AMD vs Pentium

[SewerBeing]

the new amd athlons dont overheat anything like 2400+, does not have heating issues, the new p4s do have heating issues, there are many factors in how much heat a cpu puts out. Right now its Intels turn to cool down their cpus. Unfortunatly, the latest p4's are still faster then the latest athlons, its the sad truth. If you want the absolute fastest get a p4ee (not e but ee (extreme edition))

 

[xxdryicexx]

I was mainly aiming at the amd's before the 64 bits came out.. the 1800+, 2000+, all the way till 3200+.. all had overheating problems

 

[SewerBeing]

dude I'm using a athlon 2500+ and with stock cooling it never went over 44C, my room is about 86F, do the math. Oh yeah, my athlon is overclocked to 2.2ghz (200x11). 2400-3200 athlons dont have heating problems

 

[xxdryicexx]

if your room is 87 farenhite, then you have a pretty cold friggin room..

what is your temperatures when under heavy load..

 

[SewerBeing]

44c on stock cooling, minimal case airflow. ah dude 87F is 31C thats pretty warm.

 

[GameGURU]

Not really.. pentiums make excelent game pc's.. have you read anything I have just wrote, or do you do nothing but repeat what yuo hear from the internet or your buddies, whatever..

It is just that AMD rocks over intel. Line up the benchmarks and you will see what the diff. is. AMD is more for the personal use of gaming and quality performance. Intel seems more for the corporate quality and performance. Either way I like them both and you cant go wrong either way.

 

[SewerBeing]

You are right, AMD rules for gaming the benchmarks prove it, the p4s rule at encoding, decoding and just those kinds of applications (movies and stuff). I dont think there is a difference quality wise.

 

[xxdryicexx]

I dunno, I know for a fact the amd's are faster but I am having no problem playing games like joint ops (150 players medium/hgih graphics) farcry, high settings, etc.. without any problems..

The 3200+ is only 15% faster then the 2.8 at stock speeds, and I know for a fact that the intel is more reliable to overclock to be faster then the 3200+ because it runs cooler.. 3 of my friends have 3200+'s

 

[WQ87]

I dunno, I know for a fact the amd's are faster but I am having no problem playing games like joint ops (150 players medium/hgih graphics) farcry, high settings, etc.. without any problems..

The 3200+ is only 15% faster then the 2.8 at stock speeds, and I know for a fact that the intel is more reliable to overclock to be faster then the 3200+ because it runs cooler.. 3 of my friends have 3200+'s

You have a Northwood and those are known to run pretty cool. Too bad their reign ended at 3.4ghz, which cleared the road and made way for the Prescotts. Prescotts heat up horribly and they aren't much different to the Northwood in terms of performance. I have a Northwood 2.2ghz and a 3200, and yes, from experience the Northwood is cooler, but my friend's Prescott runs hotter than my 3200.

Intel maybe reliable... maybe for the Northwood but hell, look at the Prescotts; they could either perform on par or worse than the Northwood and/or heat up alot more but that doesn't make it any better for intel's reputation. Did you see the new LGA 775? They don't even allow overclocking. Worse is that it's 100x harder to install it than a 478 chip and could possibly ruin the mobo's pins (yes, 775 is made to be backward). They did all this just for 0.2ghz increase! That will definately ruin their reputation and change the enthusiastic gaming world point-of-view of intel.

 

[xxdryicexx]

I agree, WQ.. prescott messed things up from the get go at 3.4 ghz.. i have been on many forums and have saved countless amounts of people from getting prescotts.. they have horrible overheating problems..

And you are right, it does give intel a bad name, but if a person is seriouse about getting good gaming performance, the lease he/she should know is what models to get.. its like a commanding pirate going on to sea but doesnt know how to swing his cutlass..

But I totally agree with you though..