Pentium or AMD?

[[xan]]

Well Meltdown07 you're very wrong.

First of all:

A have an AMD Athlon XP 1700+ (at home) and an Intel P4 1.4 GHz (at work). So I worked with both Intel and AMD CPUs and I guess I know what I'm talking about. Both systems are very stable.

2. The AMD computer is FASTER than P4 (they have same frequencies ~).

3. P4 1.7 vs Athlon XP 1700+: some benchmarks said that Athlon is faster in some tests.

So equal frequeuncies means Athlon > P4

So AMD is VERY competitive

4. You get a good cooler and the heat problem is solved.

5. Athlon is (much) cheaper than P4.

6. I had problems with my AMD but I changed the memory and now it works just fine. Before you blame the Athlon for computer crashed check your hardware. I'm sure that a P4 on a mobo from Via or SIS is less stable...

If I had to choose I would choose AMD. Reason : is faster, cheaper and stable.

[Wickedkitten Veteran]

I'll step in with another facinating viewpoint. RAM

True the cost of the p4 chips and amd chips have bottomed out but for 256mb of pc2700 ddr ram its only ?45.75 plus vat from scan.co.uk

for 256mb of pc-800 rambus ram its 72.00 plus vat.

same with 1 512k stick of pc2700 ddr - ?99.75

vs 1 512k stick of pc-800 rambus - ?208.00

when put that way I personally would rather just get an athlon xp 2200 and 1gb of ddr ram than a p4 with half as much ram for the same price

As for the chips before people start bring up how the newer p4's don't use rambus

2.4 GHz *533FSB* Intel Pentium? P4 CPU 512k Cache * S478 * 319.24 + vat

2.533 GHz *533FSB* Intel Pentium? P4 CPU 512k Cache * S478 * 498.38 + vat

AMD Athlon XP 2100+ (1.73GHz) Palomino Core 129.21 + vat

AMD Athlon MP 2000+ (Multi Processor) (1.67GHz) Palomino Core 160.20 + vat

from scan.co.uk

[freeza]

Originally posted by [AMD]-SimGuy

Before you can make a choice on your CPU of choice, you have to sit down and evaluate what you are actually going to be USING the computer for?

Now, as my name suggests, I'm a die-hard AMD fan. Been there ever since the AMD K6 233 back in 1997, and even though I am the die-hard AMD fan, my personal preference of CPU's doesn't reflect what I sell to customers.

Most customers balk at the idea of using an AMD processor in their system simply because it doesn't have the brand name logo recognition and corporate power behind the "Intel Inside" slogan. "Chipzilla" has been around for almost 34 years (being officially incorporated on July 18, 1968) and in that time has released many different processors, all with unparalleled success.

Now, I would be willing to estimate that 85% of all people here on NeoWin have had at least 1 PC powered by some form of an Intel processor (whether it was the good ol' 4004, 8008, 8086, 8088, 286, i386, i486, Pentium P54C, Pentium P55C, Pentium II, Pentium III, Pentium IV, the Celeron or the Itanium). Most of us have experienced an Intel-powered machine and have used them (if not at home, then at work).

If most people ever care to notice, most corporate information technology departments purchase PC's powered by an Intel processor simply because of the stability they are known for, their lasting quality and brand name recognition. Sure, corporations may pay a little more for the "Intel Inside" namesake, but they are paying for a quality product.

As the old saying goes "Nobody gets fired for purchasing IBM..."

Now, enter AMD. Yes, the AMD 486 was just like the Intel 486 in the sense that it did 32-bit x86 processing and they both fit into the same motherboard connector (good old Socket 3). The AMD K5 was a dismal failure in North America and Europe. Running at 133 MHz, this 486-enhanced core only operated at a Pentium-Rating of 75.

Enter the K6. Socket 7 Compatible.... just as fast (if not faster) than Intel's comparable Pentium P54C and P55C, but cheaper in cost.

Time-warp ahead 5 years: 2002.

Enter the AMD Athlon XP and the Intel Pentium IV.

Both great processors with MORE than enough power for everyday applications. Whether it's surfing the internet, creating electronic documents in an office-productivity suite or working in home publication software, both the AMD and Intel offerings work at acceptable levels. Even for gaming, both the AMD Athlon XP and the Intel Pentium IV hold respectable standings when playing today's hottest games.

