PDA

View Full Version : P4 vs Athlon 64 Game and Encoding?


gate1975mlm
01-02-05, 09:18 AM
I know Athlon 64 is much better for games then P4! But how much better is P4 then Athlon 64 for those other things like encoding? Like an Athlon 64 3500+ what P4 would it out perform for encoding?

Riptide
01-02-05, 09:34 AM
I'm guessing a 2.8 P4 would outperform a 3500+ in encoding. Check some benchmarks/reviews and you'll see.

Dr.Nick
01-02-05, 10:54 AM
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2261&p=12
even at encoding Intel is no longer top dog ;)

GlowStick
01-02-05, 11:26 AM
Its very hard to tell who is a clear winner on encodeing because it really depends on what codec is being used!

But on average I will say that with most codecs a 3.0Ghz Pentium 4 will preform like a 3500+, however in a odd case the 3500+ will stomp it.

You really have to think about how much encodieng you will do, and how large of files you will be doing to see how much time you could really save.

zoomy942
01-02-05, 12:34 PM
Its very hard to tell who is a clear winner on encodeing because it really depends on what codec is being used!

But on average I will say that with most codecs a 3.0Ghz Pentium 4 will preform like a 3500+, however in a odd case the 3500+ will stomp it.

You really have to think about how much encodieng you will do, and how large of files you will be doing to see how much time you could really save.

those are good points. just take into account how much of certain activities you are going to be doing. i was going to use windows xp 64bit, because when it comes to some calculation-intensive things, it stomps all over 32bit windows, but i dont do that. i play games. so 2 questions.. is encoding your pc's priamry use? and if not, how much of a difference is 4-10% encoding speed going to matter? processors nowadays are so powerful that their performance differences as a whole is very small

bkswaney
01-02-05, 04:23 PM
those are good points. just take into account how much of certain activities you are going to be doing. i was going to use windows xp 64bit, because when it comes to some calculation-intensive things, it stomps all over 32bit windows, but i dont do that. i play games. so 2 questions.. is encoding your pc's priamry use? and if not, how much of a difference is 4-10% encoding speed going to matter? processors nowadays are so powerful that their performance differences as a whole is very small

I feel the same way.
Man PC's are so fast today who really cases about 10 to 15%.

If u ask me anyone with a say 2500+ cpu is in the game. :)

CaptNKILL
01-02-05, 04:38 PM
I feel the same way.
Man PC's are so fast today who really cases about 10 to 15%.

If u ask me anyone with a say 2500+ cpu is in the game. :)
W00t for me and overclocking :D

(rudolf)

zoomy942
01-02-05, 04:39 PM
I feel the same way.
Man PC's are so fast today who really cases about 10 to 15%.

If u ask me anyone with a say 2500+ cpu is in the game. :)

yeah. i went from an xp 3200 to an athlon 64 (clawhammer) 3000 and the speed is better, but not anything i would notice my face melting over. for me, it was more of a "i need a warm fuzzy from faster parts" kind of thing

Viral
01-02-05, 09:01 PM
I feel the same way.
Man PC's are so fast today who really cases about 10 to 15%.

If u ask me anyone with a say 2500+ cpu is in the game. :)

It depends on what you are doing and what your priorities are really. Gaming is real time, so any performance differences may be far more evident. With encoding, time taken and dropped frames is all that matters. If your priorities are on gaming, then you are usually prepared to wait a bit longer when it comes to encoding to get the better gaming performance. If you had to watch/listen to what you were encoding in real time then you would care about the performance a lot more. So IMO, for any gamer/encoder (for those who value gaming more or equal to encoding and doesn't exactly need their encoding to be done faster), gaming performance should come first as it's effect directly impacts the real-time experience.

Cota
01-02-05, 10:01 PM
And then there's Windows64 just around the corner (its the corner that's still a bit far).

Which will probably give the athlon64 much better encoding times and even better gaming performance.

saturnotaku
01-02-05, 10:04 PM
Which will probably give the athlon64 much better encoding times and even better gaming performance.

In applications that would be optimized for it, yes. Otherwise, performance likely isn't going to change too much, unless Microsoft comes up with a way for native 32-bit applications to take advantage of a 64-bit hardware/OS combination.

jAkUp
01-02-05, 11:05 PM
yeah. i went from an xp 3200 to an athlon 64 (clawhammer) 3000 and the speed is better, but not anything i would notice my face melting over. for me, it was more of a "i need a warm fuzzy from faster parts" kind of thing

Face-Meltingly fast :)

Daneel Olivaw
01-03-05, 08:53 AM
Face-Meltingly fast :)
Jakup, what's your memory latency in everest with that P4? (mildly related to this thread) I see you're at 1:1 and probably with PAT?