P4 1.8GHz or AMD Athlon XP And Why?

[TimeRider]

One thing that everyone seems to forget, especially the AMD supporters is that Intel has abandoned the x87 instruction set in lieu of "Netburst.". The AMD is still mired deeply in that x87 set. Trying to benchmark these two CPU's on an even playing field is impossible because of this. Most of the current benchmarks are weighted heavily in favor of x87 and as a result the Intel processors find themseleves at a distinct disadvantage. A 1.5GHz P4 will run x87 at about the same proficiency as a PIII 850.

It's like trying to benchmark an eagle against a barracuda, each will outperform the other in it's defined environment. Unfortunately, there is not enough software written that takes advantage of Intel's new instruction set, so they do in fact run slower on the current software/benchmarks.

I would still take an Intel processor over an AMD simply because Intel has been in the chipset business for quite some time. The 440BX was one of the longest running, fastest and most stable sets ever made. Intel knows how to optimize it's processors with companion chipsets.

Further, heat is an issue. I have been building and servicing PC's for 7 years and I can tell you two things based on my experiences.

1. AMD systems are not as stable.

2. Very few people ask for AMD by name compared to those who only want Intel.

I read here that reviews on sites such as Tom's Hardware prove this or that. Well Tom's Hardware is the least bias site on the Internet when it comes to this issue. For example, not too long ago they did a Celeron/T vs. Duron comparison.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q1/0201...0103/index.html

If you read the set up closely, the mainboard they placed the Celeron on did not have the ability to utilize PC133 memory, yet the Duron's did. The ensuing results were slightly in favor of the Duron, but with a better board I have no doubt the Celeron would have prevailed or at the very least been more competitive.

Last week, I built a Celeron 1.2 Tualatin, on an Abit ST6 board with 256MB of PC133 and a 64MB GeForce 2 GTS Pro Video card. It ran just under 7000 in 3DMark 2000. I thought that was pretty damn fast for a $99 processor on a $100 mainboard with an older Video Card.

In any event, this arguement will never be settled.

I for one choose Intel. And a newbie is the last thing I am.

[obsoleet]

for not being a newbie you should know that there is no such thing as a celeron tulatin...it's the Pentium III-M or P3 tulatin.

[mike3169]

Timerider, you're not a newbie, you're a Neowinian :D

[Guest deadzombie]

Krome posted:

       

Most AMD user wants power. Most AMD users are very young and new to computers. In reality, if you want power, you get power but you will loose quality. AMD users does not understand what quality is. To them, power is speed, speed is power. That's all they care. Don't talk quality to them. They'll make you think that power is their quality of their CPU. Yes. But quality and reliability has to be equal out or you else you don't have quality. They are young. It will take times for them to understand everything. The law of the universe is if you want the best of one thing, you have to sacrifice another. That's what AMD chip is all about. They neglect reliability over quality. I am not surprise if AMD user wouldn't understand my wide-spectrum of logical reasoning. Once you are fixed to something, it's hard for you to give it up. What I would be surprise is if there's Intel (Pentium) users that are very young. This is because they are smarter than average.

I have some questions for you;

1.) Why do you think that AMD does not produce quality chipsets? Ever since then K7 series hit the retail shelves AMD chips have been extremly reliable. Yes, there were compatibility problems with some bios, some gpus' and certain installs of Windows. But that was well over a year ago. At the same time AMD was having these compatibility issues, Intel was also going through a wide series of motherboard issues. This became so bad that a large number of retailers dropped their Intel certification (roughly 15%) because compatability issues with Intel chips were costing them too much money. I am responsible for a moderate (20+) number of machines, and as each Intel chip goes down, an AMD takes its place. Over 2 years that's been 10 chips. (Which is nice because that means I stay pretty current on the latest chipset...)