Now, I'm sure I'm going to get flamed by the benchmarking crowd, but quite frankly, it doesn't matter to me. There is more to using your computer than running 3DMark2001, PCMark2002, Sisoft SANDRA or any of the other major benchmarks on your system simply for bragging rights.

Quite frankly, when it all comes down to it, customers don't care if an AMD system scores 12500 and an Intel system scores 12499 in some benchmark that taxes a computer system. All most consumers care about is getting a quality computer that won't lock up on them, loose their data or malfunction on them.

Case and point: AMD Athlon XP and the heat issue.

Sure, most of us love our AMD Athlon XP's (or comparable AMD processors), but then again, most of us are the type of computer enthusiast that would dig out the hole-saw and cut a blowhole or 2 in the side of our case (I'm included in this generalization). Most consumers wouldn't ever dream of doing this. As well, they don't want something that is going to become a space-heater for them. A nice cool, error-free computer is what 90% of the computer-purchasing public will want. Because of this fact, I recommend the purchase of the Pentium IV to most customers simply because of less servicing issues (heat-related CPU failures and consequently failures of other hardware devices due to overheating).

However, if you are the type that doesn't mind modifying your case for more adequate cooling of your CPU and major system components, then AMD is the choice for you. Yes, price is an issue as well, but when you are going to be purchasing a new system or upgrading an older system, you should purchase the **best** hardware you can afford at the time to maximize the time required between your next system overhaul.

**Takes Breather...**

To conclude, you simply have to evaluate how much you want to spend and what you are going to be using your PC for and use this information to influence your CPU purchase decision.

It seems like the Socket A line is slowly reaching it's maximum with the 2200+ series of AMD Athlon XP processors. Even with the introduction of the Thoroughbred core, we see that the Socket A platform just can't deliver much more than is currently possible. For this reason, I would hold off on purchasing an AMD system right now (at least until the 'Hammer' falls).

Therefore, at this time in the year, I would have to recommend the Pentium IV CPU simply because the Socket 478 architecture has more "life" left in it and won't be abandoned anytime soon in favour of a newer, CPU connection architecture.

Recommendation for July 8th, 2002 @ 9:47 AM EST: Pentium IV

//Ending of rant...

that was a great post!

[zivan56]

Wickedkitten, Why not just buy PC2100 DDR-SDRAM for the P4?

There is hardly a performance difference that is noticable between DDR and RDRAM with the exception of the huge price gap. Also there is a good discussion for Athlon vs P4 here, forgot to mention it earlier.

[Spyder Veteran]

Originally posted by Eldoen

The biggest warning I can give Avoid Via CHIPSETS with a passion.

ROFL..coming from a VIA owner.. AMEN!

[Spyder Veteran]

Originally posted by [AMD]-SimGuy

Before you can make a choice on your CPU of choice, you have to sit down and evaluate what you are actually going to be USING the computer for?

Now, as my name suggests, I'm a die-hard AMD fan. Been there ever since the AMD K6 233 back in 1997, and even though I am the die-hard AMD fan, my personal preference of CPU's doesn't reflect what I sell to customers.

Most customers balk at the idea of using an AMD processor in their system simply because it doesn't have the brand name logo recognition and corporate power behind the "Intel Inside" slogan. "Chipzilla" has been around for almost 34 years (being officially incorporated on July 18, 1968) and in that time has released many different processors, all with unparalleled success.

Now, I would be willing to estimate that 85% of all people here on NeoWin have had at least 1 PC powered by some form of an Intel processor (whether it was the good ol' 4004, 8008, 8086, 8088, 286, i386, i486, Pentium P54C, Pentium P55C, Pentium II, Pentium III, Pentium IV, the Celeron or the Itanium). Most of us have experienced an Intel-powered machine and have used them (if not at home, then at work).

If most people ever care to notice, most corporate information technology departments purchase PC's powered by an Intel processor simply because of the stability they are known for, their lasting quality and brand name recognition. Sure, corporations may pay a little more for the "Intel Inside" namesake, but they are paying for a quality product.

As the old saying goes "Nobody gets fired for purchasing IBM..."

Now, enter AMD. Yes, the AMD 486 was just like the Intel 486 in the sense that it did 32-bit x86 processing and they both fit into the same motherboard connector (good old Socket 3). The AMD K5 was a dismal failure in North America and Europe. Running at 133 MHz, this 486-enhanced core only operated at a Pentium-Rating of 75.

Enter the K6. Socket 7 Compatible.... just as fast (if not faster) than Intel's comparable Pentium P54C and P55C, but cheaper in cost.

