AMD future

Sounds like an Intel apologist. 'Sorry, Intel is so lame...but buy me
anyway'! Sickening to listen too.



"The Spectre" wrote in message
.. .

"LBJGH" wrote in message
le.rogers.com...
1. Well the current P4 3.2 is slower than the Athlon64 3200+.

Not when you OVERCLOCK it its not!

2. Using 64bit software the P4 will be even more behind.

There is almost ZERO 64 bit software available and by the time MS releases
a
64 bit OS and vendor re-compile or write 64 bit software it will be 2
years
and time to upgrade again! And that is if MS is not being overly
optomistic
about its release which is shure to be buggy as hell in V1.0 .

3. The Athlon doesn't have a FSB per say... but if you want to talk in
Intel
terms (i.e. 200mhz fsb quad pumped... not really 800mhz fsb) the Athlon
would be something like 1600mhz fsb.

Not sure about the FSB thing but someone may be able to elaborate on this
comment. However, there are P4's well over 260 FSB and are stable on a day
to day basis not to mention the exotic ones going even higher. From my
understanding the P4 usually tounces the AMD 64s on FSB bandwith, please
correct me if I am wrong.

4. The Athlon64/FX will give you better benchmark results to impress
your
friends.

Its not benchmarks I am worried about but benchmarks are valid reference
points.

5. The Athlon64/FX can have the multiplier adjusted with software where
as
all P4 are multiplier locked.

TRUE

"The Spectre" wrote in message
.. .
Hey guys just want to get some feed back. My last 3 comouters have all
been
AMD home builts but my next one may not be. I will be building a new
computer to replace my aging 2200+ and I have to say unless something
fantastic happens its gonna be Intel inside.

No one needs 64 bit computing
The intel P4 overclocks like mad
A 1Gz+ gap is getting harder and harder for AMD to overcome
New P4's will have added instructions
P4 front side bus is bigger
Most benchmarks show P4 ahead
Finally, upcomming Prescott on reduced die size

I want to stay with AMD but anyone know something I don't?




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.552 / Virus Database: 344 - Release Date: 12/15/2003

Sounds like an Intel apologist. 'Sorry, Intel is so lame...but buy me
anyway'! Sickening to listen too.



"The Spectre" wrote in message
.. .

"LBJGH" wrote in message
le.rogers.com...
1. Well the current P4 3.2 is slower than the Athlon64 3200+.

Not when you OVERCLOCK it its not!

2. Using 64bit software the P4 will be even more behind.

There is almost ZERO 64 bit software available and by the time MS releases
a
64 bit OS and vendor re-compile or write 64 bit software it will be 2
years
and time to upgrade again! And that is if MS is not being overly
optomistic
about its release which is shure to be buggy as hell in V1.0 .

3. The Athlon doesn't have a FSB per say... but if you want to talk in
Intel
terms (i.e. 200mhz fsb quad pumped... not really 800mhz fsb) the Athlon
would be something like 1600mhz fsb.

Not sure about the FSB thing but someone may be able to elaborate on this
comment. However, there are P4's well over 260 FSB and are stable on a day
to day basis not to mention the exotic ones going even higher. From my
understanding the P4 usually tounces the AMD 64s on FSB bandwith, please
correct me if I am wrong.

4. The Athlon64/FX will give you better benchmark results to impress
your
friends.

Its not benchmarks I am worried about but benchmarks are valid reference
points.

5. The Athlon64/FX can have the multiplier adjusted with software where
as
all P4 are multiplier locked.

TRUE

"The Spectre" wrote in message
.. .
Hey guys just want to get some feed back. My last 3 comouters have all
been
AMD home builts but my next one may not be. I will be building a new
computer to replace my aging 2200+ and I have to say unless something
fantastic happens its gonna be Intel inside.

