Ok in conclusion in my long quest i have found out that p4 outperform amds but amds are better becuase they have a balanc ein performance and cost. a 2800+ amd shuld last u about 2 yrz and u only spent like 180 (CDN). But if u wuld buy a p4 3.0 ghz...it will be updated soon and u payed like 300(CDN). So basically thats where i sum it up. Athlon XP wins because i doubt ne of u play like 50 pc games. Myself i usually jsut play cs,diablo ii, warcraft,a few sports games and like ut. POST NETHING U WANT ON INFO ABOUT AMD XP VS INTEL...THX FOR ALL POSTS
-showdown-amd Athlon Vs Intel P4
- Thread starter cell567
- Start date
- Status
Pretty much it. Intel try's to screw the consumers. (heres something i wrote for an other forum)
Amd(Barton xp cores only)
Amd delivers there performance by increasing the work done per clock cycle and improving the operating frequency at the same time. This results in a cpu that gets a high volume of work done per cycle and high operating frequencies—an optimum combination for compelling application performance. Amd has QuantiSpeed architecture, which means it is a nine-issue, superscalar, fully-pipelined core and this makes for more pathways to feed application instructions into the execution engines of the core, simply allowing the processor to complete more work in a given clock cycle. Additional features of QuantiSpeed architecture include a superscalar, fully-pipelined floating point engine, hardware data prefetch, and exclusive, speculative Translation Look-aside Buffers (TLBs). All those extra features are great, but what do they do? Combined, these features help boost overall productivity and allow a system to boot and load applications quickly. Now what about instructions what does amd do for those? Amd has multiple parallel x86 instruction decoders along side three out-of-order, superscalar, fully pipelined floating point execution units, which execute x87 (floating point), MM and 3DNow instructions. Amd also has tons of other instructions that will help you out so no need to worrie. Now whats the cache on these bartons? Amd cache memory features 64K instruction and 64K data cache for a total of 128K L1 cache. 512K of integrated, on-chip L2 cache for a total of 640K full-speed, on-chip cache. Well thats great and all but what about the die sizes and such that iv heard so much about? Amd barton's die size is approximately 54.3 million transistors on 101mm2. Manufactured using AMD's state-of-the-art 0.13-micron copper process technology. Thats a bit about Amd.
Intel(p4/celeron p4s only)
Intel p4 come in 400 fsb 533fsb and 800fsb. How can intel achieve such high fsb speeds? There cpus are quad pumped across 4 silicon pipe lines called bus lines avectively making one small incriment like 200fsb and taking it to a hole new level of 800fsb. Now whats all the hype about Hyper threading? What it does is improves performance and system responsiveness in today's multitasking environments by enabling the processor to execute multiple instruction threads in parallel. What kind of cache does intel got on there cpus? They bring 512KB L2 Cache (for 2A GHz and Faster) or 256KB Cache (for 2 GHz and Slower.) Intel Pentium 4 processor-based platforms include integrated graphics and support the high-bandwidth I/O performance of USB 2.0 and Gigabit Ethernet networking. Rapid platform development is supported by the latest operating systems, applications and Intel Architecture development tools, as well as a variety of validated reference designs from Intel. While incorporating Intel's most advanced embedded processor technologies. Now some more specific stuff. It's built with Longer pipes which directly cause lower Instruction's per clock (IPC). The idea was to follow Moore's Law and raise the operating frequency of the processor higher then the competitions defeating the competitions IPC advantage (K7). But wheres the performance gone? In order for Intel to improve performance they wanted to start with a relatively slow version of the processor with no real chance of achieving higher clock rates (Wilamette on 0.18U). They then began improving and slowly releasing the pieces of the puzzle for this CPU. First there was the shift towards the 0.13U Process and Socket 478 to replace 423. Then there was the Extra Cache and higher Front Side Bus (512KB and 533Mhz) then they added the Hyperthreading feature only to top it all off with another FSB increase up to 800Mhz.
Well theres a bit about both cpus. Whats my choice? well for me Intel is the better one because of there chipsets and there multi tasking. Hey but didn't intel bring out ht to keep up with amd multi tasking? yes they did but amd cant close 3 or mroe programs right after an other and thats not code. Amd cant encode well actually they encode like crap. But this is just me. I actually think amd's architecture makes a hell of a lot more sence than intels but what i need isn't there.
