intel vs. AMD running ATI boards

[eesa]

Hey, here's a question I've been searching long and hard to answer but am having a hard time. Not many sites have cpu scaling articles anymore (they're too time consuming) but if anyone has any useful input, it would be VERY much appreciated.

Take a barton 2800 for example. Now take a p4-2.8c. Assuming they're both running optimally - ddr333 for amd on nforce3, ddr400 for intel on canterwood, how much does the platform affect framerates? Is there a big difference when the clock speed (or rated speed at least) is comparable? Are drivers better matched for an intel platform? See, most of time time ppl would just compare different cards on the same system. I want a comparison of the same card on different systems that are more or less equivalent spec wise. If AMDs are at least up to par with intel in that department, then I'll never touch intel again.

now i know not every one of you have all these systems to test and play around with, but I'm sure many have had experience with both.

[gokickrocks]

well, you can take a look at this thread http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7726

although this doesnt mean that every case will turn out the same results...

[Sazar]

Originally posted by eesa
Hey, here's a question I've been searching long and hard to answer but am having a hard time. Not many sites have cpu scaling articles anymore (they're too time consuming) but if anyone has any useful input, it would be VERY much appreciated.

Take a barton 2800 for example. Now take a p4-2.8c. Assuming they're both running optimally - ddr333 for amd on nforce3, ddr400 for intel on canterwood, how much does the platform affect framerates? Is there a big difference when the clock speed (or rated speed at least) is comparable? Are drivers better matched for an intel platform? See, most of time time ppl would just compare different cards on the same system. I want a comparison of the same card on different systems that are more or less equivalent spec wise. If AMDs are at least up to par with intel in that department, then I'll never touch intel again.

now i know not every one of you have all these systems to test and play around with, but I'm sure many have had experience with both.

nforce3 ? 2800+ ?

[The Baron]

I think it's going to depend on several things.

1. Does the motherboard in question have the ability to lock the AGP frequency?

2. Is the game usually CPU or GPU limited (UT2003 will receive framerate boosts usually just from overclocking the CPU whereas half the time overclocking the GPU is useless)?

3. How do you determine a "similar" overclock? A similar frequency increase? Course not, since you work at ATI and don't believe in clock speeds :D Similar percentage increases in Benchmark X, Y, and Z? It's tricky to discern what an equitable OC is.

[eesa]

Originally posted by Sazar
nforce3 ? 2800+ ?

lol. sorry. meant nf2

been starring at opertons too much lately ;)

[eesa]

Originally posted by The Baron
I think it's going to depend on several things.

1. Does the motherboard in question have the ability to lock the AGP frequency?

2. Is the game usually CPU or GPU limited (UT2003 will receive framerate boosts usually just from overclocking the CPU whereas half the time overclocking the GPU is useless)?


I think you sorta missed my question. I'm not thinking O/C at all. I'm just thinking which chip is suited better for most games.

i.e. if I have a 9800 running on a p4-2.8 vs one running on a 2800+XP, which one will be faster? Forget motherboard, cause that's only a small influence. And forget small differences. I just wanted to know if a certain platform performed much better at the same specs. Assume best chipsets, i.e. canterwood for intel and nf2 for AMD.

[eesa]

Originally posted by gokickrocks
well, you can take a look at this thread http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7726

although this doesnt mean that every case will turn out the same results...

very nice! Thx! It's definitely a start. Anyone else?

[saturnotaku]

Originally posted by eesa
i.e. if I have a 9800 running on a p4-2.8 vs one running on a 2800+XP, which one will be faster? Forget motherboard, cause that's only a small influence. And forget small differences. I just wanted to know if a certain platform performed much better at the same specs. Assume best chipsets, i.e. canterwood for intel and nf2 for AMD.

Once you start getting into the higher frequencies, most times the P4 will perform better. This would be especially true if you have one of the 800 MHz chips, combined with a Canterwood dual-channel motherboard. In games that are CPU limited (such as UT2003) going that route should give you much improved performance over a 333 MHz Athlon.

[The Baron]

Once again, though, it depends on the games you're going to play. Look at Athlon64/Opteron with 32-bit UT2003--it slaps the P4 around like a redheaded stepchild. Now, if you find a game that's more frequency limited (probably a lot of flight sims), the P4 will probably demolish it.

You can't say, "Hey, Thingy X is faster than Thingy Z!" Well, not usually. You CAN say, "Hey, Thingy X is faster than Thingy Z in Applications A, B, and C!"

Maybe I'm just confused, but calling a Pentium or an Athlon faster without taking into account the motherboard, the RAM, and other various things (SSE2) seems impossible.

[eesa]

Originally posted by The Baron
Once again, though, it depends on the games you're going to play. Look at Athlon64/Opteron with 32-bit UT2003--it slaps the P4 around like a redheaded stepchild. Now, if you find a game that's more frequency limited (probably a lot of flight sims), the P4 will probably demolish it.

You can't say, "Hey, Thingy X is faster than Thingy Z!" Well, not usually. You CAN say, "Hey, Thingy X is faster than Thingy Z in Applications A, B, and C!"

Maybe I'm just confused, but calling a Pentium or an Athlon faster without taking into account the motherboard, the RAM, and other various things (SSE2) seems impossible.

