguments
and official benchmarks both ways - yes I said both ways. So far I've
had no problems with my Northwood system, not even minor niggles.

SO far my AMD64 system has had nothign but clear-sailing too. So? Oh,
and my K6-II before that, and my IBM (Cyrix) before that (my Intel P5
*sucked*). OTOH, I do this stuff for a living, so understand the issues
more than common folk.

It
works and I'm now getting on with interesting software projects. Have a
nice day.

That's pleasing to know. You have lots-a-money doing what you do. Be
happy. ;-) ...but no one here is convinced that your Northwoord was the
best solution, at least based on your arguments so far. It is now, since
you've gone for it (sorta the "existance theorem").

--
Keith

Johannes H Andersen wrote:

Keith wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:33:37 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:



Keith wrote:

[...]

True I just want a computer so I will stick to my Northwood.

You didn't research before you bought and now don't want to be told that
you made a mistake? Burry your head deeper. The world will ignore you.

Not a mistake. The Northwood was quite a good choice everything considered.

Everything considered? Did you consider a 64 bit OS and 64 bit software????


The performance issue is not as clear cut as you seem to suggest, you can
probably find favourable benchmarks in both directions, depending on which
team you belong.

Read this review.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2065&p=1

Notice that in most instances a $290 Athlon 64 3400+ outperforms a
$420 Pentium 4 3.4ghz, often by a large margin, and the
Athlon 64 3400+ even beats the $1,000 Pentium 4 3.4 ghz EE chip in some
benchmarks. Keep in mind that the review only rates 32 bit performance
with a 32 bit OS. That is the lowest level of functionality of an Athlon 64.
The next step up is 32 bit software with a 64 bit OS, then the ultimate
performance is with 64 bit software using a 64 bit OS.



You haven't been around here long, have you? Good grief! (as another
cartoon character, to be named later, once said)

I have also built using Northwoord, but belong to neither team.

Now there is a laugh! ...and on many levels! ;-))

Once the computer was completed, the processor type was not foremost
in my mind.

Well, duh! You're saying that once you made your decisions youu
didn't look back? At least you make *some* sense.

--
Keith

I know you're winding me up and it's stupid to answer your post. But what's
the big deal? Are the AMD light years ahead of the Intel Northwood at the
same affordable price?

Yes. What will you do when you want to run 64 bit software? Throw out
your CPU and motherboard?


I doubt it. As I said, there are certainly arguments
and official benchmarks both ways - yes I said both ways. So far I've had
no problems with my Northwood system, not even minor niggles. It works and
I'm now getting on with interesting software projects.

Interesting software projects? It is a pity that none of them are 64 bit.


Have a nice day.

JK wrote:

Johannes H Andersen wrote:

Keith wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:33:37 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:



Keith wrote:

[...]

True I just want a computer so I will stick to my Northwood.

You didn't research before you bought and now don't want to be told that
you made a mistake? Burry your head deeper. The world will ignore you.

Not a mistake. The Northwood was quite a good choice everything considered.

Everything considered? Did you consider a 64 bit OS and 64 bit software????

No I didn't. I can't afford to buy new OS and new 64 bit compilers which will
cost a fortune, so I stick to what I've got at the moment, and it does the job
to everybody's satisfaction

The performance issue is not as clear cut as you seem to suggest, you can
probably find favourable benchmarks in both directions, depending on which
team you belong.

Read this review.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2065&p=1

Notice that in most instances a $290 Athlon 64 3400+ outperforms a
$420 Pentium 4 3.4ghz, often by a large margin, and the
Athlon 64 3400+ even beats the $1,000 Pentium 4 3.4 ghz EE chip in some
benchmarks. Keep in mind that the review only rates 32 bit performance
with a 32 bit OS. That is the lowest level of functionality of an Athlon 64.
The next step up is 32 bit software with a 64 bit OS, then the ultimate
performance is with 64 bit software using a 64 bit OS.

I don't have any of those Pentiums as described. My system is on a budget,
hence it's an P4 2.8/800 Northwood. The price of this CPU is predicted to
fall even further in this month, so I've probably paid over the odds, but
that's life in computing. I needed the system up and running and couldn't
wait.

[...]

I know you're winding me up and it's stupid to answer your post. But what's
the big deal? Are the AMD light years ahead of the Intel Northwood at the
same affordable price?

Yes. What will you do when you want to run 64 bit software? Throw out
your CPU and motherboard?

