If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Ancra wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 00:51:52 -0400, Stacey wrote: Lets see something recent that claims a 3200 AMD chips outperforms a 3.0-800 P4 much less deserves it's inflated rating.. Some standard winmark benchmark will do that nicely, I think. 6% faster, actually. Unreal Tournament also runs faster, faster than the 3.2-800 as well, FYI. Guess it depends on who tested it? http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1834&p=8 But that is beside the point, as the 3.06 and 3.2 really does have the edge on many modern apps and most modern benchmarks. Not much of an edge, but the P4 _IS_ faster. ...on that. Now for the $64000 question: How many P4-code-optimized apps do you have, and rely on heavily? How many do you intend to buy before replacing your current computer? Yep and for people who don't use modern apps that are P4 coded I always sugest using an AMD. What jerks my chain is when people like JK contsantly proclaim AMD are the best at everything no matter what. http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1834 "The review community unanimously agreed that the processor was not deserving of its 3200+ rating, but none were as infuriated by AMD's model number than the folks at Intel. That citation is part of an argumentative article that doesn't offer any testresults that actually support the expressed opinions. Guess you missed the pages of benchmarks? :-) Some claims, in the article, are also quite off mark as well. Such as the statement that the 'Northwood' core has meant that the P4 is more competitive. That's largely nonsens. Northwood is only slightly more efficient than the Willamette. IMHO what changed was the chipsets, especially the DDR solutions. The early 845 boards were pathetic and that's what most people bought. What has happened since the Northwood release, is that the benchmark collections, used in comparisions, have changed. Changed to emphasize streaming instructions, and have also been recompiled for P4 code optimisation. So has the software being sold? I have been fooled twice. I have acquired two P4's. Both have been dissapointments (I have Athlons to compare with). They sure arn't the right choice for some people and for some people they are, see above. I don't believe in HT, I don't believe in 800FSB, I don't believe in extremetech, I don't believe in the P4 anymore. No matter what some testers cook up. I've been burned before as well. I just don't think being totally "Push one brand on people" is being honest to the people asking for advice. -- Stacey |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
JK wrote:
Stacey wrote: But is rated at 3200. Like I said this rating in inflated compared to what it can actually do. Even your links prove this point. Thanx! It depends on what software is being run. So when an intel chip is twice as fast in certain apps, Intel should make up a 2X number for theirs? -- Stacey |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 02:44:55 -0400, Stacey wrote:
Ancra wrote: On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 00:51:52 -0400, Stacey wrote: Lets see something recent that claims a 3200 AMD chips outperforms a 3.0-800 P4 much less deserves it's inflated rating.. Some standard winmark benchmark will do that nicely, I think. 6% faster, actually. Unreal Tournament also runs faster, faster than the 3.2-800 as well, FYI. Guess it depends on who tested it? http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1834&p=8 You know, that could reflect very poorly on 'anandtech'. Some claims, in the article, are also quite off mark as well. Such as the statement that the 'Northwood' core has meant that the P4 is more competitive. That's largely nonsens. Northwood is only slightly more efficient than the Willamette. IMHO what changed was the chipsets, especially the DDR solutions. The early 845 boards were pathetic and that's what most people bought. Well, I think I too, actually did mention that. What has happened since the Northwood release, is that the benchmark collections, used in comparisions, have changed. Changed to emphasize streaming instructions, and have also been recompiled for P4 code optimisation. So has the software being sold? Oh yes, and that is the justification offered. That is still possible to question, because not all apps can take any advantage of P4 code. Code that contains lots of conditional instructions or DP FP for example. But never mind, because my point wasn't to question that. My point was that it was this, rather than the Northwood core that made the P4 start to show up better. I've been burned before as well. I just don't think being totally "Push one brand on people" is being honest to the people asking for advice. True, I should perhaps not have expressed my break with the P4 so emphatically. Actually I think both Strontium and I may have had a similar experience: Moving up to a radically faster machine, while also changing brand. Even if we went totally different ways. ancra |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Ancra wrote:
