Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Athlon XP 2800+ OR Intel P 2.8 800Mhz

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 18, 2003 2:33:39 PM

OK here is the problem.. a friend and I are both planning on buying a new pc.. now i've heard that the AMD Athlon XP 2800+, 333Mhz, 512Kb, SocketA, Box is better then the Intel Pentium 4 2.80Ghz, 512Mhz, S-478, 512Kb, Box and its been confirmed by tomshardware in the tests on: http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20021001/xp_2800-12.ht... and the other 4. He still wasn't confinced and stayed with the intel... now he found out that these tests were with the AMD and a Intel P4 2.8 512Mhz!!! but he's going to buy a 800Mhz.. now my questions.. Which one is better? does the athlon still beat the 800Mhz or is the 800Mhz so improves that its faster and better than athlon?

FlashFreak

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by FlashFreak on 11/18/03 12:16 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 18, 2003 6:48:54 PM

The 533fsb were about equal (give and take in places) with the older axp chips. The 800fsb pretty much blow 200+ thru 400+ pr rating out of the water. See the newer toms reviews. A 2.4c (800mhz fsb) will be on par with a 2800+ for the vast majority of things. A 2.8c will beat down a 3200+ usually and a 3.0c or 3.2c rape everything but the new amd 64 stuff.

Shadus
November 18, 2003 7:40:08 PM

Wait a minute I just finished some 3D Mad Onion benchmark tests. I used my AMD XP Ready 2800+ CPU stock against a Intel 2.4c overclocked to 3.0 GHz in both tests the benchmark software says the Intel 2.4c @ 3.0 GHz has a 200 MHz FSB and the AMD CPU was running the FSB at 166 MHz.
Funny thing is the memory for both computers is P.C 2700 DDR and was running @ a minimum of 333 MHz. Since the 2.4c was overclocked to 3.0Ghz I can only presume his system memory jumped up to a minimum of 366 to 400 MHz, both motherboards supported 500 MHz front side bus but both CPU's could not pull the systems up to those speeds.
The Intel system used AGP 4X as that is as high as his motherboard could support and my ASUS A7V8X-X ran the tests in AGP 8X.
I Used a GeForce Ti4200 and he used a Radeon 9800 in both tests the Intel system beat my FPS in all test by a 20 count EXAMPLE Car Chase High Detail (Intel 190 to 200 FPS)-(AMD 2800+ 175 to 182 FPS)
Considering that he was overclocked to 3.0 GHz and I was stock at 2800+ Approx (2.8MHz) the Intel chip performed faster Frames Per Second.
I wanted to overclock my AMD chip to 186/44 in the BIOS that should bring the chip up to a desktop setting of about 2.20 GHz reality but I do not want to toast the CPU to death by overheating it. That slight increase would obviously tie the FPS score.

One other thing I found annoying with the benchmark from Mad Onion the 2001 Second Edition version with patch installed was this... The tests run all the graphics tests at a Monitor setting of 60MHz I mean what in Heck is that my Geforce Ti4200 supports Refresh rates at 120 MHz @ 1024X768 on my 17 inch .20 pitch (H) Samsung 955DF Monitor. If I was able to and I was not... I would have set the benchmark to use the 120 MHz refresh rate and the FPS scores would have been much higher then posted.

»§øЫÑighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.
Related resources
November 18, 2003 7:40:46 PM

yep, i agree with Shadus. ask ur friend to get a 2.8c. but if i were ur friend, i wud get a 2.6c and overclock it.

<b><font color=red>Barton 2500+ @ 10*222
A7N8X Dlx Rev2.0
2*256MB Hyper-X PC4000 @ CL2.5-4-3-7
GF4 MX-440 64MB/4X
80GB IDE w/2MB + 2*120GB SATA w/8MB</b></font color=red>
November 18, 2003 8:00:19 PM

Woops let me fix this apparently the Mad Onion Benchmark reports the Front Side Buss values for the Graphics card and not the Front Side Bus of the Motherboard.
I just loaded and ran a program called AIDA32 you can get that free online and it reports every detail you could imagine about your computer system.

Ok Point is it is saying that my Memory Bus is running a real clock @ 333 MHZ DDR and effective clock of 333 MHz equal to 2666 MB/s. The chipset (Motherboard) is running at an Effective Clock speed of 533 MHz.

At any rate the 2800+ and the Intel chip are almost a match it would be more interesting if he used 8X AGP instead of 4X he might have posted higher scores on the Pentium.

I found a link at AMD that has a Microsoft patch for AMD AGP 8X /s computers for Windows 2000 computer operating systems.

You can go here for the AMD specific AGP Patch for AMD CPU/s:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/...

You can go here for the Windows 2000/XP AGP Driver Digitally-Signed, Version 5.33 Windows 2000/XP only.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/...

