View Full Version : Intel Pentium 4 2.8GHz vs. AMD Athlon XP 3200+

Pages : [1] 2 3 4

08-14-03, 03:57 PM
Which processor do you think is better for gaming? The Intel Pentium 4 2.8GHz (800MHz system bus) or the AMD Athlon XP 3200+ (400MHz system bus)?

08-14-03, 04:46 PM
XP 3200+ ofcourse, it's only a abit slower then P4 3.2Ghz

08-14-03, 05:39 PM
Oh god, he we go again...lol. I say Intel, because it runs cooler and overclocks higher... but that is just because I have one now. I had an XP2100+ but it was too hot in here to overclock. It is on average 34c to 37c in my room which is 93F to 98F. I had to run that AMD at 65c just to game with it and my mobo temp shut down was 70c I believe, so when I was gaming and it got too intense pc would shut down. :(

The P4 hasn't shut down on me once and doesn't go any higher than 119F. I would still like it to be 95F or lower, so I may watercool real soon.

Price wise, you get more with AMD when running default speeds. On the other hand, I can game all day and not worry about CPU temps. I can also have CPU OC'd to 3.5Ghz running at 120F but I don't like doing that at all. Maybe it is just because I was a long time AMD user and have never owned a Intel CPU till now, but from now on... I will only buy and sell Intel CPU's to friends and family.

Hope it helps some...



08-14-03, 09:01 PM
What's your room temp? I have XP2200(said to be much hotter then these new AMD cpus) and I can o/c it by133mhz and play all day without any probs...

Oh and about overclock, I think that XP3200+ could match that 3.5Ghz o/c of yours :)

08-14-03, 09:05 PM
Originally posted by Malfunction
I had an XP2100+ but it was too hot in here to overclock. It is on average 34c to 37c in my room which is 93F to 98F.



08-14-03, 09:13 PM
lol I love making fool outta myself when I read forums at night :D (5:21AM), I thought those were your cpu temps :p

37C/98F at home, damn I guess P4 is the only way for you then. It's max around 26-8 here even if it's ~40 outside :D

08-14-03, 09:30 PM
Ya, sadly...lol. I wish it was cooler during the day, but I am stuck in the valley and hardly any breeze comes through while another bud who lives in SF averages 75F/80F tops...lmao. Lucky bastard... :D

So both are cool if you watercool them, however if you are like me and run aircooling for now... P4 is the way to go. Depends on where you live and what you face in ambient temps on a regular basis that should also be a factor in your purchasing. That makes a difference between a happy gamer and a frustrated one... lol. :)



08-15-03, 05:33 AM
I read some reviews, and it seems that the Pentium 4 2.8GHz is faster than the Athlon XP 3200+ in most gaming benchmarks.

The Baron
08-15-03, 07:33 AM
Buy the 3200+ unless you plan on ever doing non-game stuff. HT will let the P4 spank the Athlon in the vast majority of application (read: not game) benchmarks.

08-15-03, 07:34 AM
What about Pentium 4 3GHz (800MHz system bus) vs. Athlon XP 3200+?

The Baron
08-15-03, 07:36 AM
3Ghz, without a doubt.

08-15-03, 07:39 AM
Do Intel motherboards allow any form of tweaking/overclocking?

The Baron
08-15-03, 07:45 AM
Friend of mine got a 2.6 up to 3.47 or something like that.

08-15-03, 07:58 AM
No, what I mean is do motherboards that are made by Intel allow FSB overclocking and other tweaking?

08-15-03, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by The Baron
3Ghz, without a doubt.

How do you say "3Ghz, without a doubt" and say "Go with the XP3200+" when it is compared to the 2.8Ghz 800FSB? It takes just 15Mhz more on the FSB for the 2.8Ghz to hit 3Ghz... just 15Mhz (215Mhz FSB)!!! Yet you will advise a 3Ghz in a heart beat? Not to mention that over at NewEgg.com the 2.8Ghz Retail is $267, while the 3Ghz is $393. That is a difference of $126 dollars. That extra saving could go to extra memory or a new Nvidia videocard... ;) , well any videocard.. it doesn't have to be Nvidia but you get my point about the extra savings with a 2.8Ghz vs. 3Ghz.