Time-warp ahead 5 years: 2002.

Enter the AMD Athlon XP and the Intel Pentium IV.

Both great processors with MORE than enough power for everyday applications. Whether it's surfing the internet, creating electronic documents in an office-productivity suite or working in home publication software, both the AMD and Intel offerings work at acceptable levels. Even for gaming, both the AMD Athlon XP and the Intel Pentium IV hold respectable standings when playing today's hottest games.

Now, I'm sure I'm going to get flamed by the benchmarking crowd, but quite frankly, it doesn't matter to me. There is more to using your computer than running 3DMark2001, PCMark2002, Sisoft SANDRA or any of the other major benchmarks on your system simply for bragging rights.

Quite frankly, when it all comes down to it, customers don't care if an AMD system scores 12500 and an Intel system scores 12499 in some benchmark that taxes a computer system. All most consumers care about is getting a quality computer that won't lock up on them, loose their data or malfunction on them.

Case and point: AMD Athlon XP and the heat issue.

Sure, most of us love our AMD Athlon XP's (or comparable AMD processors), but then again, most of us are the type of computer enthusiast that would dig out the hole-saw and cut a blowhole or 2 in the side of our case (I'm included in this generalization). Most consumers wouldn't ever dream of doing this. As well, they don't want something that is going to become a space-heater for them. A nice cool, error-free computer is what 90% of the computer-purchasing public will want. Because of this fact, I recommend the purchase of the Pentium IV to most customers simply because of less servicing issues (heat-related CPU failures and consequently failures of other hardware devices due to overheating).

However, if you are the type that doesn't mind modifying your case for more adequate cooling of your CPU and major system components, then AMD is the choice for you. Yes, price is an issue as well, but when you are going to be purchasing a new system or upgrading an older system, you should purchase the **best** hardware you can afford at the time to maximize the time required between your next system overhaul.

**Takes Breather...**

To conclude, you simply have to evaluate how much you want to spend and what you are going to be using your PC for and use this information to influence your CPU purchase decision.

It seems like the Socket A line is slowly reaching it's maximum with the 2200+ series of AMD Athlon XP processors. Even with the introduction of the Thoroughbred core, we see that the Socket A platform just can't deliver much more than is currently possible. For this reason, I would hold off on purchasing an AMD system right now (at least until the 'Hammer' falls).

Therefore, at this time in the year, I would have to recommend the Pentium IV CPU simply because the Socket 478 architecture has more "life" left in it and won't be abandoned anytime soon in favour of a newer, CPU connection architecture.

Recommendation for July 8th, 2002 @ 9:47 AM EST: Pentium IV

//Ending of rant...

Great post. Intelligent, well thought out and no BIAS. Its too bad though that your post will fall on deaf ears. Here's hoping I'm wrong

[vchip]

only AMD

you can read some more about its power on web

and leave intel with his faked clock speed.

[vf-]

you know what [AMD]-SimGuy is saying is true most people just want pc to run no hasstle or stuff and get whatever work they have to do

its only hardcore gamers that have to have greatest and fastest but for what..? MORE FPS?!?!?!?!!? if your system runs fine and stable there ya go

but look how sad some peoples lifes are on 3d mark site they constantly bench program or cheat the scores and same question for what?!?!?!

only thing i love about 3dmark 2001se now is nature scenes pixels shaders there absoloutely outstanding scenes especially the advanced pixel shader with fishes

and by the way from reading all these AMD intel threads its all been AMD VIA problems this and that, i do admit i had VIA board never again plus im curious how i dont hear many people with nForce & are the boards hard to get or what..?

[AMD]-SimGuy Enter the AMD Athlon XP and the Intel Pentium IV.

Both great processors with MORE than enough power for everyday applications. Whether it's surfing the internet, creating electronic documents in an office-productivity suite or working in home publication software, both the AMD and Intel offerings work at acceptable levels. Even for gaming, both the AMD Athlon XP and the Intel Pentium IV hold respectable standings when playing today's hottest games.

Well said, but only reason i dont go intel is only one thing just my opinion i dont like any of Intel compatible motherboards out there,

just always had my eye set on nForce until nVIDIA make one for Intel i might switch but this pc does the job for now ;)

[Qarth]

It's so funny to see people trying to talk techno babble... Why not simplify... So funny indeed...