No one needs 64 bit computing
The intel P4 overclocks like mad
A 1Gz+ gap is getting harder and harder for AMD to overcome
New P4's will have added instructions
P4 front side bus is bigger
Most benchmarks show P4 ahead
Finally, upcomming Prescott on reduced die size

I want to stay with AMD but anyone know something I don't?




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.552 / Virus Database: 344 - Release Date: 12/15/2003

The Spectre wrote:

Hey guys just want to get some feed back. My last 3 comouters have all been
AMD home builts but my next one may not be. I will be building a new
computer to replace my aging 2200+ and I have to say unless something
fantastic happens its gonna be Intel inside.

No one needs 64 bit computing

64-bit computing WILL be the wave of the future just like
16-bit supplanted 8-bit and 32-bit supplanted 16-bit.

More importantly, the AMD Athlon 64 FX-51 offers the
best *32-bit* performance as well. All you need to do is
look at the review sites (minus the biased Tom's
Hardware) or the last several issues of any of a number
of computer magazines to see.

The FX-51's benchmarks are scorching.

The intel P4 overclocks like mad

Ace's Hardware shows what the FX-51's performance
is like when overclocked from 2.2Ghz to 2.8Ghz.

Even a 2.2Ghz FX-51 can put the P4EE to shame
(as evidenced in a recent head to head comparison
in CPU magazine).

A 1Gz+ gap is getting harder and harder for AMD to overcome

The K8 and even the K7 does so much more per
clock cycle, this is moot. It is like bragging your
four cylinder car is running at a higher RPM on the
highway than the V8 next to you. Intels rev higher
but only because they are weaker per cycle.

New P4's will have added instructions

Yup, I hear that Intel will add AMD64 following AMD's
lead. So much for 64-bit being no use. ;-)

P4 front side bus is bigger

This is not true. The P4's link to the Northbridge is
at 6.4GB/sec which is the same as the Athlon 64
(both FX and non-FX versions) HT link to the
chipset. The difference is that on the P4, this
bandwidth is saturated with memory traffic. With
the FX-51, the memory controller is on-die
providing a separate 6.4GB/sec communication
with memory.

In short, the AMD Athlon 64 FX-51 dominates here.

These kinds of busses should be described in
throughput (GB/sec) but if want to use Intel
terminology (ie. if you describe the Intel bus as
800Mhz), then the Athlon 64 FX-51 has a
"1600Mhz FSB."

Terminology is not quite accurate (should really
read 1600MT/sec HT link) but sometimes the
only way to get the message accross to the
Intel fan. ;-)

Most benchmarks show P4 ahead

Are you kidding? The FX-51 smokes the P4, even
the Extreme Edition. And I'm not talking about
biased Tom's Hardware comparison. The recent
issue of CPU magazine has a fair comparison.

Finally, upcomming Prescott on reduced die size

I want to stay with AMD but anyone know something I don't?

AMD will run on 90nm by that time too so where's
the problem?

Even Cray is using AMD's Opteron processors to
build the Redstorm supercomputer for the US
Government. If the technology is good enough for
Cray and good enough for the government, where's
the problem?

"The Spectre" wrote:

From my
understanding the P4 usually tounces the AMD 64s on FSB bandwith, please
correct me if I am wrong.

Wrong.

On the Athlon 64 and Opteron, the FSB is replaced by
the HT link to the chipset. This HT link no longer
carries memory traffic and can pump 6.4GB/sec just
like Intel's P4 FSB. It consists of two 16-bit sublinks
running in opposite directions for a total of 1600MT/sec
(mega transfers per second). In comparison, the P4
has a FSB 64-bits wide operating at 800MT/sec but
it does carry memory traffic.

Memory traffic on the Athlon 64 FX-51 is controlled
via an on-die dual channel memory controller with
a 6.4GB/sec throughput connected directly to
memory.

So let's see, P4 has no on-die memory controller
so latency is greater. Bandwidth is the same
(6.4GB/sec) but the P4 has to go through the FSB
to access memory whereas the FX-51 does not.