After I install both of these I will try some new benchmarks WHAT DO YOU SAY ;) 

»§øЫÑighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.
November 19, 2003 2:18:36 AM

Buy the P4 2.8C.
November 19, 2003 6:58:32 AM

The 2.4C can beat the 2800+, the 2.8C basically slaps it around. :cool:
November 19, 2003 8:15:11 AM

Quote:
At any rate the 2800+ and the Intel chip are almost a match

Have a look at tom's <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030623/index.html" target="_new">review of the 3.2Ghz</A> it includes both the P4 2.8 800FSB and the XP2800+ in the benchies. The P4 is up to 30% faster in some of them. I don't call that 'almost equal' I'd call it a bitch-slapping.



---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink: <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by ChipDeath on 11/19/03 10:28 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 19, 2003 10:35:45 AM

2.8C over 2800+ anytime, anyday, anywhere, baby. :smile:

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
November 19, 2003 11:21:55 AM

Well you apparently were not paying attention to the original post he was asking about the AMD 2800+ and the Intel 2.8........Not the Intel 3.0
I did read the link you provided and you do not need a calculator to see that the FPS for both CPU's were in some cases only 10 fps apart.
I also read the FPS for the splinter cell benchmark they posted and the numbers were terrible for both the Intel and the AMD chip.
Since I played and finished Splintercell on my 2800+ cpu and had FPS @ 100 the whole time and proly higher I can only conclude that the tests they ran were not accurate and they fudged the FPS scores for both Intel and AMD.
The difference between an AMD chip and an Intel chip is the Intel chip is designed to run business applications and they choke in graphics situations in the real world.

I have played Day Of Defeat on a Intel 3.0 CPU off my same home cable connection and had my ass handed to me because even the other players machine gun muzzle flashes dropped the FPS down into the basement causing you to get shot to death very quickly because your player model freezes.
The AMD chips even my 2800+ retain the game max of 100 FPS even in combat with 2 or 3 other players shooting back at you.
I routinely win every map and level on Day Of Defeat every night I play the game with my AMD CPU's.
I routinely find myself lagging like a BeOtch using the Intel 3.0 CPU.
Nothing we do gets that piece of crap Intel chip to render frame rates fast enough to play Day Of Defeat.
If you want to play games on a computer buy an AMD chip!! Benchmarks are for idiots that believe what others tell them.
In real life the AMD rules FPS for games.

We should all hope that Planet X comes through our solar system soon so they can pick up the bad genetic material they left lying around 6000 years ago,,,,,, Namely TTZX.

Perhaps TTZX should load up Day Of Defeat into that lagging 2.4c Intel chip he has and meet me online in the CF or Canadian Forces server in the Day Of Defeat server list.
I am clan leader for CF my player name is CF | Nighthawk[CAN].
The poor little boy on his little 2.4c Intel chip would be in last place for both teams. Besides TTZX walks and talks like a nube perhaps he is a Nuberian from Planet X apparently all that rock is good for is causing [-peep-] without any intelligent thought.

»§øЫÑighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.
November 19, 2003 11:27:32 AM

*yawn* blah blah more bs from sod blah blah *yawn*

This guy is an utterly clueless moron. He posts crap that can't be substantiated in any manor. Ignore him or get a collaborating opinion at the least.

Shadus
November 19, 2003 12:53:00 PM

Quote:
Well you apparently were not paying attention to the original post he was asking about the AMD 2800+ and the Intel 2.8........Not the Intel 3.0

OK, I suggest you go get your eyes checked, you have some sever tunnel vision I reckon.. Otherwise you might have noticed I said:
Quote:
it includes both the P4 2.8 800FSB and the XP2800+ in the benchies.


And as for Comments like:
Quote:
I routinely win every map and level on Day Of Defeat every night I play the game with my AMD CPU's.
I routinely find myself lagging like a BeOtch using the Intel 3.0 CPU.

You know, I've just suddenly realised! Can you not see the connection? Intel are actually Evil aliens, and they're in league with Satan himself, who is slyly using your processing power to come up with some evil plan for world domination! This explains both your conspiracy theories on why you get lag while playing on-line games, <i>and</i> why AMD are so much better, as they are clearly under divine control... Please! Let me be the first of your AMDisciples! When there are enough of us we must wage a Jihad to wipe out all the black-hearted intel Owners!

I thank you for making me see past the lies <i>of everyone else who's ever compared these chips</i>.

I will now find a soapbox to spread the word, and save the souls of the innocent!


---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
November 19, 2003 1:25:47 PM

> I will now find a soapbox to spread the word, and
> save the souls of the innocent!

*snicker*

Shadus
November 19, 2003 2:06:44 PM

Quote:
Benchmarks are for idiots that believe what others tell them.

