Athlon 64 Or INtel P4 ?
- Thread starter kevinG
- Start date
- Status
Northbridge
In Runtime
- Messages
- 149
Intel is selling 478 prescotts to appeal to the casual pc buyer . The buyer will think since its a later version of a 478 that it will be better than a Northwood . Here's an example: you'll see an ad on the internet specifically saying a 478 board is presscot ready . All 478 boards are prescott ready so the main center of the ad is the prescott. This is a good way for Intel to make a quick buck .
Personally I think Intel would be a lot better off if they tweaked the Pentium M architechture and based all there processors off of it . This way they could be like AMD and there would once again be a MHz to MHz comparison between AMD and Intel processors . The Prescott and Pentium M are like a liberal and a conservative compared . I think Intel may have to change their architechture eventually because their speed increases in processors have declined and are taking a lot longer than they used totoput out faster processors . Intel has been going on 200 MHz increases for a long time and when you get as far up in GHz as they are a 200 MHz increases is almost neglgiible but on an AMD you can tell a bigger difference with a 200 MHz increase.
I'm an AMD fan .
Personally I think Intel would be a lot better off if they tweaked the Pentium M architechture and based all there processors off of it . This way they could be like AMD and there would once again be a MHz to MHz comparison between AMD and Intel processors . The Prescott and Pentium M are like a liberal and a conservative compared . I think Intel may have to change their architechture eventually because their speed increases in processors have declined and are taking a lot longer than they used totoput out faster processors . Intel has been going on 200 MHz increases for a long time and when you get as far up in GHz as they are a 200 MHz increases is almost neglgiible but on an AMD you can tell a bigger difference with a 200 MHz increase.
I'm an AMD fan .
No, its not a marketing plot. The purpose of Prescotts is that Intel can make much faster rocessors with the Prescott core, up to 4.2 ghz I've heard, while the Northwood core cannot go higher than 3.4 ghz. In reality the Prescott is not that bad, once you get up to 3.6 ghz it outperforms the Northwood. This is the purpose of it, because even though it runs hotter, most people won't care about that, because they don't overclock. They are just happy it runs faster. You have to remember that the vast majority of Intels processors are bought by companies like Dell, only a few are sold off for people to build their own.
Yeah, I agree, I am a Northwood enthusiast all the way. I'm just trying to tell people that the things people say about the Prescott that are bad really go too far. Its really not that bad a processor, and I've actually seen that a 2.8e (Prescott) will get a stable overclock farther than a 2.8c (Northwood) on STOCK COOLING, without changing the voltage. The Northwood only made it to about 3.25 ghz, while the Prescott made it to 3.43 or something like that. And when the EE gets cheap, hell yeah I'm gonna buy it!
str8lazy
In Runtime
- Messages
- 446
knuckle50 said:
that is prolly why dells and other computer that come prebuilt suck so much, because that thing can make some heat, and then it cant get released from the case(because pre-built cooling sux @$$). Therefore making sluggish performance
I am gonna have to say go AMD 64bit with a 939 socket. In my opnion you get the most bang for your buck.
- Status
