Athlon 64 CPUs are expensive.. starting around 400-800 dollars US
i would say that as of this moment: intel is the best bang for the bang if you know how to overclock... my main computer is an intel 2.4c running at 3.36ghz and the FSB is around 1100mhz since i have increased the memory bandwidth.
At these new high speed cpus... bandwidth makes way more difference then a few mhz of cpu speed... i would say that 2.6ghz 400mhz is slower then a 2.4ghz 800mhz... the fact that intel has dual channel rams... the FSB is running even double what is rated... you will see by testing with sandra that memory bandwidth is way higher on intel compared to amd.. usually double the amount. The Cpu speeds can oc very well... a 2.4 hitting 3.36 means its almost 1ghz more (and this is with stock voltage and stock HSF)... i understand that AMD bartons can do almost hte same.. but usually require very good cooling and also very good ram... even with taht.. the bandwidth is still lower then the intel... therefore if you are getting a computer that is above intel 2.4c ghz computer then go with intel... the bandwidth will make the big difference... dual channel ram is a big plus and hyperthreading greatly improves multi-tasking...
i would only recommend AMD if you are short on cash and need one of those under 500 dollar computers...
Last edited by [UCLA]lee0539; 28th September 2003 at 04:45 AM.
I have seen so many computers come in here because they burned out from being over clocked, I don't recommend anyone trying to overclock a system even for a few mhz.......
as i have BOTH a p4 2.6GHZ and an AMD Athlon XP 2.6 GHZ my AMD runs much better. P4 tends to lag up once in a while
IF you want to go for professionality, Intel All the way
BTW the new centrino is impressing me.
So you are saying that Intel systems are overpriced aren't you?
I strongly disagree with your comments on AMD processors and know many others who will as well.
no.. i said intel is overpriced in the low end of the market.. in high end systems they end up being equal... but intel still has a benefit with hyperthreading and dual channel ram... they support much faster FSB
i didnt say anythign bad about AMD processors, im just making the point that they arent faster (they used to be during the 1ghz-1.4ghz competition).. in fact my previous system was an AMD processor... so dont say im promoting intel simply because i have an intel system at the moment... (im curious if you have even tried an intel p4 canterwood system) i am fan of both cpus.. but by simply understanding benchmarks with sandra, 3dmark03, and many others.. the end results show that intel is faster in the higher end of the market for a very similar price...
i dont know what ur talking about when u say disagree with my comment on AMD cpus... cuz i didnt say anythign about them except that they have lower bandwidth... and if ur gonna argue that they have same or higher bandwidth then intel... you need to show me some links or information as to how AMD is better, if your gonna make comments like that.. cuz from what i know there is no way AMD can beat intel's higher FSB and dual channel ram in the bandwidth arena.... i also said tehy run hotter... and that is also true because they dont have a large surface area like intel so HSF contact is lower... therefore more heat...
even with such things... another big benefit is hyperthreading.. which allows you to multitask and increase performance on programs that are multithreaded... this is something i found myself loving cuz of the huge difference i see when opening multiple programs all at once...
Last edited by [UCLA]lee0539; 29th September 2003 at 09:36 PM.
another big benefit is hyperthreading.. which allows you to multitask and increase performance on programs that are multithreaded... this is something i found myself loving cuz of the huge difference i see when opening multiple programs all at once...
According to tests done by AMD the Intel processors ran faster with hyperthreading off!
I find that rather strange unless hyperthreading is just a sales pitch at the moment. By the way, hyperthreading is more geared for games than general applications.
well when i run my tv tuner usually it uses all 100% but when i look it takes up only 50% by splitting the application.. then i'm allowed to use the other half for something else... similar to having a dual system...
i also wouldn't use the inquirer to make any statement.. especially something done by AMD (which will be even more biased)...
here is one from tomshardware.com (can't post link: howto/20030527/ip4_adapter-14.html is the extension)
"With regard to performance, only Hyper-Threading can be recommended; the benchmarks are proof positive of the obvious advantages of this technology. It is not by accident that Intel will soon introduce other Pentium 4 CPUs, which offer HT at even lower clock rates.
[justify]Arguments in favor of the PowerLeap adapter solution are the simple installation and the presumably low price: if you take into account the cost for a Pentium 4 with Hyper-Threading, an estimated $20 is suddenly not such a high price to pay. In any case, you should choose an accommodating dealer, who will accept a return of the adapter if the upgrade does not work out. "
[/justify]
Location: from the deepest inner mind to the outer limits
Posts: 7,367
Blessings: 66,243
Reps: 26,771 (power: 40)
Originally Posted by Apologist
I find that rather strange unless hyperthreading is just a sales pitch at the moment. By the way, hyperthreading is more geared for games than general applications.
i also wouldn't use the inquirer to make any statement.. especially something done by AMD (which will be even more biased)...
AMD was HELPING not being biased. If they wanted to be biased they would have left the hyperthreading on but they said it was slower. Also, that article was at more sites than just that inquirer site, I just posted it because it was a little longer. Do a search with Google and you will see.
I didn't say hyperthreading was not a good technology, it is just not being implemented yet as software needs to be written to take advantage of it.
Technology moves so fast anyhow that it will be obsolete by next year.
By the way, I live in the Silicon Valley so most of these companies are within 20 miles of me.
__________________ "Truth is so obscure in these times and falsehood so established, that unless we love the truth, we cannot know it." -Blaise Pascal
Last edited by Apologist; 1st October 2003 at 12:32 AM.
![[UCLA]lee0539's Avatar](http://www.christianforums.com/cache/avatars/Jesus Lives.gif)
![[UCLA]lee0539 is offline](/style/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
![[UCLA]lee0539 is on a distinguished road](/style/reputation/reputation_green.gif)
Linear Mode
