P4 1.8GHz or AMD Athlon XP And Why?

[Guest deadzombie]

Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo stick!!!!

You guys are nuts.

Intel HAS good chips. Very few things flat out touch a Xeon.

I think Intel took a wrong turn with the P4, but multi-threading may turn that around.

AMD has good chips. No they aren't as cool as Pentiums. But they do have a better overall design with their shorter, w-i-d-e-r pipelines, which is how they out perform Pentiums.

Calling people stupid because you haven't taken the proper time to install a chipset properly is your own problem. I'll be happy to charge you on an hourly basis so you can work through this anger you have. Therapy is a good thing.

Alot of people on the Intel side aren't really using facts to back their arguments. C'mon guys, support your favorite chip with FACTS. I've had many Intel chips just 'go bad'. My Intel rep shakes his head and offers me a discount to upgrade. :|

I would love to hear good things about Intel again.

Heaven forbid two different chips, made different ways, can't better the other in different areas?

Calling names IS childish. and if you go back and read this thread, it's the Intel guys sounding 14 right now. Most AMD peeps know there chips pretty well, usually because they were once Intel peeps who took a big chance switching over. Most AMD users I know did alot of research before taking that step.

Hopefully, Intel users would be so kind as to deliver the same and stop the name calling?

BTW: I have bad habits older than most of you peeps, so watch who your calling a kid. It took me 4 months of daily research and talking to experienced AMD users and private retailers before I switched -> it was my bosses money on the line, and it would come out of my bonus if something went wrong. Better beleive AMD is good.

[dysan]

1) the main diffences between p4 and athlonxp are power consumption and heat. as long as athlonxp suffers from this, they will never be a good consumer chip

P4 sucks up 70 watts of power and needs a proper power supply. P4 consumes as much power as Athlons. It seems to me that all of the frying and heat arguments come from one video tom's hardware made. However AMD do run at higher temp than Intel.

2)athlonxp is cheaply made...why else do you think amd can keep selling the chips at the price they are

Have you ever though about the reason Intel cost more is because Intel can get away with it. If you own like 90 percent of the market share(i'm not sure of the figures that is a huge majority) yes you could charge whatever the hell you want. Also Intel know that a lot of people associate Intel as a quality brand so they are willing to pay what ever price to get Intel. They charge a higher premium than the Athlon. There is no way AMD can sell their CPUs at the same price because people would rather buy Intel since the vast majority of people tend to stick with a well known name brand. So AMD charge a lesser premium than Intel. If P4 is such a quality CPU why would Intel had to add more cache and switch to .13 micron and support DDR and gasp SDRAM and basically ditch RDRAM. If the P4 is so well made why did they have to revamp it with the Northwood chips? The fact is the P4 have flaws as do Athlons. Also AMD is not a small newcomer to making CPUs.

3)current architecture amd uses has no future..can't even reach 2.0ghz, whereas the p4 northwood currently works fine at 3ghz

Clock Speed does not mean everything and that is the truth. These are exactly the reasons why Intel can cash on the Mhz myth. 3ghz won't mean any thing if a it is ouperformed by a processor running at lower clock speed.

4)amd doesn't have a good quality chipset....nforce is expensive and already out of date.

There plenty of quality chipsets for the AMD platform. They don't however match the ones Intel makes. and how is nforce out of date?

Why is it that most arguments that Intel supporters make just attack the flaws of AMD solutions and thus a couple flaws means AMD is not a got chip. Intel is not immune to flaws either. They also suffer with problems with their chips.

[Roger H. Veteran]

This is whoa.... 5 pages of flame.. these pages are so hot no wonder my AMD system is 50C right now.. LOL... That's the overclocked temp so chill out people...

/me ****es on the board to cool it down!!

calm down people... if you got an AMD then rep it to the fullest and if you got Intel then rep that too...

/edit

dysan - hey man good points. And another reason why Intel chips are so expensive is because they advertise so much that everyone knows them. They charge you for that too and dont' say they don't cuz they gotta charge for the advertising the do. This war been going on for ages and wont ever end so just do what pleases you i suggest.