So anyone who believes you is an idiot?How apt! :smile:

no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]
November 19, 2003 2:22:15 PM

It's really funny. I can play games online with my lowly 2.53GHz (533Mhz FSB) with nary a hiccup. Could it be my decent internet connection coupled with a Radeon 9700Pro? Nah... couldn't be... we all know 3D games depend more on the processor than the video card, right?

Clueless.

Your CPU has NOTHING to do with lag online, you bleeding idiot. Your internet connection is the most important thing when playing games online. Now if you have a cheap-ass network card that sucks CPU cycles while playing games online, then that is your weak link... not the CPU. To say otherwise shows a complete lack of knowledge on your part.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
November 19, 2003 2:28:44 PM

I used to get playable frame rates on Day of Defeat on a PII-400 over a T3!

no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]
November 19, 2003 7:02:18 PM

Your right. But since he asked about 2.8C. But you let him know about 2.4c.
November 19, 2003 7:34:54 PM

Zoron your CPU has much to do with lag online, the CPU in games generally goes up to and stays AT 100% CPU usage you can take a game made in 1995 called Battlezone and run it on a 500 MHz CPU and it will use 100% of it. You can take the same game and run it with a 2.6c or 3.0 Intel chip and that same game will still use 100% of the CPU's time.
I told you if you read it that there is no problem with connection it is a 5 MB cable connection high speed and with the 2 AMD machines I currently have there is no problem with the connection. In fact all three computers will test out for the same connection speeds @ www.2wire.com so the connection is not the issue. We have both High Speed cable and High Speed Optical at the house to try connections with.
Each computer would be hooked up alone on that connection with no sharing of bandwidth. The Intel computer at 3.0 GHz simply lags terribly and all three systems use the same high end 10/100 LAN Ethernet cards.
We spent many hours installing new hardware and reinstalling XP onto that Intel CPU set-up we even changed the motherboard and later used the boards on board 10/100 LAN card and the system still lags in games even at home off the internet.

The only apparent difference is that I shelled out loads of cash for a high end Intel chip a Radeon 9800 Graphics card and 1 Gig of pure Kingston KVR333X64C25/1G DDR Memory and the Intel System still lags.
The only thing left is to yank out the ATI Graphics card and try the Intel system with a GeForce card and see if Nvidia can get any life out of the 3.0 Intel CPU.

As in reply to ChipDeath Intel chips are not Evil as he believes they simply suck <Ass> for games.

»§øЫÑighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.
November 19, 2003 7:43:26 PM

Quote:
The Intel computer at 3.0 GHz simply lags terribly and all three systems use the same high end 10/100 LAN Ethernet cards.


What high-end network cards are you using? I would really like to know, as I don't experience the same problems that you say you do with your Intel setups. I used the Intel Gigabit adapter integrated on the motherboard. Interesting enough, I can have webpages open in the background along with an IM client and I still don't have the same problems you do.

*Shrug*

It's pretty hard for me to blame Intel CPUs since I can't recreate any of the issues you say you're having.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
November 19, 2003 9:57:52 PM

Here's your problem, you idiot.

Quote:
The only apparent difference is that I shelled out loads of cash for a high end Intel chip a Radeon 9800 Graphics card and 1 Gig of pure Kingston <b>KVR333X64C25/1G</b> DDR Memory and the Intel System still lags.

Are you aware of the fact that the RAM you have is only PC2700?? Unless you are overclocking it to 200MHz, your computer is only running at around 2.33GHz and 666MT FSB. That hardly represents the P4C and what it is capable of doing. If you do have it OCed to 200 and you are still getting this performance, you are probably having RAM errors of some sort. My 2.66B has never had ANY sort of problem play any internet games in any game, and mine runs at slower speeds all around.

Or you might just have a messed up motherboard, the performance you claim to have is not justified at all, the 2.8C is decisively faster than the AXP 2800+.

EDIT: I also found out that your RAM is a single chip, i.e., you aren't utilizing Dual Channel AT ALL. No wonder your performance is so off, you run low quality, incorrectly rated, single channel RAM. That's like getting a kickass system for gaming (CPU, mobo and RAMwise) and running an old PCI graphics card.

Damn Rambus.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Vapor on 11/19/03 07:02 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 20, 2003 2:25:15 AM

The problem with freaks like you Vapor is you look for loop holes in any statement anyone posts so you can be a little know it-all when in fact you should not talk to your betters at all until the second ball drops and your voice goes up another octave.
I OWN my own computer Store I have worked in Quality control Engineering for the previous 17 years I am fibre Optic certified and I am also a AN Electrical Engineer as well as a SMT specialist in computer placement robotics and repair. I have developed both Software and Hardware for Nortel Networks and designed proto-type fibre optic switches for JDS-Unifase the amount of knowledge you have compared to mine... is none existant!! It make me ill when you little <Cock Suckers> come into the message boards trying to stir up [-peep-] because it's all your good for. Go back to school for at least the next 15 years then spend another 25 years in the work force then come back and talk to me if you can only be ignorant.

