Is AMD still good to go?

[Ennia]

Does everyone still think that AMD is faster and better than P4's now that Intel has the 800Mhz CPU's out? Granted, AMD used to be more worthwhile but it seems to me that these days Intel is very much in the lead against AMD, especially looking at the test scores across various sites.

I'm planning to build a system and was seriously considering AMD but a lot of recommendations for high end systems is P4 based. I read somewhere that prices between high end P4 and AMD is comparable so shouldn't we just go P4...we don't have to worry about heating issues either. So i guess what i'm asking is this: Is it more worthwhile getting a P4?

 

[dhlucke]

High end - Intel

<A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=389&s=1fee5dab901bebe29da7aa1c2658fc6f" target="_new"><font color=red>dhlucke's system</font color=red></A>

<font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> <font color=red>BLESS</font color=red> <font color=blue>AMERICA</font color=blue>

 

[14Dx]

Yes, Intel took the lead with their 800mghz fsb chips. There happens to be an article on the home page of this site benchamrking AMD and Intel.

If its not broken, you're not trying hard enough.

 

[sirak]

AMD is cheaper for low/mid-range, but Intel is definitely the best for high-end if you can afford it.

 

[jmecor]

Intel is definitely the better choice, the P4 has better hardware than AXP.

 

[Mephistopheles]

you want high end?... then: HIGH END = INTEL.

No question about it...

You sound a little afraid to believe the claims that the P4 is superior... Don't worry. It's a fact. A mathematical certainty.

Don't worry, be happy...

 

[tombance]

The p4 is faster, but I would just like to point out that high end Athlons don't have 'heating issues'. In fact they are in some cases cooler than the equivalent p4, the days of hot Athlons are long gone.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5467618 " target="_new">Almost Breaking 12k!!</A>

 

[HardWareBoss]

P4's 2.4c,2.6c,2.8c,3.0c,3.2c. Wow five C no more. Then we hit 3.4 Prescott. AMD?

 

[varghesejim]

It is better to go for p4 because of its new technology and perfomance over AMD.Go for AMD only if you have serious financial considerations.But if u want the best p4 will be the choice

 

[Crashman]

AMD can't compete with Intel at the top end. The fastest AMD processor, the 3200+, barely outperforms the old 533 bus P4 2.53 (which also had no hyperthreading). The midrange P4 2.8C stomps the 3200+ badly. The top end P4 3.2C...it will probably take AMD a year to catch up with.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>

 

[10GHZ]

ye.... but if you compare an AMD cpu with an INTEL cpu GHz by GHz, rather than using the rating system, then AMD leads.

 

[ChipDeath]

yeah, but if your car has a 500CC engine and develops 75hp, but another car has a 1000CC engine that develops 100HP, you'll still lose the race....

---
$hit Happens. I just wish it would happen to someone else for a change.

 

[Mephistopheles]

Many people share your opinion - I don't get it exactly...

So, 10Ghz, here's the deal: Mhz/Ghz <b>IS IRRELEVANT</b>. Instructions per clock, as in equal clock comparisons, <b>IS IRRELEVANT</b>. What is relevant is ACTUAL PERFORMANCE.

Take it this way:
<font color=red><b>P</b> = "ACTUAL PERFORMANCE"</font color=red>
<font color=blue><b>IPC</b> = "Instructions per clock"</font color=blue>
<font color=green><b>CLOCK</b> = "Clock rate (frequency)</font color=green>

So the actual performance formula would be:

<b><font color=red>P</font color=red> = <font color=green>CLOCK</font color=green> * <font color=blue>IPC</font color=blue></b>

So you should expect that, if CLOCK goes up and IPC goes down, the NET PERFORMANCE could stay the same, couldn't it? In fact, because <font color=red><b>P</b></font color=red> is a two variable function, YOU CAN'T TELL PERFORMANCE AT ALL from one variable alone. So there you go...