[TimeRider]

Actually, one of the principal reasons Intel processors are more expensive is because they are physically larger than the AMD counterpart. That equates to fewer chips per wafer.

I don't dispute the fact that there are other reasons as well. But that is one of the major contributing factors.

This from Tom's Hardware:

"Another factor is the stability and product quality of a system: while all Athlon processors suffered from occasional instability in our tests, the Pentium 4 platform ran without a glitch. Reasons for this behaviour might not lie in the processor itself, but rather in the motherboard design and the chipset used."

-October 2001

And this:

"In any case, one thing is visible: in the majority of performance tests, the new Pentium 4/2200 is ahead."

-January 2002

And . . .

"In the benchmark results, the Athlon XP 2300+ cannot quite keep pace with the Intel Pentium 4/3000."

-January 2002

He's your boy AMD'rs

By the by, I have not called anyone any names and I have boots older than many of the post authors here.

[Heinrich-X]

This thread is getting out of hand, way too many immature people posting worthless crap insulting other people.

Do I need to remind you people this is a Performance debate not personal verbal attackings?

Intel guys get the facts and the benchmarks through your thick little sculls and accept the fact that for just about everything except for pure clock speed and power consumption/heat dissapation the AMD flat out wins

[Roger H. Veteran]

Originally posted by TimeRider  

Actually, one of the principal reasons Intel processors are more expensive is because they are physically larger than the AMD counterpart.  That equates to fewer chips per wafer....

what tha... i'm not flaming but where do you get your info? The p4 is much smaller than the Athlon. have you seen the sockets and or the chips? Well ok... here's a side by side!

hehe... once again... tomshardware to the rescue... :)

[Miran]

A hex on you all!

[TimeRider]

Uhhhhh . . . . sorry SHoTTa35 but those pictures demonstrate the size of the substrate not the chip itself. While you can see the Athlon chip (the little square in the center), you cannot see the Intel chip as it has a big metal heat spreader on it.

Physically, the P4 chip is about 30% to 40% larger and has something like half again as many transistors.

Read this one:

http://www.electronicstimes.com/story/OEG20020128S0007

[Roger H. Veteran]

oh... hehe.. well my bad :) i thought you meant the total packaging! :) SORRY!

and to that kid who thinks the P4 runs on the 400Mhz FSB then you're just plain wrong... the new core that comes out at 533mhz is only the memory clock not the FSB. the P4s still run at 133FSB and the rest of the system runs at the higher bus.

(I THINK!!)

[TimeRider]

It's the silicon wafer that is so expensive, not the substrate.

The 533MHz is quad pumped 133.

Not unlike the 266MHz Athlon being 133MHz using both sides of the clock cycle.

It's all smoke and mirrors . . . memory arcitecture (sp).

[vraa]

Originally posted by Chris123NT  

 And vraa is ur typical 14 year old.  A stupid ****!

whoa.. that was plain out mean

i do have a stock HSF and FAN and they are running pretty cool.. but like i said not on my comp tho.. i have that thermal paste..

that having many fans thing i won't argue about.. i have a total of seven fans

two in the front

one in the back

on on cpu each which totals two

and one on graphics card

and on on Powersupply

itsnot that loud.. if i had one of those decibals meter things i would give yall info on how loud it was

when yall say the XP is cheaply made isn't that new intel made for only 55USD? i'm not sure so don't get mad at me for that..

i am not one of those kids that pure out hates intel.. i just don't like celerons and pentiums..

xeon's infact are prolly the coolest server cpu's.. i'm not sure about that tho cuz i hear people saying PIII Xeon's.. hmm..

i do have my side of the case open.. that might be why i have a low temp but thats only cuz i'm still working on my computer.. i've only have amy tyan board for about a week and a half.. its going perfect. nothing has caught on fire or stuff

[Xe|oN]

Hmmm what I am really sick of is some Intel users who are stuckup and simply diss AMD and the people who use AMD processors and insult those people.