2.) Power doesn't equal quality, but don't you think it has something to do with it? I take from your post that you would disregard a chipsets overall performance in determining quality. This absolutley must be included in determining overall chip quality. The time and cost of fixing any incompatability issues is in direct relation to the money an employeer loses by deploying slow workstations. Render time, save time, network time (computing time) equals hard cash when that time is veiwed over the long term. Dollars a day waiting on a slow processor becomes thousands of dollars when looking at tens/ hundreds of employees over weeks/months. With AMD & Intel having almost zero difference in compatibility, AMD does process faster than Intel, hands down. In cost of deployment and long term production, AMD is the clear winner in the x86 field. (I love/ hate Macs and they run a slightly better dollar value than AMD based PC's in terms of long term production, but that's another discussion.)

3.) What do you think about the current roadmap of Intel vs. AMD? It was announced several months ago that both Intel and AMD are working on new bus systems to replace our outdated standard. The difference being that AMD is establishing these standards in line with a consortium of Mobo manuf., while Intel is going at it alone. AMD's system is supposed to support legacy bus cards, such as PCI, while Intel's won't. Hmmm. See any problems for Intel coming?

Even the quality of the chipset design roadmap comes into question here. Why did Intel revamp the P4 to handle instructions like it does? For the clock speeds alone? Out of all the chipmakers, Intel is still riding high on the misconception (read: taking advantage of public) that clockspeed=power. AMD is expanding the chipsets pipeline bandwidth, is running wild with DDR, and is designing their chips to handle instruction sets more like Motorola does (kinda - this is hard to describe non-technically -> help?), which will be far more efficient. (Although if Intel goes through with hyper-threading they will be so very cool I'll scream, AMD...watch your back)

4.) Please explain exactly what your "wide-spectrum of logical reasoning" is. Even my 4yr. old nephew, who seen Star Trek, knows logic is based upon factual reasoning. Abstract logic, systems logic...all logic references from some factual point. I missed yours. I found a few opinions, none of which were backed by statistics, experience or any technical information.

I am an immature AMD supporter. They won me over with their cool green logo and really insane processing power. Wow. I AM FRAGBAIT ! (with 10 yrs. experience in IT...)

[Zombie9920]

Originally posted by obsoleet  

for not being a newbie you should know that there is no such thing as a celeron tulatin...it's the Pentium III-M or P3 tulatin.

What the heck are you talking about man? All of the new Celerons are Tulatins. They require a FC-PGA2 compatible chipset just like a PIII Tulatin.

[obsoleet]

wow an even more useless celeron has been released, my apologies.

[Miran]

DeadZombie:

Legacy? Do you still have an ISA slot in your AMD Athlon 2000? I didn't think so. Legacy is a BOTTLENECK.

Soma:

"Opinions mean nothing to me... It was once an opinion that the sun revolved around the earth, it was once an opinion that the earth was flat, and it was once an opinion that by allowing someone to nearly bleed to death, you could drain them of a certain disease or sickness they had... "

Actually, none of these were based on opinions, but what were considered "fact" at the time. In fact, the opinion that the sun revolved around the earth (Ptolemy's Earth-centered view) was mathematically based and indeed DID work (until new findings arose). This has nothing to do with this conversation, but I thought you might find it interesting.

[GregHard]

I'm sorry, if i knew you judged this type of thing on how well it runs without the fan (BTW, the Athlon XP runs as well and shuts down unlike the Athlons before it) i'd say GO PENTIUM!

Sorry. But when a slower AMD Athlon XP beats a much faster Pentium 4 in 9 out of 10 benchmarks, for half the price, I go for the best one -- the Athlon XP.

toms did benchmarks. hard did benchmarks. I did benchmarks. anand did some benchmarks. tweak did some benchmarks.

Take 10 benchmarks comparing both you'll see the XP is equal or BETTER than the Pentium 4.

Just my $.052 (Inflation rates)

[Miran]

I don't know why you guys keep bringing this up.

Both chips use a different clocking scheme.

Simple as that, you can't compare point for point.

If you really compared point for point than consider that an 800 mhz MACINTOSH can kick the living crap out of any AMD invented thus far.

[irdawood]

800mhz faster then an AMD XP2000?????? where did u get that from i own a mac its crap form start to finish its a rotting apple as shown in the logo!!!!

[Heinrich-X]

I read about the first 2 1/2 pages of this so if this seems out of place you know

Just my 2 cents, but here are the advantages to the Athlon:

9 stage pipeline (PowerPC G4s have a 7-10 stage, smaller pipeline means more IPC but lower clock speed)

NVIDIA nForce chipset!!

