knuckle50 said: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.
str8lazy 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 @$$). Therefore making sluggish performance
I am gonna have to say go AMD 64bit with a 939 socket. In my opnion you get the most bang for your buck.
YourPrinter said:rofl bang for ur buck compared to what? the 939's start at 500$ and up
northwood: extreme ocer'
amd xp's: budget
amd 64: expensive performance
slvrstang said:northwood: good Ocer
AMD XP's: budget
AMD 64 754: great bang for buck/lack upgradability
AMD 64 939: poor bang for buck/ will be upgradable for a long time
str8lazy said:I wasnt reffering to the 939 as the best bang for your buck, but AMD in general. I was saying that I am gonna get a 939 cuz that can kick any p4's @$$. Sorry for the poor wording of my sentences