PDA

View Full Version : AMD or Intel?


Pages : 1 2 [3] 4

vampireuk
07-29-02, 04:17 AM
Originally posted by SavagePaladin

woot! woot!

I second that with my own series of connected w00ts

w00t w00t!

Kruno
07-29-02, 04:24 AM
Intel = W00t 1337 cpu :p
Intel 2.8ghz@3.4ghz is faster than an AMD XP 2100 :p

StealthHawk
07-29-02, 04:28 AM
P4 2.8GHz isn't out yet :rolleyes:

my 3GHz Hammer is faster than your 6GHz P5!

mavis
07-29-02, 04:53 AM
Originally posted by StealthHawk


"some time early next year" is when dual channel ddr support from Intel will be introduced last i heard.

you seem to be forgetting one thing about RDRAM and Pentium 4, mavis. each speed of RDRAM is in sync with the P4 FSB, providing exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle. PC800 provides what the 100MHz FSB maxes out with, and PC1066 provides all that 133MHz can cope with. unless Intel is increasing the FSB to quad pumped 166MHz or something, the new RDRAM won't help at all. i haven't seen any roadmaps or info on when Intel will be doing this. it is obvious that dual channel PC800 RDRAM cannot even compete with DDR333 single channel(the new Intel and SiS mobos), let alone DDR400(the SiS mobo). PC1066 still has them beat by a little though. dual channel DDR will change this, as it will double the bandwidth.

hmm... I have a question.

If RAMBUS delivers "exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle," how will having dual channel (higher bandwidth DDR2) help in any way? The FSB will be the limiting factor still - until, of course, Intel ups their FSB, which is why RAMBUS is planning PC1333 modules with 10Gb/s bandwidth ...

Second, I should hope the new DDR333 and DDR400 SDRAM can beat the three year old PC800 RAMBUS!! lol

:)

mavis

SavagePaladin
07-29-02, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by mavis


hmm... I have a question.

If RAMBUS delivers "exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle," how will having dual channel (higher bandwidth DDR2) help in any way? The FSB will be the limiting factor still - until, of course, Intel ups their FSB, which is why RAMBUS is planning PC1333 modules with 10Gb/s bandwidth ...

Second, I should hope the new DDR333 and DDR400 SDRAM can beat the three year old PC800 RAMBUS!! lol

:)

mavis
As I've been saying, RDRAM has higher latency than DDR on random access.
This is why it performed horribly compared to SDRAM on a pentium 3 system, where the extra bandwidth doesn't even come into play.
Now you're seeing where it obviously does come into play, and the single channel DDR can't keep up. Dual can, however, not with bandwidth, but with the reduced latency.

Sorry if any of this is patently obvious, but...

Gator
07-29-02, 04:20 PM
AMD is simply more for your money, nough said :D

although I must say, that 1.6a P4 sure does overclock like a motha!
:eek:

PCarr78
07-29-02, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by Gator
AMD is simply more for your money, nough said :D

although I must say, that 1.6a P4 sure does overclock like a motha!
:eek:

Yes and yes.

But it's amd for me, next box.

Ive used intel all my life, it will be hard to switch.

LORD-eX-Bu
07-29-02, 07:02 PM
Intel said a while back that the Pentium 4 will reach 11 ghz in its lifetime. Lets see if AMD can last long enough to compete with it.:p

PCarr78
07-29-02, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by |TX|-LORD-EX-BU
Intel said a while back that the Pentium 4 will reach 11 ghz in its lifetime. Lets see if AMD can last long enough to compete with it.:p

You never DID send me those benchmarks from your system?

Check ur PM

StealthHawk
07-29-02, 08:31 PM
Originally posted by mavis


hmm... I have a question.

If RAMBUS delivers "exactly as much bandwidth as the FSB can handle," how will having dual channel (higher bandwidth DDR2) help in any way? The FSB will be the limiting factor still - until, of course, Intel ups their FSB, which is why RAMBUS is planning PC1333 modules with 10Gb/s bandwidth ...

Second, I should hope the new DDR333 and DDR400 SDRAM can beat the three year old PC800 RAMBUS!! lol

:)

mavis

well, single channel DDR is not getting the job done so to speak. DDR400 only provides as much bandwidth as dual channel PC800 RDRAM. obviously the 133FSB P4's can handle more bandwith than that.

second, they would come out for the same reason that DDR333 and DDR400 chipsets for AMD come out. marketing reasons purely. DDR333 offers little to no benefit, since DDR266 already saturates Athlon's FSB. DDR333 offers very minuscule benefits, although i'm not sure whether this is totally attributed to improved memory controllers in the new motherboards, or whether DDR266 only really provides say 99% of the bandwidth that the FSB can handle(due to the nature that a 10Mb/sec network won't ever transfer at 10Mb/sec).

