PDA

View Full Version : Intel/AMD - what a mess


Pafet
06-18-03, 12:51 PM
First, sorry for my ignorence presented in this message but hear me out
I try to stay up-to-date but for the last couple of monthes I got too confused... too many chipsets, codenames, whatever...

So, help me clear this out -
AMD just went more FSB to 333, then more cahche, then more FSB 400. those are the most recent TB and Bartons right?

Intel, fisrst P4 sucked, then more FSB, then cach, then FSB, then more FSB, lots of useless insturctions added, more technical terms, and now with Canterwood ?

plus, when the 3000+ were reviewd (http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030217/cpu_charts-24.html), AMD still seemed on top, current reviews (http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030521/800fsb-11.html) show it all backwords. But aren't those the same Intel's? or just FSB pumped? which ones? (there are more of those 2-way benchies)
and last, recently people been saying Intel is the curent "bang for buck" over the the high-end, while prices for Intel are still through the roof.

please, please respond or send a link to some reviews that cover all Intels up against each other, whatever



Edit: I know the second one is the newest P4C's but there are others

StealthHawk
06-18-03, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by Pafet
So, help me clear this out -
AMD just went more FSB to 333, then more cahche, then more FSB 400. those are the most recent TB and Bartons right?

Intel, fisrst P4 sucked, then more FSB, then cach, then FSB, then more FSB, lots of useless insturctions added, more technical terms, and now with Canterwood ?

Ok, first of all it would be better to group AMD/Intel upgrades chronologically, instead of trying to separate them, it makes it more confusing. So here, we go.

P4 Willamette introduced at 400FSB, it sucked. P4 Northwood introduced at 533FSB and doubled Willamette's cache to 512K. AMD releases AthlonXP ThoroughbredB with a 333FSB. Intel now wins with the 3.06GHz P4, released with HyperThreading, still Northwood core. AMD counters with Barton, which doubles AthlonXP cache to 512K, it is not up to the task. Intel releases the P4C, which is the Northwood core with HT at all levels and a 400FSB, Intel dominates. AMD raises Barton to 400FSB, but it's not enough.

Canterwood is a motherboard chipset, which supposedly will be usable with Prescott, the next P4 upgrade.

In other words, there exist P4A, P4B, and P4C. P4A is Willamette, the original P4. P4B is Northwood, with 533FSB and the highest model(3.06GHz) has HT. P4C is Northwood with 800FSB and HT.

Sazar
06-18-03, 06:34 PM
they both operate @ the same fsb now...

amd == 200mhz (400 ddr)
intel == 200mhz (800 qdr)

its easier to go through the progression of the fsb such as amd's

133-166-200...

intel went 133-200 straight... they bypassed the 166 mhz fsb processors completely...

stealth has worked it out quite nicely..

Pafet
06-19-03, 03:36 PM
woo.. thanks guys. so many names, numbers.... i am getting too old to stay on track :p

so... canterwood is the chipset? then theres the 845 850 865 875 478 423 475 486 LOL
never mind... it's not like vendors here let me pick what I want. they only sell what people buy

Ok so one thing left: price/performance. an Intel setup always comes too steep for my taste. 800FSB costs ****loads of $
like P2.4C ~ Barton2800+ (correct me of i'm wrong :angel2: )

reever2
06-19-03, 05:29 PM
If you account overclocking I would still say the most bang for buck is the 1700+

Sazar
06-20-03, 12:20 AM
Originally posted by reever2
If you account overclocking I would still say the most bang for buck is the 1700+

I would counter with the 2500+ barton... and some intel chips oc like crazy as well..

most 2500+ 's oc to 3000-3200+ levels out of the box which is a nice performance boost..

Pafet
06-20-03, 07:05 AM
have been looking over the net to sort things out. correct me where i'm off:
springdale = 865 chipset series, 865PE is 800FSB
canterwood = 875 chipset, 800FSB, activates PAT (lol) but asus, msi and abit worked around it somehow. according to this (http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20030603/865_PAT-20.html)

the 800 FSB P4 are currently 478pin codenamed Northwood and labeld with C, like 2.4C
Prescott is what next to come?

well, AMD is much more simple - currently Batron and nForce2 are the only things interesting ;)

the only other Intel 800FSB CS are sis648FX and 655FX, both with nearly no reviews, and those show it has room for improvements. but they look like a cheap solution anyway.

the performance increase with the new FSB seems to be so hugh that AMD dropped to the bottom of the graphs in a suspicious way... (suddenly 2.4B is faster than 2700+)

and the last thing to notice is that 2800+ is faster and about the price of 2.4C

well? how am I doing so far? :D

cvearl
06-21-03, 01:16 AM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
Ok, first of all it would be better to group AMD/Intel upgrades chronologically, instead of trying to separate them, it makes it more confusing. So here, we go.

P4 Willamette introduced at 400FSB, it sucked. P4 Northwood introduced at 533FSB and doubled Willamette's cache to 512K. AMD releases AthlonXP ThoroughbredB with a 333FSB. Intel now wins with the 3.06GHz P4, released with HyperThreading, still Northwood core. AMD counters with Barton, which doubles AthlonXP cache to 512K, it is not up to the task. Intel releases the P4C, which is the Northwood core with HT at all levels and a 400FSB, Intel dominates. AMD raises Barton to 400FSB, but it's not enough.