[JrDZ13]

Originally posted by prick

going back to the first post.....

i got a amd xp 1800+, it works fine, is stable, and fast. I had to get a volcano 7+ cooler for it thou and its now idling around 35c.

im sure the intel runs at lower temp, but as a amd user, the high temps might be a corcern in the summer months.

money was a issue for me, so i went with amd.

if money ISNT a issue go with the pentium

if money IS a issue, go with the amd xp, and get a good heatsink fan as ull need it.

hope that sheds some light

Totally Agree! If money is no object go for a high end P4 without a doubt. If ur looking for a price vs. performace value go with AMD.

Simple as that.

[sp0rk]

$240 Athlon MP 2100

$608 Pentium 4 2.53GHz

-----------------------------------

You could buy one hell of a water cooling kit with that extra money, not to mention ram and a hard drive.

[Wickedkitten Veteran]

Originally posted by Qarth

It's so funny to see people trying to talk techno babble... Why not simplify... So funny indeed...

techno babble where? I think what everyone is saying is pretty straight forward

[fizik3]

i like Pentium3's. the fastest P3 is 1.4 ghz, the fast celeron is like 1.8ghz...

[Krome]

Choice: Intel

Reason: Pros and Cons

The Pro's and Con's

Intel:

Have not heard of overheating problems. Less time constraint on debugging and trouble shooting with hardware compatibility issues.

AMD:

Have seen many people have problem with heat and the CPU get busted and have to be replaced. Doubling the price for CPU cost, not to mention extra money spending on special heat sink and extra fans. Hence, power consumption and fan noise as a result. You have to trouble shoot many problems with hardware and software compatibility problems. In some case, it lead to destroying a good mobo.

Overall:

Price, performance, and quality is what I really want. For Intel, price is only a few bucks higher than the AMD. I don't want to have CPU that will lead to power failure due to heat sink or overheating problem, and then having to pay extra money on a new CPU and then get an extra fan or a new case just to over come the air ventilation problem.

As for Intel and performance issue, it is outstanding. You can leave the system on without having to worry about power consumption or overheating. When you first turn on your system, installing software and maintenance is not much of a problem. You don't need an extra fix for the hardware issue.

Quality for Intel really counts when it comes to long life. I mean the CPU never burn out, given that you do not oc it or doing it incorrectly. What else can be say about Intel quality when there are more Intel CPU in the higher end business class than AMD. Intel is more dominant in the business field because of it's quality.

[Meltdown07]

Originally posted by xan_san

Well Meltdown07 you're very wrong.

First of all:

A have an AMD Athlon XP 1700+ (at home) and an Intel P4 1.4 GHz (at work). So I worked with both Intel and AMD CPUs and I guess I know what I'm talking about. Both systems are very stable.

2. The AMD computer is FASTER than P4 (they have same frequencies ~).

3. P4 1.7 vs Athlon XP 1700+: some benchmarks said that Athlon is faster in some tests.

So equal frequeuncies means Athlon > P4

So AMD is VERY competitive

4. You get a good cooler and the heat problem is solved.

5. Athlon is (much) cheaper than P4.

6. I had problems with my AMD but I changed the memory and now it works just fine. Before you blame the Athlon for computer crashed check your hardware. I'm sure that a P4 on a mobo from Via or SIS is less stable...

If I had to choose I would choose AMD. Reason : is faster, cheaper and stable.

I'm not comparing equal clock speeds. I am comparing the northwood core to the Thoroughbred core. If you compare the 1.7 P4 with the 1.7 XP then you are 100% correct. However, I was referring to the newest possible technology of which AMD is clearly lagging. I love AMD, I have two AMD systems, they're just not the fastest right now. A 2.26 Ghz northwood P4 out performs the 2200+ Athlon XP. That is a fact. If you need some benchmarks to back up my claims check this link out the AMD gets beaten in almost every category: http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/02061...engl_benchmarks

With the northwood core intel took back the crown from AMD, previous iterations of the p4 couldnt compete, this one does.

Dont flame me, I'm on your side. However, I will only own systems of the highest possible speed for my main system (in applications not necessarily Mhz), and right now, that is intel without a doubt. The hammer could very well change that, and I hope it does, but as the war goes, at times AMD is on top, and at other times, Intel. The ones that always come out winning is the consumer with lower prices.

[Meltdown07]

Originally posted by sp0rk

$240 Athlon MP 2100

$608 Pentium 4 2.53GHz

-----------------------------------

You could buy one hell of a water cooling kit with that extra money, not to mention ram and a hard drive.