The results are quite simply the FX-51 BLOWS
AWAY the P4 in memory performance and (only
important to Intel fans but nice anyway) AMD
also has bragging rights...1600 is a bigger number
than 800 (sometimes the only thing an Intel fan
will understand.

In article ,
says...

Heisenberg computing, you never know how fast it is or where you put it.

You'd know one or the other, just not both at the same time.

--
AMD Athlon 64 3200+
MSI K8T NEO FIS2R
Corsair TWINX1024-3200C2PRO matched pair
PNY Verto GeForce FX 5900 SE
Maxtor 160GB SATA 7200 8MB
Emprex DVD Dual 8x DVDRW
LG 16x DVD
Antec TruePower PSU 350W
Windows XP Home
Microsoft Wireless Keyboard and Optical mouse
Total Cost: $1556.94, All bought at Fry's Electronics
at retail costs. Would have been cheaper if bought online.

Try to beat that with the latest Intel crap!


"Neil" wrote in message
e.rogers.com...
The Spectre wrote:

Hey guys just want to get some feed back. My last 3 comouters have all
been AMD home builts but my next one may not be. I will be building a
new
computer to replace my aging 2200+ and I have to say unless something
fantastic happens its gonna be Intel inside.

No one needs 64 bit computing
The intel P4 overclocks like mad
A 1Gz+ gap is getting harder and harder for AMD to overcome
New P4's will have added instructions
P4 front side bus is bigger
Most benchmarks show P4 ahead
Finally, upcomming Prescott on reduced die size

I want to stay with AMD but anyone know something I don't?


Well you can go a 3000+ A64 for resonable cost with a new board.
Persoanlly
I run both platforms a NF2 2500+@3200+ and a p4 2.4@3 gig at 250 fsb, one
advantage of the p4 is it is almost a silent system, the amd is
watercooled or would be too noisey for my liking.

Don't get high hopes on Prescott tough. Only good it will do is intruduce
new plateforms where we can run Nortwoods on, only faster.
It has some serious issues with electrochemistry, also those (even more)
lengthed pipelines will give reduced performance per clockrate. Remember how
P4 1,6 was outclassed by almost all other 1,6GHz cpu's? Even
athlon1,2/duron1,3 were a LOT faster than (on papir)faster P4.

Get XP 64 at 3000+. That or opteron.


"Mike" wrote in message
news:IQiYb.100$nI1.51@okepread05...


--
AMD Athlon 64 3200+
MSI K8T NEO FIS2R
Corsair TWINX1024-3200C2PRO matched pair
PNY Verto GeForce FX 5900 SE
Maxtor 160GB SATA 7200 8MB
Emprex DVD Dual 8x DVDRW
LG 16x DVD
Antec TruePower PSU 350W
Windows XP Home
Microsoft Wireless Keyboard and Optical mouse
Total Cost: $1556.94, All bought at Fry's Electronics
at retail costs. Would have been cheaper if bought online.

Try to beat that with the latest Intel crap!


"Neil" wrote in message
e.rogers.com...
The Spectre wrote:

Hey guys just want to get some feed back. My last 3 comouters have all
been AMD home builts but my next one may not be. I will be building a
new
computer to replace my aging 2200+ and I have to say unless something
fantastic happens its gonna be Intel inside.

No one needs 64 bit computing
The intel P4 overclocks like mad
A 1Gz+ gap is getting harder and harder for AMD to overcome
New P4's will have added instructions
P4 front side bus is bigger
Most benchmarks show P4 ahead
Finally, upcomming Prescott on reduced die size

I want to stay with AMD but anyone know something I don't?


Well you can go a 3000+ A64 for resonable cost with a new board.
Persoanlly
I run both platforms a NF2 2500+@3200+ and a p4 2.4@3 gig at 250 fsb,
one
advantage of the p4 is it is almost a silent system, the amd is
watercooled or would be too noisey for my liking.