Canterwood is a motherboard chipset, which supposedly will be usable with Prescott, the next P4 upgrade.

In other words, there exist P4A, P4B, and P4C. P4A is Willamette, the original P4. P4B is Northwood, with 533FSB and the highest model(3.06GHz) has HT. P4C is Northwood with 800FSB and HT.

Good job stealth. I'm glad I did not have to explain all that. It's exactly correct!

Now if I can get this dude in another forum to admit that he is lieing...

He claims he had a 9700 Pro on a nforce 2 motherboard with an Athalon 2400+ (Thoroughbred right?) and with everyhting stock settings and no overclock or tweaking he was getting just over 15,000 in 3DMARK01SE. He's so full of crap! I can't even get him to admit he's BSing. Only thing he will admit is that he was using 10*200=2Ghz=AMD 2400+ for his FSB. Even using dual channel DDR400, would that have evven got him close to 15K? If any of you know if this is true, please enlighten me.

Charles.

cvearl
06-21-03, 01:23 AM
Originally posted by Pafet
have been looking over the net to sort things out. correct me where i'm off:
springdale = 865 chipset series, 865PE is 800FSB
canterwood = 875 chipset, 800FSB, activates PAT (lol) but asus, msi and abit worked around it somehow. according to this (http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20030603/865_PAT-20.html)

the 800 FSB P4 are currently 478pin codenamed Northwood and labeld with C, like 2.4C
Prescott is what next to come?

well, AMD is much more simple - currently Batron and nForce2 are the only things interesting ;)

the only other Intel 800FSB CS are sis648FX and 655FX, both with nearly no reviews, and those show it has room for improvements. but they look like a cheap solution anyway.

the performance increase with the new FSB seems to be so hugh that AMD dropped to the bottom of the graphs in a suspicious way... (suddenly 2.4B is faster than 2700+)

and the last thing to notice is that 2800+ is faster and about the price of 2.4C

well? how am I doing so far? :D

Pretty close to accurate.

When I compare my 2.6C setup 3DMARK2001SE scores to recent MAXPC benchmarks comparing chips, I am getting just a hair shy of a 3.06 P4B on an Intel 850E chipset using PC1066 Dual channel RDRAM. In other reviews, I am getting just a hair over an Athalon 2800+ in benchmarks. So a 2.4C would be just a hair below it. What I really like is that I am getting beyond PC1066 Dual channel bandwidth (I'm getting 4485 mb/s) and my Sandra processor scores are just over P4B-2.8 and Athalon 2800+ and my 3DMARK2001SE are about 100 points within a P4B-3.06Ghz RDRAM Rig! Good job Intel.

AMD will make a comeback. No doubt. But I'm likin what I have. Stability wise though, Warcraft III freezes 5-10 minutes into play but the other 8 games I have played work fine and fast. Wierd thing is the Warcraft III never crashed on my P4B-2.4 ASUS 845PE board (533FSB AGP 4X). Hmmm...

Charles.

Dazz
06-21-03, 03:58 AM
Originally posted by cvearl
Even using dual channel DDR400, would that have evven got him close to 15K? If any of you know if this is true, please enlighten me.
Charles. Don't see why not http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5637318

StealthHawk
06-21-03, 04:07 AM
Yeah, with a 200FSB, I can see how a score around 15k is possible. Ask him to submit his benchmark run to the ORB database, that should be sufficient proof.

cvearl
06-21-03, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by Dazz
Don't see why not http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5637318

Wow. That's pretty cool. A few questions...

1. Do you need cooling to acomplish that?

2. If that is how a 2400+ runs at 200*10, why is AMD not just selling it like that?

3. What is it about 200FSB vs. standard that is making it so fast?

4. Do you have to screw with voltages and memory timings to stay stable like that?

5. Can all owners of that rig setup achieve the same FSB settings?

6. Can you tell me if there is any overclocking on the 9700 Pro in that case?

I ask this because you are out performaing a stock 2800+ setup on a dual channel nforce 2 motherboard. How is that. It makes little sense to me and I am really curious now.

Charles.

cvearl
06-23-03, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by Dazz
Don't see why not http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5637318

Uh ya. You'r at 2005Mhz using 200Mhz FSB. That means that you are running your core at nearly the speed of a 2800+ and your memory bus is running alot faster with that FSB setting than would be normally possible. This guy I was talking about was claiming that at stock 2400+ speeds and default FSB, he was getting 16K and later admitted to running 10*200 as well and his score was simular to yours. I now understand how this is being done. AMD's appear to be really overclocking friendly. That's good! Especially for those on a budget.

In the end, I will stick with my P4 rigs as performance rocks without overclocking.

Charles.

R.Carter
06-24-03, 03:05 PM
Originally posted by Pafet
the 800 FSB P4 are currently 478pin codenamed Northwood and labeld with C, like 2.4C
Prescott is what next to come?


The Prescott P4 should be out later this year and clock speeds of 3.4GHz and faster. It will be made with a 0.09 process. The processors should also have more cache as well, I think 1MB or more.

Pafet
06-24-03, 03:12 PM
tnx for the replies.
I think I got it all figured out :)
this (http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030623/images/cpu_history_big.gif) sure would have come in handy a week ago...