I myself am 14 and don't have lots and lots of money to spend on a processor. The fact is, I can get just as good quality and even better performance with an AMD processor than with a slightly more expensive Intel processor. If I was as wealthy and fortunate as some I would probably be buying Intel processors too but I'm not. This is not to say that AMD processors are just for people like me though. I think AMD have done a darn good job of going head on with Intel and I think they will continue to do so. I mean even an XP 2000+ is still in the same league as a P4 Northwood 2.2Ghz and thats pretty good considering its only running at 1.66 Ghz. Even if Intel remains ahead, AMD will always be right behind it proving to be a very good alternative.

So come on people... This is Neowin, we're supposed to be part of a community not part of a processor war. :p

[GregHard]

My AMD CPU runs at 30 degrees Celcius. Thats not overheating, pal. Argue with facts. An athlon xp 1800+ beats a p4 2.2ghz. Faster clock speeds mean nothing.

[TimeRider]

Xe|oN:

I hear you . . . really I do. But let's be honest about one thing. The AMD owner's "diss" the Intel owners with equal vigor. It's like the Ford vs. Chevy debate.

I think what gets the ire of most Intel enthusiasts is the condescending language that seems pervasive in this argument.

I have said it before, and I will say it again. There is no way to compare these processors on an even playing field. AMD is rooted in x87 and Intel has moved to NetBurst. If you benchmark an Athlon with software optimised for NetBurst it will perform poorly by comparison. If you benchmark a P4 with software optimised for x87 it will perform poorly by comparison. No reviewer worth his salt would deny this observation.

Because Intel holds such a large market share, more and more software will be written to optimise this new instruction set. AMD will lose ground without some change in the basic structure of their chip. I think most would also agree that the current architecture of the Athlon is reaching the limits of its ability. Right now the P4 is a processor with an eye on the future, AMD is still rooted in the past . . .

JMHO

[dcghost]

I will not lie...I have always prefered Intel. AMD however has turned out to be a hell of a deal for it's price.

If you have a limited budget and want a good PC get AMD with DDR.

If money does not matter get the fastest out there. P4 2.2GHz with DDR (less new RDRAM is out and better, i have not kept up with RDRAM lately). It is proven that it ourperforms all competors and are you wondering why...AMD has been known to get hot as it is...well AMD still has a .18 micron level, the new P4 however is down to .13!

Also, if you like to overclock, get the P4. It can easily be overclocked at descent speeds without major coolding.

Enjoy your decision.

www.tomshardware.com

(good place as one guy said to get facts)

[bubka]

The only reason the Intel fanboys are so mad is because the payed the big money for their P4s so they have to back it up with something. Hey, if I payed 1,000 more for a system with less perfomance, I would be mad too. They got those "Dell systems with Intel P4... which is so nice" lol

Yeah so nice because it costs $53 to make and we sell them at $400+. Go to www.anandtech.com and check out any current review to see what is the best, those guys dont care what brand anything is, as long as it has the best performance.

Also, the Athlon XP uses .15m technology, Intel even took apart an XP and said it was smaller than .18. Just wait tell then Fall when its Hammertime.

[freeza]

here are 2 facts that remain true every since my last post

and that will continue to remain true even after my post

so every AMD fan out there will know it and be bothered by it because its the only thing they have.

when you say facts i guess you mean the benchmarks you people hold so dear since thats all you have to hang on to.

but anyway

1. benchmarks (the only purpose they serve is puroses like these, to brag when nobody cares really)

2. you wouldnt be able to tell the difference between an intel system or an AMD one if they were sat side by side and you had to evaulate each (maybe you would be able to since one would sound like a blender and the other one wouldnt)

anything you amd fans say after this is useless junk and shouldnt be taken seriously by anybody since the only thing you will have to say after this is more benchmark jabber and/or trying to mock or make fun or say something sarcastic and ignorant about my post.

if you have anything other than yeah it can outperform this when you have never tried it yourself then we're all ears.

until you stop quoting toms hardware and what other sites are doing then it is of no use to any one on this board.

now every one do me a favor and review the past 10 or so pages and look at how many times benchmarking has been brought up.

and remind me how that matters when you are surfing a board like neowin and playing games?

and to all the people that say Intel supporters havent brought up facts.

benchmarks to you fools are all the fact you need right?

it would be funny as hell to find out that whoever created the program made it biased then you would shut up so fast :)

[TimeRider]

"The only reason the Intel fanboys are so mad is because the payed the big money for their P4s so they have to back it up with something."