When the software comes - If I can afford it - If I really need it - But then
the old system will still be useful, just like my oldie computer at present.

I doubt it. As I said, there are certainly arguments
and official benchmarks both ways - yes I said both ways. So far I've had
no problems with my Northwood system, not even minor niggles. It works and
I'm now getting on with interesting software projects.

Interesting software projects? It is a pity that none of them are 64 bit.

Maybe for you, but my software is solving real problems in the real world.

Keith wrote:

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 11:37:35 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:



Keith wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 19:33:37 +0000, Johannes H Andersen wrote:



Keith wrote:

[...]

True I just want a computer so I will stick to my Northwood.

You didn't research before you bought and now don't want to be told that
you made a mistake? Burry your head deeper. The world will ignore you.

Not a mistake. The Northwood was quite a good choice everything considered.
The performance issue is not as clear cut as you seem to suggest, you can
probably find favourable benchmarks in both directions, depending on which
team you belong.

You haven't been around here long, have you? Good grief! (as another
cartoon character, to be named later, once said)

I have also built using Northwoord, but belong to neither team.

Now there is a laugh! ...and on many levels! ;-))

Once the computer was completed, the processor type was not foremost
in my mind.

Well, duh! You're saying that once you made your decisions youu
didn't look back? At least you make *some* sense.

--
Keith

I know you're winding me up and it's stupid to answer your post.

NOt as long as we understand each other. ;-)

But what's the big deal? Are the AMD light years ahead of the Intel Northwood at the
same affordable price? I doubt it.

Other than some specific uses, your doubts would be unsubstantiated. The
only place a P4 has *ever* had an advantage over an AMD processor is in
video streaming. ...and that advantage evaporates when one brings in
price. If you've been around the block here (.chips) a few times you
would have understood this. In short, if your business is video and
graphic-arts, buy an Apple. ;-)

As I said, there are certainly arguments
and official benchmarks both ways - yes I said both ways. So far I've
had no problems with my Northwood system, not even minor niggles.

SO far my AMD64 system has had nothign but clear-sailing too. So? Oh,
and my K6-II before that, and my IBM (Cyrix) before that (my Intel P5
*sucked*). OTOH, I do this stuff for a living, so understand the issues
more than common folk.

It
works and I'm now getting on with interesting software projects. Have a
nice day.

That's pleasing to know. You have lots-a-money doing what you do. Be
happy. ;-) ...but no one here is convinced that your Northwoord was the
best solution, at least based on your arguments so far. It is now, since
you've gone for it (sorta the "existance theorem").

Well, eh yes in a way. Maybe I should also build an AMD system, just to
keep people happy and be able to support that I've nothing against AMD.
On the contrary, the Prescott flamed grill seems to be a roasted pig.
I hope that Intel will eventually develop the Pentium M into a desktop
processor. Perhaps the market will split into 32 bit low power and
64 bit high power consumption processors.

The arguments here seem to always take a strange turn. If I can paraphrase
the line of battle:

P: "I've now got a P4C 2.8/800 that support dual channel"

A: "AMD64 has also dual channel support and it's on chip and much better"

P: "But that's only the higher range"

A: "But then you should get the higher range, we pros don't bother with low
end stuff"

P: "But my Intel chip works fine, and I've seen benchmarks in favour"

A: "But higher AMD64 beats higher Pentiums, i.e. my dad can beat your dad"

Johannes H Andersen wrote:

JK wrote:

[SNIP]

Interesting software projects? It is a pity that none of them are 64 bit.


Maybe for you, but my software is solving real problems in the real world.

I've solved some real world problems that didn't need 64bit addressing
but they *really* flew SIMD style with 64bit registers as opposed to
32bit... That was back in 1996 too, pretty sure printing presses are
still running so I figure that real world problem will still be there
too.

If your business is compiling you might want to consider AMD (XP or A64)
in preference to P4 chips anyway. The AMD chips seem to offer far better
bang for buck in that department.

Cheers,
Rupert

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 10:09:14 GMT, Johannes H Andersen
wrote:
Everything considered? Did you consider a 64 bit OS and 64 bit software????

No I didn't. I can't afford to buy new OS and new 64 bit compilers which will
cost a fortune, so I stick to what I've got at the moment, and it does the job
to everybody's satisfaction

Tony dons his flame-proof suit

Well the obviously answer here is that you should be running Linux and
using the free GCC compiler! :

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca