Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel P4 3Ghz or AMD 64 3200+?

Last response: in Motherboards
Share
August 22, 2004 1:50:48 PM

Should I buy:
Intel P4 Prescott 3Ghz, D1826-G31 i915P mobo, 2x256MB, 400mhz RAM, ATI X600Pro 256MB PCIe Graphic with a 200GB SATA HDD

or:
AMD64 3200+, Asus socket 478 K8V-F K8T800 mobo, 2x512MB RAM with only one "channel" 400Mhz, ATI 9600XT4 256MB AGP Graphic and a 250GB SATA HDD
???

The AMD system only has three memory banks and one channel compared to Intels four banks and two channels. The real benefit with a 64bit system seems to be the large RAM memory support, wich is missing in present day or at least in mentioned systems, in fact the Intels 32bits system can support more RAM (3GB vs. 4GB)..

I'm not sure wich would be the best buy.. do you?

More about : intel 3ghz amd 3200

August 22, 2004 2:27:19 PM

The AMD system will be faster than the intel one. On-die memory controller for the AMD64 is vey efficient so dual channel is not an absolute necessity as on P4. And by the time you'll need more than 3 gigs of memory, you'll be ready for a next upgrade. But you should have a good system in both case. I would say, go for the cheaper one.

I see that you have more ram and HDD in the AMD system and that matter much more to me than CPU...

-Always put the blame on you first, then on the hardware !!!
August 22, 2004 5:09:29 PM

Both those choices suck! You're short on memory for the Prescott and you will see no advantage from the PCI-E graphics card. You're using the Via chipset for the socket "754" board and a larger drive than you're giving the P4E. In each case, you are using the absolute minimum acceptable graphics card in an otherwise "upper end machine"
My choices:
ABIT IS7 w/ Northwood P4-3.0C
Sapphire 9800Pro
512 X 2 Crucial Ballistix PC4000
2 X 120gb Samsung Sata @ RAID 0 or 2 X 120ATA 133 for E,F

MSI K8N-NF3-250gb-NEO2-FSR w/AMD64-3200+ Newcastle
2 X 512 Crucial Ballistix PC4000
EGA-6800 (or best one you can afford)
2 X 120gb SATA Samsung RAID 0 or 2 X 120ATA-133 E, F

Either system will enjoy significant overclocks with decent cooling. The Northwood should hit 3.5ghz anyway with stock cooling and the 3200+ will do better than 2.3ghz. The AMD's have the on-die memory controller which makes the need for dual-channel an afterthought and the Nvidia chipsets make the Nvidia graphics cards faster performers than the Radeon.



Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
Related resources
August 23, 2004 3:41:26 PM

Quote:
and the Nvidia chipsets make the Nvidia graphics cards faster performers than the Radeon.

I have never seen any sort of proof to this line of thinking. Got any links etc?

Coyote

Mobile XP 2600+ (11X200)
Abit NF7-S v 2.0
Maxtor 60GB ATA 133 7200RPM
512MB Corsair Twinx 3200LL
BBA 9800 Pro
Enermax Noisetaker 420 watts
Win98SE
August 23, 2004 4:59:27 PM

Who uses over 2 Gig of Ram? Unless you are running a server and need the 4 Gig of RAM there is no real need for it. If you wanted to go to 4 gigs of RAM it is better to just get a server with more memory banks and PCI-X 64 bit slots. Even if a motherboard says it can access 4 gigs of RAM keep in mind that Throughput is everything. I think this is where the memory controller with a 64 bit Athlon Processor has the edge, but you probably need the one with the larger cache to beat the P4.

when you see smoke is that a good sign?
August 23, 2004 11:01:13 PM

Yes, it's been mentioned at several sites that the Nvidia chipsets have been optimized for Nvidia GPU's and vice-versa. I don't think it's a huge difference, but I'll take anything I can get in Doom3.

Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
a b V Motherboard
August 24, 2004 2:35:58 AM

Great suggestions! But take a minute to breath!

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
August 24, 2004 4:29:01 AM

The optimizations are actually kinda decent for benchmarks.

I consider it rather a gimic (although it works it appears), and for me, rather useless on account that I never seem to get Nvidia graphx boards.

As for which is faster? well, a 939 board with 1 gig of ddr 500 memory running at 1000fsb is obviously faster, the 3200 regular a64 could be faster for games than the p4 3ghz.

the chip cache doesnt make the slightest bit of difference. AMD chips run differently than pentiums are do not require the big caches to see big improvements.

p4 3.0 HT chip is a solid choice though.

(no one really needs more power than either chip you mentioned! shh dont tell anyone!)
August 25, 2004 7:38:15 PM

I would go with the Intel 915, for future upgradeability and stability, but this is debatable, I'm sure.
I have had more stable Intel computers that had good performance across the board compared with my AMD systems.
The way I look at it, if it is mission critical, go Intel, if it is budget minded and for leisure primarily, go AMD...

========================
Try everything...
Do not be afraid of failure, for this is how we learn and grow...
Live life to the fullest...
Do not regret what you have not done!!!
August 26, 2004 1:06:56 AM

The way I look at it, if it is mission critical, go Intel, if it is budget minded and for leisure primarily, go AMD...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Please let us in on why AMD platforms are less stable than Intel? Is this just an opinion?

Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
August 30, 2004 4:32:39 AM

I just read this thread. Makes me ticked off at people to assume that intel chip is better. its definitely is not at all better in the stable sorts of better.

only thing that makes a system crappy is a crappy motherboard. AMD often has their mobo people give consumers some very crappy options for stability. That's really the only problem. If you correct this by going chaintech or abit, its a done deal. Abit for me personally. and dont bother overclocking, keep things cold, use all THG tested parts, use a very good psu. amd and intel do the same then stability wise.
September 3, 2004 8:14:10 PM

IN REPLY TO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
In reply to:

and the Nvidia chipsets make the Nvidia graphics cards faster performers than the Radeon.

I have never seen any sort of proof to this line of thinking. Got any links etc?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

well why r u so amazed about that ....nvidia performing better than ATI ...as u clearly see 6800 is simply toplled over X800 ......but i thought 9800 pro was still great card ....but what amazed was the following bechmarks from our own THG bechmark results u will have lot to think about...

http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030512/gefor...

http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030512/gefor...

i m doomed!!!
September 4, 2004 4:32:33 PM

go with n amd 64 3200+ and a nforce3 mobo set up
September 6, 2004 2:48:32 AM

""Please let us in..""

hehehe, there are peepel that do learn, and there are peepel that don't (not capabell of), you are probabelly second category persona, so there is no need for sweating the brainzez out for a useless explanationzez.

PS: there were millionz of "inz", you still can't get it? I think your scall is too hard to be crashed to "let it in".

PSS: the "PS:" thing belongz to every body with the same question.

PSSS: (I know it is PPPS;)

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
September 6, 2004 6:07:44 AM

You're right! It shouldn't make any difference which card you stick in it. I don't know what I confused it with. Nuw, about yer spellin'...............................

Abit IS7 - 3.0C @ 3.6ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
September 6, 2004 6:19:48 AM

i dont get it.

and IMHO buy the AMD chip. If you can get socket 939 and wait for pcie video cards to come down. little more $ but a bad @ss system.

GA-7NNXP, XP3000+ Barton
1 gig corsair pc2700, 2 Maxtor 80GB SATA 150
1 Seagate 160 gig ATA 133,
Asus GeForce4 TI4800, Samsung 172X
D. VINE 4 Chassis (moded)
September 6, 2004 10:32:16 AM

When win64 comes out, and the A64s can use the extra registers, the Amd chips will shine. Right now though, they are only slightly better than thier Intel counterpart.
In other words, the Amd chips are better now, but will be more better latter.
September 6, 2004 8:05:38 PM

now that, i understand...

GA-7NNXP, XP3000+ Barton
1 gig corsair pc2700, 2 Maxtor 80GB SATA 150
1 Seagate 160 gig ATA 133,
Asus GeForce4 TI4800, Samsung 172X
D. VINE 4 Chassis (moded)
September 7, 2004 6:23:17 AM

We are such nit pickers here, yet nobody said anything about
Quote:
AMD64 3200+, Asus socket 478 K8V-F K8T800 mobo,

September 7, 2004 11:02:48 AM

That's OK, just break out the wire cutters and dispose of a few hundred pins... :lol: 

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL/1x512Mb Corsair XMS PC4000 2.5-3-3-7
Sapphire 9800Pro (VGA Silencer Rev3) @418/742
September 7, 2004 2:31:10 PM

can you realy fit an amd 64 3200+ into a socket 478 mobo? and what pins do i crimp? :-)

GA-7NNXP, XP3000+ Barton
1 gig corsair pc2700, 2 Maxtor 80GB SATA 150
1 Seagate 160 gig ATA 133,
Asus GeForce4 TI4800, Samsung 172X
D. VINE 4 Chassis (moded)
!