XP 2500+ vs. P4 2.4 GHz

[PizzatheHut06]

I was reading reviews on newegg of the P4 2.4 GHz 800 FSB and here is what some guy said...

"The P4 2.4C is the Intel equivalent of the Barton 2500+... that is to say it is an extremely good overclocker available at a small fraction of the price of each brand's respective flagship CPU. However, once you factor in the 800MHz FSB and HyperThreading, this CPU will easily compete with the XP3000+ to 3200+ at stock speeds... and when overclocked, will blow any AMD right out of the water. All for $170"

Will the P4 really compete with the XP 3000+ and XP 3200+ all at stock speeds? I thought I had seen benchmarks where the XP 2500+ beats the P4 2.4 GHz, but I could be wrong.

 

[didi]

for editing purpose sure P4 win, but in gaming, P4 sure lose.

 

[Regulus]

Whoa, Whoa, AMD out does Intel in gaming? How so? I know that AMD has some crazy FSB speeds, but Intel has some higher clock speeds. AMD is cheaper too, but I heard that Intel also is better quality and won't give as much problems as AMD. Which is better?

 

[BxSlipSk8718]

Amd is better, I have to go over this every 1 AMD uses quataspeed tech its liek a video card that uses more pipe lines so it need to use less clock speed to out do another card or chip with a higher clockspeed exp: my freinds 9600XT has a 500MHz clock speed and 4 pip lines (intel p4 2.4) and my card has 380MHZ (8 pipelins) mines would win more pipe lines think of it yeterday

 

[regeisle]

There's NO WAY to simple say AMD is better, or INTEL is better. It all depends on what you're using the computer for. Figure that out first, and find some appropriate benchmarks. The reason this question (AMD vs. INTEL) gets posted every other day is because people just say random crap to support their buying decisions. Obviously, if you've used AMD all your life, and have had no problems, you'll say AMD is best. If you just went out and bought a $250 P4, you're not likely to come on and say bad things about it. I think by now everyone has gotten their 2 cents in. So the final word? look for relevant benchmarks and base your decision on that. You'd be foolish to drop a couple hundred bucks on a random "AMD rules" blab.

 

[sithspawn]

By the way, i have an Athlon 2500+ Barton core, and i have the FSB clocked up to 200 FSB (so its equivalent to a 3200+). Runs sweet as. (been running for 6 months now fine). And, with stock speeds, an athlon 2500+ barton core will beat a P4 2.4Ghz.

Generally speaking, amd will perform better for a cheaper cost. (Gaming...)

 

[72montecarlo]

this should about cover it all

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlonxp-3000_2.html

 

[Ace No-Money]

Dud Athlon XP 2500+ whoops the p4 2.4GHz in 3dmark really bad!
Besides compare processors by cost, not by name. So the Athlon Xp 2500+ is really compared to like a 2.0GHz Celeron - LOL!
The celeron would be blown away!

 

[RedRecon2004]

It'd be stupid arguing over which is better, Intel or Pentium...

Just like the stupidity in arguing over which is better, Nvidia or ATI.

Both are great, depending on which CPU (or video card in the other example) you buy, so who cares!?

 

[Megadeth2]

BxSlip, you are wrong. AMD does not use Quatasped. First of all, it is Quantispeed Architecture. That was for the AXPs, now they use AMD64 Architecture. Look for some threads. There are a lot that explain the difference between AMD and Intel.