Cheaper

MP capable out of the box

Easily OCed

Intel Disadvantages:

20 stage pipeline (very low IPC so much so that the clock frequency must be around 3.6ghz to make it worth it)

Poor DDR support

RDRAM is highspeed but not very wide being only 16 bit

QDR FSB, thats only 100mhz core, AMD has a 133 to get DDR 266

Go with Athlon because it perfectly balances IPC and MHZ to give you maximum performance at a better price.

And for you Intel guys, its sad that a 1.67ghz part can beat a 2.0ghz and meet a 2.2ghz

[Chris123NT]

I just have one thing to say my preference is Intel and will always be untill AMD fixes their damned heat problems!

[irdawood]

what heat problems my amd 2000XP runs at 35c

if u get heat probs mate then u dont kno whow to build a computer

[GregHard]

Originally posted by irdawood  

what heat problems my amd 2000XP runs at 35c

if u get heat probs mate then u dont kno whow to build a computer

exactly. What heat problems?

[Guest deadzombie]

Heinrich-X; Right On! Don't forget if the pipeline needs to be flushed the new P4's take about 4 times longer than an Athlon XP.

and oh yeah, AMD chips don't overheat in properly built systems.

That's like saying your HD doesn't work because you use it to hold your refrigerator magnets.

[Chris123NT]

you guys are ****ing stupid. I have an athlon system i built not too long ago and it has endless heat probs and **** . I use a thermaltake Volcano 5 HSF and arctic silver II and the damn thing still hits 50 C! My P4 on the other hand runs at 28C all the time pretty much and whoops my athlon system to hell :evil:

[Guest deadzombie]

Chris123NT;

calm down man.

I don't see how we're the stupid ones when your the one having the problems with a system you built...how does that work?

Sorry, I must be to dumb to understand that...

[irdawood]

volcano 5 is a **** heat sink and are you sure u applied the artic silver correctly??

too much artic silver and it will raise the temp rather then cool it

i dont have a prob with my XP

u probbably dont know how to build computers or something i dont see any other thing it could be

[Guest deadzombie]

Let's not flame the guy, let's help;

Chris123NT, did you read the supplied manual?

[irdawood]

listen when u put on the artic silver 3 make sure its a paper thin layer not tooo much!!!

also thing about getting yourself a better heatsink

and also some system fans not for your cpu but for peripherals my mates Intel CPU used to be ok temp but his case insides was very very hot

get yourself some fans i went over the top but this is my case for my AMD XP 2000 my mate with the intels case is more or less the same

we wanted it coz it looks cool and also for some serious overclock power

the window mod lights up to neon blue in the dark

the inside is very cool had to do a simillar set up to mates Intel

if u dont like noise then get yourself a speed adjuster contoller it switches fans off 1 by one but if u want sheer overclocking power as my mate and i then u need to keep system cool with fans

not as many as mines 1 or 2 will do the job if your not gonna overclock

[Chris123NT]

yeah the arctic silver II is a paper thin layer plus i have like 5 case fans in the thing. 4 80 mm and 1 120 mm fan. It idles at like 45C and loads at 51C. I dunno maybe thats not hot but it sure as hell is not cool by my standards.

[irdawood]

nooo way with that setup it should be cool around 35 - 40c no way maxxing out at 50

hmm weird get yourslf another fan....

also when u applied the artic silver u sure u scrapped the heatsink with a good cleaner?

and take all that heatsink wax off?

[TDQuiksilver]

You know what's funny also.. some of these kids have a so-called "kickin'-Intel's-ass" processor, but then they own something like a 56k connection.. talk about using that PC to get more FPS! ..like it would matter.. but good points put out by Freeza, hats off to him :)

and by the way irdawood, could you heat me up some hotpockets?

[irdawood]

where did u get this slow connection crap from???

i own an ADSL connection

no ****ty 56k here

[Krome]

irdawood, that box looks super... wonder if they gonna put a refrigerator in that box next... ehhehe too many fans... :)