So has the software being sold? Oh yes, and that is the justification offered. That is still possible to question, because not all apps can take any advantage of P4 code. Sure and if you're not able to use it, there is no reason at all to buy a P4. Code that contains lots of conditional instructions or DP FP for example. But never mind, because my point wasn't to question that. My point was that it was this, rather than the Northwood core that made the P4 start to show up better. Same thing is going to be true of the AMD64. When code starts being written for it, it will probably pull ahead. Until then it's probably not going to be a big deal. I've been burned before as well. I just don't think being totally "Push one brand on people" is being honest to the people asking for advice. True, I should perhaps not have expressed my break with the P4 so emphatically. Actually I think both Strontium and I may have had a similar experience: Moving up to a radically faster machine, while also changing brand. Even if we went totally different ways. Yep. :-) Not saying your experience isn't real and since it sounds like you were using a low memory bandwidth board I bet it was a disappointment. A good chip on a bad board can equal disappointment. I sure was bummed by a few Via/AMD systems which had nothing to do with the processor. -- Stacey |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
JK wrote:
Stacey wrote: Yep and for people who don't use modern apps that are P4 coded I always sugest using an AMD. What jerks my chain is when people like JK contsantly proclaim AMD are the best at everything no matter what. They usually provide the best performance at each price point for most applications. What a shock you'd post that... I notice that you tend to dwell on the exceptions of the exceptions, namely the applications that Athlon XP has the weakest relative performance, Sure I "dwell" on it when someone specifically asks for a system to mainly run that type of software. You on the other hand argue that they should instead buy an AMD (what a shock!@) even though they specifically said they want to run software which even you know runs MUCH faster on a P4. So instead of getting an optimal system, you PUSH them to buy another AMD chip which you have previously stated is your reason for posting here. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=shill&r=67 -- Stacey |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 00:17:43 -0400, Stacey wrote:
Sure and if you're not able to use it, there is no reason at all to buy a P4. - Hrmmpf, ehum. Actually I think my case is defensible. There's all kinds of reasons when you put together a system: First you need to understand that I buy cheap systems, below the cutting edge. But more frequent. That way I get 2 PC's for the price of one. And the second, of those, is going to at least as fast as the first one would have been. I need several computers so that strategy makes lots of sense. There won't be a big differense between my PC's. (My 3000+ is closer to the high end than I've ever been before.) Today I'm quite happy with my 700Athlon. It's been my best PC investmment to date. It's performance was mindblowing at the start, and has hanged in there for a very long time. (actually, I'm typing this on it) But when I got it, It was my first non Intel system, and I was in panic about it's heat and noise. It was terrible. That was the big reason for choosing a P4 next time. My second P4 had a bigger L2 cache, just like the 700Ath, ran almost 1GHz faster than the 1.5GHz, and there was all this Northwood hype going around, that offered me an explanation for the poor showing of my 1.5GHz. And it looked good in benchmarks. (and it does games and video well, in fairness) At this time there had emerged a lot of concerns about Athlons cooling and noiselevels, in newsgroups and articles. So naturally, I was still scared of Athlons. ancra |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Ancra wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 00:17:43 -0400, Stacey wrote: Sure and if you're not able to use it, there is no reason at all to buy a P4. - Hrmmpf, ehum. Actually I think my case is defensible. There's all kinds of reasons when you put together a system: If you're not using P4's code, an AMD is faster for the same money.. My second P4 had a bigger L2 cache, just like the 700Ath, ran almost 1GHz faster than the 1.5GHz, and there was all this Northwood hype going around, that offered me an explanation for the poor showing of my 1.5GHz. And it looked good in benchmarks. Bet those good benchmarks weren't using a low memory bandwidth mobo... -- Stacey |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Geforce 6800 drivers | Glitch | General | 3 | December 13th 04 09:30 AM |
Performance Comparison: Nvidia Fx 5200 or GeForce 4 Ti 4200 | Falcon1209 | General | 13 | October 30th 04 02:26 AM |
Elsa Geforce 256 64 Megs AGP Any Good? | [email protected] | General | 1 | February 4th 04 06:06 PM |
ASUS GeForce FX 9950 Overclocking question... | gogulo | Overclocking | 3 | October 13th 03 06:54 PM |
Agp 4x, MSI K7T (6330) Lite, Geforce 2 GTS PRO | kcirevam | Overclocking AMD Processors | 0 | August 4th 03 05:50 AM |