Wolfie
07-30-02, 11:09 AM
AMD ALL THE WAY!!!!

tryx
07-30-02, 11:18 AM
I don't have to wait for DDR 400 to come along to keep up with RDRAM 1066. All I need is my latest upgrade it's a Epox 4G4A+ that has the P4 845G chipset and has the DDR 333 and the 533 system bus. Now when you slap a 2.26 P4 in with Corsair 3200 DDR and set the system bus to 164Mhz and it is X 4 you get a bus running at 656 and your DDR running at 407Mhz and a 2.77 P4. That's what I have, and I get great results now without waiting for DDR 400 to come along. And the thing I really like about this board is the it has a setting for the AGP/PCI bus so that no matter how high you turn up the bus speed it will stay at 66/33(if you want it to that is) which helps out alot when you are looking for system stability. I love AMD but right now have to go with Intel if you want the fastest system out there without paying alot and alot of extra cooling + you don't need to go with RDRAM to be fast you can go with DDR.

StealthHawk
07-30-02, 09:24 PM
DDR400 is already out, overclock you bus further and take advantage of it! :D

buff
08-01-02, 11:36 AM
I have heard about a "revision" to the TBred that AMD is working on. Its supposed to have a 333 FSB, and come out at 2.0ghz and 2.13(pr 2400+, 2600+). If those are the barton cores coming out, they will also have 512L2 cache. AMD is supposed to be having great success with them.

hurray for AMD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

volt
08-01-02, 12:12 PM
currently that's a rumor :)
Hope it's true though. AMD has been kind of idle for the past few months.

Prime
08-06-02, 12:42 AM
Well, I've been AMD all the way since the first socketed Athlons came out, but the newest P4's finally induced a switch. I just ordered an Epox 4G4A+ and P4 1.8a. I should get it Thur. or Fri. I'll let ya know how it compares to my current A7N266-E/AthlonXP 1700+ setup.

PCarr78
08-06-02, 07:30 AM
Sell me your a7n266 and 1700+?

Spectral
08-06-02, 09:29 AM
For some reason.. Intel just comes off a big Dictatorship company who doesnt listen to its userbase.

I wouldnt ever spend $650 on a CPU.
Dont get me wrong, I would definetely like a P4 2.5ghz at the moment, but I wouldnt buy one unless I had lots and lots of money to burn.

The top of the line Athlon chipset right now costs about 70% less than the top of the line Pentium, but you sure as hell arent getting 70% more performance out of the Pentium.

Ill stick with AMD.

mcortz_2000
08-06-02, 12:07 PM
I have been an AMD fan for a long time ever since the k6233 but the latest P4's also provoked a change in my system. The overclockability of the 1.8A for instance is AWESOME to say the least. Also if u can reach 2.4 with a 1.8A with stock cooling/thermal grease, why would u get an AMD and also now that DDR is a viable option with the P4 makes it even more appealing and finally there are some low cost DDR chipsets a.k.a. SiS645dx(replaced with 648) that give new meaning to the word bang for the buck and there are the 845 boards etc......

savyj
08-06-02, 01:45 PM
I am lost...if a 1.73ghz Athlon XP w/ DDR =~ 2.4ghz P4 w/ DDR in overall performance why is a $120 1.6ghz P4 (oc'd to 2.4ghz) so much better than a $100 1.67ghz Athlon XP (oc'd to 1.73ghz)??? Can someone explain this?

mcortz_2000
08-06-02, 01:54 PM
Actually it does not compete entirely. The P4 has the 533Mhz bus advantage, it runs cooler, the system is a lot quieter and the 1.73 AMD does not perform as well as a P4 2.4(533 Bus).

Prime
08-06-02, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by [Corporal Dan]
Sell me your a7n266 and 1700+?

Hehe...sorry, it's already sold.

savyj
08-06-02, 02:49 PM
mcortz_2000: Actually I'm having a hard time finding review material to back up what you said. I can see the 2.4ghz 533fsb inching out an overall victory when using expensive RDRAM memory but not when using 333mhz DDR. Can anybody point me to some material so I can edju-m'kate myself? Oh, I should probably include the 1.8ghz (1.73ghz oc'd to 1.8ghz) in this comparison as they currently cost the same as the 1.6ghz Northwood cores (~$120). Is it just me (could very well be that I'm just not finding them) or are there a surprising lack of Athlon XP w/ KT333 vs. Pentium 4 533mhz / 333mhz DDR comparisons out there? Seems suspicious...

mcortz_2000
08-06-02, 03:59 PM
savyj: I agree that the performance is really close but there is a difference. The other thing u have to realize is only certain DDR setups will do so. Some will not but we all know that already. The facts are simply:
P4 runs cooler..........
P4 systems run quieter..........
VIA chipsets are not as stable as P4 based chipsets(not all P4 chipsets but most)
Anyway i am not against AMD, in fact the oposite. I am just sick and tired of the issues like noise, heat etc... compared to P4.

StealthHawk
08-06-02, 08:18 PM
shudder, K6 :o

AMD's Performance Ratings are on the mark. use them to compare P4 and Athlon. At most add 100 to the Performance Rating, but a general rule is 66MHz of Athlon = 100MHz of P4.

if you overclock the FSB of the Athlon, it would be closer to the P4 though. of course that is more work.