PDA

View Full Version : It's "official" the tables have turned - Heat


Pages : [1] 2

Viral
03-23-04, 11:59 PM
http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2004q1/pentium4-3.4ghz/index.x?pg=15

I think this puts an end to the argument if there still is one.

Prescott 3.4GHz stock cooler 2xF@H load = 78C
Athlon 64 3400+ stock cooler 2xF@H load = 52C

That's a 50% difference.... add this to the fact that the 3400+ is considered faster and AMD suddenly look to be in a good position.

Nutty
03-24-04, 03:52 AM
Totally agree.. I dont think the argument was heat, but the fact that Intel chips have thermal shutdown in em, while AMD didnt for a while. I dont know if AMD motherboards had it in the old Thunderbird days.. but basically if you left the cooler off both, the Intel chip would shutdown, whereas the AMD chip would fry.

But yeah, thats one of the typical arguments of Intel fanboys laid to rest.. ;)

Riptide
03-24-04, 08:51 AM
Intel had better be doing something about this situation or they're going to get their rear-ends handed to them over the next year or two.

Sazar
03-24-04, 09:06 AM
they already are... intel will learn from this and make the necesary adjustments... I just want to see amd ramp production and persude OEM's that they can indeed meet demand...

Riptide
03-24-04, 09:32 AM
I think it would be nice to see Intel have their rear-ends handed to them though wouldn't it? AMD needs to strengthen and even the financial playing field a bit.

Sazar
03-24-04, 09:43 AM
amd has an uphill task regardless of what it does for 2 reasons... intel can afford to severly undercut them in supplying processors to OEM's and the like... and intel can MEET DEMANDS... there is a very good reason so many manufacturers were wary of jumping on the a64 bandwagon when amd announced it... AMD has consistently had problems failing to meet demand ESPECIALLY of newer products...

now with upto 3 fabs being dedicated for microprocessors AMD has a chance to turn the corner and try striking up some more deals and keep money flowing into its coffers...

sxotty
03-24-04, 10:53 AM
Yeah I hope amd can get more market share. I don't even care if it gets to 50/50 but I would like them to get at least 30% that would enable them to grow. Now they simply hang on the edge of bankruptcy w/o enough income to make the fabs to meet demand.

Viral
03-25-04, 01:34 AM
Yes it still does look impossible for AMD to be no#1. They simply don't have the capacity to even get 25% of the market up from their now ~18%.

The facts are Intel have alot of control over AMD.. and if they really feel threatened they will be able to cut AMD down to size in many ways. Intel can take pretty much anything from AMD. If they wanted to could make a clone A64 and use their better/cheaper production ability to sell it cheaper while still making a profit. Intel would have to be downrigth evil to do such a thing though IMO.. and it could still be considered as over agressive competition.

I'm just hoping AMD can get more market share than they have ever had. Around 25% should be good.. hopefully up to 30% by 2005. That should be enough to change the market and keep it competitive for more years to come.

B&R
03-25-04, 02:27 AM
But yeah, thats one of the typical arguments of Intel fanboys laid to rest.. ;)

Tru. The heat never worried me but the fanboys complains about this.. pffff.

EMunEeE
03-25-04, 09:50 AM
Intel processors are definately getting hotter as Intel tries to beat AMD with brute force. Thats not good in the long run. My next processor will probaly be from AMD (in a couple years) unless a Pentium Centrino type processor comes to the desktop.

Sazar
03-25-04, 11:22 AM
centrino is not a processor... its the general technology you receive with the M processor in the laptop...

Nutty
03-25-04, 12:25 PM
According to my IT manager today, Dell are now listing AMD cpu's for the 1st time ever.. This right? Good news for AMD methinks.

Sazar
03-25-04, 12:38 PM
was a mistake apparently nutty... :)

more info @ the inq if you care to find out :D

afaik there are no plans to do any server sales from dell @ this time with amd mp's.. believe me... I would be one of the first to know if this was the case...

Nutty
03-25-04, 01:42 PM
Oh well, I thought it was too good to be true.. :)

Sazar
03-25-04, 01:48 PM
:) the fact we've seen it does bring out a laugh though lol...

dell has tried out some amd server configs... they just have no plans to bring it to market @ this time...

Ninja Prime
03-26-04, 01:52 PM
Where is Malfunction, I would think he'd be all over this like stink on a monkey, spreading his FUD. ;) :p

MUYA
03-26-04, 02:26 PM
Pentium M Processors are quite good they perform even better than P4 (as well all know) and is competitive against K8s even w/o on die mem controller. Only problem is I cannot find the link where there was such comparsions. I think it was at tech report!

sxotty
03-26-04, 05:02 PM
Yeah the pentium M's are good. Intel just followed a theory to get good marchitecture and not architecture on the p4's and people rightly thought it was silly :).

Intel is not run by a bunch of clueless monkeys. They can make outstanding products, and they do at times, just now the amd has a better deal.

Dazz
03-27-04, 03:13 AM
Pentium M Processors are based on the Intel Pentium 3.

GamblerFEXonlin
03-28-04, 09:59 AM
MUYA, bring a source or dont bother post.
sxotty, of course they can be innovative but not so much without competition.

P4 systems have een more responsive then AMD because of the better memory badnwidth and latency, windows XP feels more responsive.

I tried a P4 2.8 in a store and start-help took less then one second to pop up (obviously in the memory) but 1.5 seconds on my own athlon system (also when in memory).