Amd(Barton xp cores only)
Amd delivers there performance by increasing the work done per clock cycle and improving the operating frequency at the same time. This results in a cpu that gets a high volume of work done per cycle and high operating frequencies—an optimum combination for compelling application performance. Amd has QuantiSpeed architecture, which means it is a nine-issue, superscalar, fully-pipelined core and this makes for more pathways to feed application instructions into the execution engines of the core, simply allowing the processor to complete more work in a given clock cycle. Additional features of QuantiSpeed architecture include a superscalar, fully-pipelined floating point engine, hardware data prefetch, and exclusive, speculative Translation Look-aside Buffers (TLBs). All those extra features are great, but what do they do? Combined, these features help boost overall productivity and allow a system to boot and load applications quickly. Now what about instructions what does amd do for those? Amd has multiple parallel x86 instruction decoders along side three out-of-order, superscalar, fully pipelined floating point execution units, which execute x87 (floating point), MM and 3DNow instructions. Amd also has tons of other instructions that will help you out so no need to worrie. Now whats the cache on these bartons? Amd cache memory features 64K instruction and 64K data cache for a total of 128K L1 cache. 512K of integrated, on-chip L2 cache for a total of 640K full-speed, on-chip cache. Well thats great and all but what about the die sizes and such that iv heard so much about? Amd barton's die size is approximately 54.3 million transistors on 101mm2. Manufactured using AMD's state-of-the-art 0.13-micron copper process technology. Thats a bit about Amd.
Intel(p4/celeron p4s only)
Intel p4 come in 400 fsb 533fsb and 800fsb. How can intel achieve such high fsb speeds? There cpus are quad pumped across 4 silicon pipe lines called bus lines avectively making one small incriment like 200fsb and taking it to a hole new level of 800fsb. Now whats all the hype about Hyper threading? What it does is improves performance and system responsiveness in today's multitasking environments by enabling the processor to execute multiple instruction threads in parallel. What kind of cache does intel got on there cpus? They bring 512KB L2 Cache (for 2A GHz and Faster) or 256KB Cache (for 2 GHz and Slower.) Intel Pentium 4 processor-based platforms include integrated graphics and support the high-bandwidth I/O performance of USB 2.0 and Gigabit Ethernet networking. Rapid platform development is supported by the latest operating systems, applications and Intel Architecture development tools, as well as a variety of validated reference designs from Intel. While incorporating Intel's most advanced embedded processor technologies. Now some more specific stuff. It's built with Longer pipes which directly cause lower Instruction's per clock (IPC). The idea was to follow Moore's Law and raise the operating frequency of the processor higher then the competitions defeating the competitions IPC advantage (K7). But wheres the performance gone? In order for Intel to improve performance they wanted to start with a relatively slow version of the processor with no real chance of achieving higher clock rates (Wilamette on 0.18U). They then began improving and slowly releasing the pieces of the puzzle for this CPU. First there was the shift towards the 0.13U Process and Socket 478 to replace 423. Then there was the Extra Cache and higher Front Side Bus (512KB and 533Mhz) then they added the Hyperthreading feature only to top it all off with another FSB increase up to 800Mhz.
Well theres a bit about both cpus. Whats my choice? well for me Intel is the better one because of there chipsets and there multi tasking. Hey but didn't intel bring out ht to keep up with amd multi tasking? yes they did but amd cant close 3 or mroe programs right after an other and thats not code. Amd cant encode well actually they encode like crap. But this is just me. I actually think amd's architecture makes a hell of a lot more sence than intels but what i need isn't there.
MasterJason
In Runtime
- Messages
- 431
I CURRENTY HAVE A INTEL 2.6GHZ AND I WANT TO UPGRADE MY OLD P4 1.7GHZ TO A AMD 2600+.
IN GAMES WHICH WILL BE BETTER THE INTEL 2.6 OR THE AMD 2600+ .
THE AMD HAS A 333MHZ BUS AND THE INTEL A WHOOPHING 800MHZ BUS.
THATS A 467MHZ DIFFERENCE.
SO I AM A BIT CURIOUS ABOUT GETTING MY FIRST AMD CPU PC.
IN GAMES WHICH WILL BE BETTER THE INTEL 2.6 OR THE AMD 2600+ .
THE AMD HAS A 333MHZ BUS AND THE INTEL A WHOOPHING 800MHZ BUS.
THATS A 467MHZ DIFFERENCE.
SO I AM A BIT CURIOUS ABOUT GETTING MY FIRST AMD CPU PC.
From what I have heard, AMD and Intel are very close, but when you spend a hell of a lot more money on the Intel you get a small drop in average cpu temps and marginal increase in stability, "small" and "marginal" meaning "not worth the money in terms of efficiency."
So based on that, I say go with P4 if money is no object, but take me for example...I am going for a pretty much top-of-the-line computer and I am going AMD.
Why? Because all in all they are too close to call, and if they are that close, the difference won't be noticed, but spending a hundred+USD less on the processor IS noticed.
So based on that, I say go with P4 if money is no object, but take me for example...I am going for a pretty much top-of-the-line computer and I am going AMD.
Why? Because all in all they are too close to call, and if they are that close, the difference won't be noticed, but spending a hundred+USD less on the processor IS noticed.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Locked