Haha. I like how you used the most expensive mainstream intel processor available. Why not compare with a 2.26 ghz on price vs performance? There's not much difference on price there, but definitely worth the extra 20 bucks for the extra performance.

Intel 2.26 Ghz Northwood: $261

Athlon MP 2100: $240

So basically for 21 bucks more, I get more speed. I'll take that.

Again i'm not an intel fan either, but I'll buy whatever gives me the best bang for my buck in my price range, which in this case is Intel, in some other cases, it is AMD. It depends on the person and on the uses of the machine. But if you are comparing top equal priced processors (mid 200's) the intel is clearly faster.

[Guest deadzombie]

Originally posted by Meltdown07

Haha. I like how you used the most expensive mainstream intel processor available. Why not compare with a 2.26 ghz on price vs performance? There's not much difference on price there.

Intel 2.26 Ghz Northwood: $261

Athlon MP 2100: $240

So basically for 21 bucks more, I get more speed. I'll take that.

Again i'm not an intel fan either, but I'll buy whatever gives me the best bang for my buck in my price range, which in this case is Intel, in some other cases, it is AMD. It depends on the person and on the uses of the machine. But if you are comparing top equal priced processors (mid 200's) the intel is clearly faster.

How do you figure that? Have you seen the benchmarks on those two processors? For $21 you get less performance.

[Meltdown07]

check this article out deadzombie.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020610/index.html

I guess I should say that I am referring mainly to games, because that is mainly what I do. AMD still reigns in some categories, but for my needs, intel is best. AMD posts higher sysmark scores, but unfortuantely that isnt translating to some real life FPS marks as well. No disrespect to AMD, I love my athlon rig, but Intel is the choice for me for now. At least until the hammer falls...

[Wickedkitten Veteran]

Originally posted by Meltdown07

check this article out deadzombie.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020610/index.html

I guess I should say that I am referring mainly to games, because that is mainly what I do. AMD still reigns in some categories, but for my needs, intel is best. AMD posts higher sysmark scores, but unfortuantely that isnt translating to some real life FPS marks as well. No disrespect to AMD, I love my athlon rig, but Intel is the choice for me for now. At least until the hammer falls...

lmao tom's hardware already got their asses busted from that "video" where the heatsink falls off a thunderbird that got proven to be a joke. Tom's got his head up Intel's ass anyways and an Intel Inside tattoo over his ######. You never ****in see him say anything postive about amd and every single benchmark he's ever done has them always beating amd. "ooh we managed to dig out this old intel 486 dx 33mhz system and guess what? We pit it against an athlon xp 2200 and it won!"

[bilston]

Originally posted by vchip

only AMD

you can read some more about its power on web

and leave intel with his faked clock speed.

Please, take your head out of your ass.

"ooh we managed to dig out this old intel 486 dx 33mhz system and guess what? We pit it against an athlon xp 2200 and it won!"

ROFL :D

[sp0rk]

Meltdown07, the dual athlons would SMOKE that p4 any day...

[Meltdown07]

Originally posted by sp0rk

Meltdown07, the dual athlons would SMOKE that p4 any day...

Well duh. I would hope they would.

I'm not slamming AMD man, dont get so excited :)

[dmd3x]

A nice, cheap Celeron 1.8 GHz. Just upgraded.

[Initial 2k2]

Wot does Level 1 Cache signify? I know this so far..

AMD Athlon XP

L1 Cache = 128 KB

L2 Cache = 256 KB

Intel Pentium 4

L1 Cache = 8 KB

L2 Cache = 512 KB

What EXACTLY does the cache in the chip REALLY do? I know more L2 Cache = fast motherfuker and stuff =p

[Guest deadzombie]

Originally posted by Wickedkitten

lmao tom's hardware already got their asses busted from that "video" where the heatsink falls off a thunderbird that got proven to be a joke. Tom's got his head up Intel's ass anyways and an Intel Inside tattoo over his ######. You never ****in see him say anything postive about amd and every single benchmark he's ever done has them always beating amd. "ooh we managed to dig out this old intel 486 dx 33mhz system and guess what? We pit it against an athlon xp 2200 and it won!"

Too true. And I bet Intel is scared to death of the new Opterons. AMD took a big risk redesigning the entire pipeline structure of the AthlonXP, now taking the pipeline redesign farther and pairing it the new hypertransport bus and a better floating point.

Looks like AMD wants to be Motorola. Not a bad thing, just funny.