This have changed with AMD's on-cpu memory controller though, i read people report a more "spunky" windows XP.

http://prisguide.hardware.no/vis_produkt.php?view=erfaringer&product_id=9811&id=5051

"Windows er litt "friskere" = windows is more fresh.

so im saving for a 939 system.

Viral
03-29-04, 03:22 AM
Hmm, pressing f1 in any instance of general use takes less than 1 second to display help and support for me.

Tried at 3200+ speeds also.. couldn't tell the difference. I would not think such a thing would be all that dependant on bandwidth. For general use i have always found AXP's better..for multitasking no, but regular general use and light multitasking definitely.

I'm still looking forward to the holy 939 system though. Such a thing of myth and mystery just has to be experienced! ;p It seems like that's what everyone is waiting for these days, and i can't agree with the more.

MUYA
03-29-04, 04:57 AM
MUYA, bring a source or dont bother post.
sxotty, of course they can be innovative but not so much without competition.

P4 systems have een more responsive then AMD because of the better memory badnwidth and latency, windows XP feels more responsive.

I tried a P4 2.8 in a store and start-help took less then one second to pop up (obviously in the memory) but 1.5 seconds on my own athlon system (also when in memory).

This have changed with AMD's on-cpu memory controller though, i read people report a more "spunky" windows XP.

http://prisguide.hardware.no/vis_produkt.php?view=erfaringer&product_id=9811&id=5051

"Windows er litt "friskere" = windows is more fresh.

so im saving for a 939 system.


Tell u what clam down a tad eh mate? I do suggest you calming down a bit before posting a response. You can post a counter-post but don't give me or anyone an ultimatum. That job is for forums mods only.

I don't know why you got your knickers in a twist but, with regards to Athlon64 performances, I have had first hand reports from someone who went from a P4 to K8 and he has been all but raving about it (and I trust him in his judgement and he is afellow member of these forums). Around the web there are many Intel P4 vs Athlon64 shootouts in which Athlon64s come out tops on most occasions in gaming.

I posted that Pentium M were competitive against K8s as I distincly remember some benches which had the Penitum M being competitive against P4s and I think K8s. I said competitive not beat or downright own. I don't have the exact link ...

But i did dig up a pentium M vs Athlon64 Mobile here
http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/20031216/yakumo_athlon64-09.html

In some cases the Pentium M is competitive aginst the Mobile Athlon64. Although not a apples to apples comparision, it does give you somewhat of an idea.
Pentium M have better IPC than P4s. That is also why Pentuim M are competitive aginst K8s as well.

Viral
03-29-04, 06:58 AM
Generally Penitum-M's still fall short of high-end P4's simply because they aren't as of yet, clocked high enough to be truely competitive.

When comparing both in the mobile sector however, the story can be quite different. The reason for this is the memory config used in laptops. generally these days single channel DDR333 is what you will see. Now the P4's are made to survive on much more than this, even the northwood B's used in many of these laptops. The Pentium-M's on the other hand are designed to work with DDR266 i believe. Thus they are well suited to the mobile sector, while the P4's aren't. Generally speaking, you won't get the same performance out of a P4 in a laptop as you will out of one in a desktop with DC DDR400.

Of course back to the original statement. P-M's aren't clocked high enough yet to compete with P4's in a desktop environment. If they got a bit over 2.0GHz they would be there, but they aren't, and so generally average out below the P4's in performance.

MUYA
03-29-04, 07:05 AM
You are right Viral when talking about overall clocks...in terms that 4s are like 3.4Ghz and K8s are now approaching 2.4GHz. So no way a 1.7 Pentium M can compete there with a P4 3.4Ghz or K8 2.4Ghz :D Clock for clock is what I was on about in which the Pentium M is a modified Pentium III..(Intel's Israeli Labs came up with this one IIRC) and we know Pentium III also performed better clock for clock against P4s. Perhaps I wasn't clear before but what I was suggesting was that Pentium Ms are competitive against P4s and K8s clock for clock. I did not specify at clock speed they are available. ;) Perhaps Intel will introduce the Pentium M in 90nm flavor for the desktop. That would be intersting but unlikely?

Sazar
03-29-04, 02:08 PM
MUYA, bring a source or dont bother post.
sxotty, of course they can be innovative but not so much without competition.

P4 systems have een more responsive then AMD because of the better memory badnwidth and latency, windows XP feels more responsive.

I tried a P4 2.8 in a store and start-help took less then one second to pop up (obviously in the memory) but 1.5 seconds on my own athlon system (also when in memory).

This have changed with AMD's on-cpu memory controller though, i read people report a more "spunky" windows XP.

http://prisguide.hardware.no/vis_produkt.php?view=erfaringer&product_id=9811&id=5051

"Windows er litt "friskere" = windows is more fresh.

so im saving for a 939 system.

socket A to p4 C.. i did not notice much differnce in general load times... if anything the d'top environment was faster using sckt A.. prob due to the lower latencies...

in memory intensive situations this was reversed with the p4 showing better performance and under multi-tasking environments again this was shown with the p4 doing better...

however the p4 c does not hold a candle to the a64 processors even with single channel v/s dual channel mem... apart from synthetic benches the a64's are faster in pretty much every scenario.. heck with CnQ on my d'top is still faster than a p4 3.0c @ full speed..