It is not difficult to overclock Kain if you don't really know how. Infact, the Asus mobo's make it really easy for you with what they call the AI overclocking feature. Depending on how aggressive you want to go, you have more power going with manual settings but atleast you can do some overclocking without knowing a whole lot about it from the get go. The manual is very easy to read and if you are new to overclocking you will atleast have more options as your knowledge about it increases.

Another friend of mine was also interested in the Intel mobo's but ended up getting a Asus P4P800 Deluxe instead. I will choose Asus over Abit any day since I had an Abit mobo/AMD before and it failed, same friend who was looking at the Intel mobo had a new Abit NF7-S and it crapped out on him 2 weeks later. He RMA'd it and it crapped out the same day. He was very happy he went Intel when he did but disappointed his AMD pieces are just sitting there while he waits for Abit to replace the damn thing.

You may pay a little more while going Intel, but you are also paying for insurance. Insurance that the product is going to work like it says (And even far better than that), the heat detection that lowers the CPU speed if it runs too hot (even while overclocked) and reliability.

Look in these forums and see how many people toast their AMD systems or the mobo fails. I haven't seen a one thread in regards to a failed Intel CPU or Mobo yet... have you?



08-15-03, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by Kain
No, what I mean is do motherboards that are made by Intel allow FSB overclocking and other tweaking?
Most do not.

The D875PBZ that I own allows tweaking of memory timings and a 4% system overclock called "Burn-In Mode" in the BIOS.

CPU voltage, vDIMM, and FSB adjustments are not available.

Supposedly there is going to be a new utility that Intel will release within a month or two that will allow for much more tweaks including some more overclocking friendly items.

08-16-03, 05:02 AM
Thanks guys.

I do know how to overclock, but I was just wondering if the Intel motherboard allowed it. :)

08-16-03, 07:03 AM
No wonder Intel CPUs are feeding too much power than AMD CPUs, Intel overclockers are paid big electricity bills. Can you imagine Intel users with Prescott later this year with over 100 Watt power, geee it seem will be much worsen with overclock it likely to be around 150 Watt power. Meaning intel overclockers will paying huge electricity bills, Athlon 64 will make little no different with power compare to Athlon XP.

It may be possible that Prescott will be a big disaster when people realised about power blackouts happened in USA.

08-16-03, 09:46 AM
What is the average overclock of an AMD Athlon XP 3200+?

08-16-03, 09:50 AM
Just think about how much power the 10ghz processors of the future might draw... ;)

Then running seti or folding might actually cost you some coin then...

08-16-03, 01:54 PM
Okay, I read some more reviews and it seems that the overall gaming performance of the Intel Pentium 4 2.8GHz (800MHz system bus) is better than the AMD Athlon XP 3200+.

08-16-03, 07:43 PM
I suggest u go with 3200+.. in the most reviews i have read i have noticed that 3200+ is better than 2.8Ghz.

08-25-03, 07:52 AM
Here is an alternate soluton.

Buy a 2500+, save the $350 it would have cost you extra for the 3200+ and simply set the 2500+ to 200x11. There you go. :thumbsup: Just make sure you shop around to get a new stepping (AQXEA etc) and its pretty much gurenteed. :)

Now spend $350 on a new graphics card. ;)

08-25-03, 02:40 PM
Kain, I would suggest you take a look at Anands latest cpu tests.
The Pentium4 2.8GHz beats the Athlon XP 3200+ at stock speeds in every game.Click Here (http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1834&p=7)
Most people can overclock to 3.4GHz with ease using stock cooling!!!
Amd people should catch up with the latest reviews!I think they are stuck in the pre-800MHz bus era. ;)

08-25-03, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by Fotis
I think they are stuck in the pre-800MHz bus era. ;)

I wouldnt bring that into it if i was you. Because you can look at it two ways.

1) Intel have 3Ghz+ CPUs with 800mhz FSB's. AMD dont.

2) Intel need to have 3Ghz CPU's with 800mhz FSB's to beat AMD's clocked at 2.2Ghz with 400mhz FSB's.

If i was Intel i wouldnt be pleased about that. ;)