Well I have seriously shyed away from P4 before since it ran windows slower than my amd and I can't stand any lag. At work I gotta 3.06Ghz HT, and it runs windows pretty farking well Perhaps I'll consider them for an upgrade now.....tho there's still the issue of the fpu.
All the things I really like to do are either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/html/news.html" target="_new"><font color=red><b>Join the Tom's Hardware Guide Community Photo album, send us your pics!</font color=red></b></A>
Why do I get the impression that flamethrower is a terrific admirer of AMD which is having a hard time admitting to the fact that Intel has the upper hand right now?... As if his AMD-loyal side was making him feel bad for also having feelings about Intel, and now he's saying "oh well, <i>T'aint so bad now</i>"? Maybe I'm just paranoid.
Yeah we got a little role reversal action going on here.
Intel flagship is cheaper - faster - better then the AMD flagship by a pretty nice margin. I have always had an intel - Asus - Crucial Core, and i can honestly say i got pwned by the AMD box, when intel FUBAR themselves with their contract with RAMBUS and AMD went DDR, and i was stuck with SDRAM cuz RDRAM was too expensive, so there was definately a time there when i was getting pwned by the AMD box but that time is over, its about friggin time, and good riddance!
No...what happened was I bought a new comp right when the P4 came out and I was all hyped up- turned out to be a pos proc so I didn't buy it thanks to tom's benches. Bought a 1.2Ghz amd and to this day I swear by that thing's fpu- it's fvckin fast. Meanwhile, my friends got 1.7Ghz even 2.0Ghz P4's, and windows itself lagged/ was slow, which totally blew. I know ram and hdd and all can influence this, but their systems were fine in that respect. Just saying that my current one runs nicely- we'll see how it holds up when the real stuff start happening tho.
All the things I really like to do are either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
FP-intensive programs compiled with SSE2 that use up to 64-bit precision are very fast and give the P4 an edge over even the Athlon's rather powerful FPU.
As for clock for clock, it's of course as useless as total clock rate for the net performance. A 2Ghz Athlon may beat a 2.5Ghz P4, but that doesn't mean a 3Ghz P4 is inferior in any way to a 2Ghz Athlon.
i have a P4 1.5ghz with sdr ram, and my main system is a xp 1700. the p4 blew chunks since the day i got it, the amd is still (in my mind), competitive.
unlike yourself, i have no recent leanings to intel because of their flagship price/performance lead.
I realize they are faster, but who cares, as we've said before how many of these self proposed gurus actually have a 3.2ghz p4?
Mid to low end is what matters to 90% of us. And my processor of choice is the 2800 right now.
I think its a moot point, but without AMD, intel would still be trying to stick RDRAM in our a$$es. knowing that AMD prevented the intel monopoly on the home user to continue to dominate us (price wise also) for another 15 years.
AMDs great 'defeat' at the hand of a billion dollar empire doesnt seem so impressive to me, and its easy to switch sides every time intel 'wins' again. Its silly.
Besides, I'm american, I ALWAYS root for the underdog to topple the king!
The 2.8GHZ from Intel trounces alive the 3000+ from AMD, and the 2.8GHZ costs FAR less than the 3200+. The 2.8GHZ C 800MT with HT eats the 2800+ from AMD, which back then HAD a chance against it. Therefore, the better choice is a 2.6 or 2.8GHZ C from Intel.
Again, only low end works with AMD, still.
--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/html/news.html" target="_new"><font color=red><b>Join the Tom's Hardware Guide Community Photo album, send us your pics!</font color=red></b></A>
Perhaps I'll consider them for an upgrade now.....tho there's still the issue of the fpu.