I'm not mad at all. I gladly paid the money, no reservations, no hesitation and no regrets.

That statement is right up there with "nah-nah na-nah-nah."

Grow up.

Actually I built my own, but if I were to buy a branded system it would in fact be a Dell.

[Krome]

You people are so funny! :)

I can gather up points from all the post and title it "How to tell if you're a INTEL or AMD compatriots" hehehe

Am still laughing my butt off when thinking about it... ahhahaha

[Guest deadzombie]

well Freeza [cool name!], let my respond;

You've thrown the baby out with the bath.

You say benchmarks don't matter, and basically again, benchmarks don't matter.

Benchmarks are an excellent way to determine real world performance. If a benchmark by a reputable tester tells me that Athlon XP performs Photoshop renders faster than a P4, and my shop performs about a hundred filters a day, that means alot to me.

If I'm a Quake3 player that loves insane lvls, then the P4 FPS benchmark has a practical meaning to me.

Biased software? If anything, most software will be biased in favor of Intel.

You've seemed to close your mind off to the fact that someone other than Intel could do anything good at all.

But did you read the title of this thread? The poor guy wants to know what chip he should buy and why. Benchmarks are a standard recognized way of evaluation. Seems to me thats what the guy is asking for, along with any install problems, benefits, etc...

[Roger H. Veteran]

Originally posted by TimeRider  

Xe|oN:

...........

I have said it before, and I will say it again.  ..... x87 and Intel has moved to NetBurst. ....

you said it before and you said it again and both times you are wrong. i thought it was X86??? LOL.... hmm who knows though.. i'm just an AMD user who knows nothing. Both processors are X86 but the P4 just adds other instructions, like MMX, SSE, SSE2 and AMD added those (except SSE2) as well as 3DNow and Advanced 3DNow.

Netburst is just an extra set of instructions to improve in certain areas of computing!

/edit

and good points my nukka deadzombie... I used to have P4 and i sold it and built a "slower" AMD system and still had money to go buy icecream and more stuff to celebrate the speed boost i got in my computing needs...

[Krome]

Ok... to end this, let's ask Bain (the thread starter) to see if he come to a conclusion on which processor is his choice... I think Bain had a headache from all the fighting already... so he must have missed a few points from some people who responds to this thread... nevertheless, I want to know his final decision on which processor is his choice... :)

So which is it Bain? AMD or Intel? :) Choose wisely or we're going to hammer you! :) hehehehe j/k

[Zombie9920]

He alread posted that he bought a P4. I think that a moderator should lock this thread because it is getting ridiculois. The thread starter already got the input he was looking for and he already made his choice. This thread should be axed now. ;P

[Zombie9920]

Well hell, the stupid forum isn't letting me edit my post. I'll just correct myself here. ridiculois = ridiculous.

[Spyder Veteran]

From personal experience:

When I bought my new PC, I left my Intel Pentium II and Intel 440BX chipset MB... my friend convinced me to go AMD because of better performance.

I went to an Athlon Thunderbird 1Ghz and VIA KT133A chipset MB, mainly because I had been reading good things about the setup: That an AMD outperformed an Intel chip at an equivalent speed.

The other reason I went AMD was that it was much cheaper than the Intel Pentium III 1Ghz combo I was looking at.

Anyways, I immediately had problems. USB, sound crackling, Windows 2000 blue screening with a stop error once in a while.

It took me a few weeks of researching and troubleshooting to get my system rock-solid stable and my system has been awesome since.

BUT there seems to always be new problems arising. Video card incompatibilities, sound card problems, burning problems.... I know these are a VIA chipset problem and not AMD but the fact still remains I never had one single problem with my Intel setup before I upgraded. Not one problem. Ever.

Looking back now, I somewhat regret leaving my Intel setup. I sacrificed stability and compatibility for what? A little bit more performance and the AMD was cheaper.

Well, the money I saved wasn`t worth the trouble I`ve encountered, and I can honestly say that when I upgrade my MB and CPU I`ll be going back to an Intel solution.

Just wanted to tell you my story because I`ve experienced both sides of the fence.