I agree that it's extremely difficult to make a generalized comparison. I was just wondering, bus speeds aside (cause that's platform independent. A p4@400fsb would be slower than p4@800fsb too), if there are any existing known quirks or bugs or whatnot that exists with the drivers and the AMD platform that causes otherwise unexplainable performance degrations. Lower bus and memory speed accounting for a reasonable amount of slowdown is explainable, and therefore I'm not too concerned about. Hope that make sense? :confused:

[eesa]

oh, and are you implying that there's something wrong with red headed step children? ;)

[The Baron]

Originally posted by eesa
oh, and are you implying that there's something wrong with red headed step children? ;)
Yes. Yes I am.

Anyway, so basically you're looking for stability with regards to performance (as in, it will run Benchmark X and get Score Y every time instead of getting Score Y one time and half of that the next)? Well then, no, I don't think there are any such issues with AMD boards. 3DNow in some shape or form has been around longer than SSE, so if devs haven't gotten it right yet, I doubt they will.

nF2 had a few quirks when it was first launched, but those have been mostly ironed out with drivers and BIOS updates. Same with Canterwood/Springdale.

[eesa]

you're getting closer and closer baron :) It's good to hear there isn't any major issues with nf2 and that 3dnow is now pretty mature.

All I'm asking is whether there will be performance degrations that are more than the reasonable amount due to a lower fsb, memory speed, etc. As in degration due to the drivers/hardware not being fully optimized for the platform (AMD). Everyone optimizes for intel so that's why I'm not asking.

[The Baron]

Meh. It's more because AMD doesn't have SSE2 then developers simply optimize for Intel. AMD64 has SSE2, but the implementation is not very good, so I hear.

[eesa]

I'm guess this means there really isn't a problem then. Good to hear. But I'm definitely waiting for amd64. You think they're going to be more expensive than the p4s?

[The Baron]

Originally posted by eesa
I'm guess this means there really isn't a problem then. Good to hear. But I'm definitely waiting for amd64. You think they're going to be more expensive than the p4s?
Athlon64 will be about as much as a 3.2Ghz P4, unless Intel introduces the 3.6 at the same time and slashes pricing like they have a habit of doing.

nF3 mobos might be hard to find and somewhat expensive, though, and God knows I'm not buying another Via motherboard after their track record with Socket A boards.

[Skuzzy]

Ok..seen it bazillion times....what the heck does "meh" mean?

Yep, VIA nearly single handedly killed AMD. The sorriest chipsets on the planet. Intel's "Prescott" should be rumbling along pretty soon. Gonna be a bad boy from what I have been able to gather.

[The Baron]

C'mon Skuzzy, say "Meh" out loud. It's just kinda... Meh. Indifference.

And, I'm still tired of waiting ;)

[saturnotaku]

Originally posted by The Baron
God knows I'm not buying another Via motherboard after their track record with Socket A boards.

Nornally I'd agree with you on this one, but I've had two VIA/AMD boards (KT133A, 266A) and they were both fantastic. Extremely reliable and stable as granite. I was a bit worried when I got my 133 board, but after my positive experiences I wouldn't hesitate to recommend VIA (that is, if they can get a chipset out that performs on par with the nForce2). ;)

[ChrisRay]

I love my Via board...

[Skuzzy]

Originally posted by The Baron
C'mon Skuzzy, say "Meh" out loud. It's just kinda... Meh. Indifference.

And, I'm still tired of waiting ;)

Ok,..that's what I thought it was,..just wanted to be sure.

Hehe patience young grasshopper. Rome wasn't built in a day and I got my hands full with an unexpected contract.

[The Baron]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Hehe patience young grasshopper. Rome wasn't built in a day and I got my hands full with an unexpected contract.
by the time you're done, we'll have BitBoys cards to try it on :D

[Skuzzy]

Awwww..no sense in gettin ugly about it. :D

It wasn't a contract I expected to get, so I had pretty much dropped it, then I got a phone call the other day. Go figure.

Worst case, it will slow me a couple of weeks. I have most the work done for the contract in my archives. I just have to put it together and document it.

[lukar]

Go for P4. Radeon cards are performing much better on system based on Intel's P4. However, the current AMD CPU line can't touch P4 in term of performance and stability. P4 2.8C i faster processor than Barton 2800+ even Barton 3000+. The 6 of 10 AMD users experience certain problems, related to chipset, or generally speaking system stability.

Right now, Intel dominates on the market. As far I know new upcoming AMD64 is very promising CPU. I really like idea about 32/64bit computing, and the way AMD packed new CPU (almost look like P4) is very atractive.
From unofficial benchmarks, performance is awesome, but let's wait official bench, and compare it to Pentium V (Prescott). If I need to buy a new system, I would wait for next 2-3 months. If AMD64 shows superios performance and stability over Prescott, I will buy AMD64 after all these years. My latest AMD CPU was K6 266Mhz, awesome CPU.

[bkswaney]

My 9800Pro is loving this 875P chipset board. My 2.6C P4 is running
3510Mhz no sweat. Only 1.6volt to get there to. :)

This is a stable setup. The new P4 at 2.8 and above with 800FSB and HT rock! :D