The only failing that I can see is that you little goof balls need to have every aspect of a post spoon fed to you because you only read what was not posted and ignore what was posted.
Next time you want to bleat off like a sheep you should realize that everyone knows that Kingston KVR333X64C25/1G is P.C 2700 Ram and the Default BIOS setting is 333 MHz but the ram can be set up higher then that.
Guys like you are the clif clavins of the world always available to state the obvious but seldom able to come up with the original thought.

»§øЫÑighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.
November 20, 2003 2:56:47 AM

Quote:
I OWN my own computer Store I have worked in Quality control Engineering for the previous 17 years I am fibre Optic certified and I am also a AN Electrical Engineer as well as a SMT specialist in computer placement robotics and repair. I have developed both Software and Hardware for Nortel Networks and designed proto-type fibre optic switches for JDS-Unifase the amount of knowledge you have compared to mine... is none existant!! It make me ill when you little <Cock Suckers> come into the message boards trying to stir up [-peep-] because it's all your good for. Go back to school for at least the next 15 years then spend another 25 years in the work force then come back and talk to me if you can only be ignorant.


My e-penis is bigger than yours... nya nya nya nya nya!!

Sorry, but being an owner of a store doesn't impress me in the slightest. My old boss owned his store and had certifications hanging on the wall; yet he was next to clueless when it came to performing service. If it wasn't for me and the other guy I worked with, he would not have had half the service contracts he did.

Quote:
Next time you want to bleat off like a sheep you should realize that everyone knows that Kingston KVR333X64C25/1G is P.C 2700 Ram and the Default BIOS setting is 333 MHz but the ram can be set up higher then that.


Ahhh... but you didn't say you clocked it higher, now did you? If you're going to state 'facts' make sure your 'facts' aren't too fuzzy. It's PC2700 RAM, but how do we know you ran it at PC3200 speeds? You didn't mention that you did... so we have to assume you were running it at PC2700 speeds; since you didn't mention overclocking the RAM and that is what the BIOS would detect. The BIOS won't automatically overclock RAM for you.

Running one stick is also ludicrous. Pentium 4s love bandwidth... the more you give, the more it likes it. (Why the hell do you think that RAMBUS was the preferred platform for P4s before dual channel DDR?) Everyone with 'half a brain', as you put it, knows that. Dual channel is the only way to go in a P4 configuration.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
November 20, 2003 6:22:11 AM

Exactly what I said in my post we tried everything to get that computer to perform. You have to use your head and expect that people know what they are doing.
You cant expect and I do not from anyone in a chat room to explain every minor detail.
I however realize what you said is true even of Engineers being idiots of 20 years in the business there was only 1 other Engineer I thought had any brains.
The rest are book smart but could not hammer a nail in straight to save their lives.
You shipwreck 20 Beer drinkers on one Island and 20 Engineers on the other I can promise you the Beer drinkers will be sleeping in a new hut 4 feet off the ground with a walk in toilet out back and the Engineers will still be sitting around a pile of wet fire wood debating how to start the job.

I am one of those unique individuals that at 17 was a Para Military sky diver then messed my right knee up and my neck in a bad jump then went back to school in the Mil and got my Aero Jet Engine Mechanics degree then moved to civilian high tech.
I also Duck Hunt, Deer Hunt, and Fish every chance I get. We have a hunting camp on an island up here on White Lake in Ontario Canada.
I can fix an airplane crashing in mid air I know I have actually had to do it :) 

»§øЫÑighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.
November 20, 2003 8:33:54 AM

Quote:
I can fix an airplane crashing in mid air

I can't. That doesn't make me a bad computer technician.

I can tell that a 200Bus CPU on a dual channel chipset will be bottlenecked by running only a single stick of 166Mhz RAM. That goes some way towards making me a good computer technician. It's called knowledge. You seem to be a bit short of it - in itself this is not a problem, but if you're unaware of it (or unwilling to admit it even to yourself), then you have no hope of correcting it.

While it's <i>possible</i> that you are correct and everyone else is wrong (after all, everyone once believed the earth was flat), the much more logical deduction is that your Intel system is configured in some horrible, crippled way, and even that's discounting the fact that all your 'tests' rely almost solely on your own perception which clearly is biased in favour of AMD.

Incidentally, when talking about the evilness of Intel, I wasn't being altogether serious....

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
November 20, 2003 10:03:54 AM

Quote:
it's possible that you are correct and everyone else is wrong

Quite right!I have just binned my NF7-S to buy an A7V8X-X on sod's recommendation, since it is clearly the ideal platform for my beloved AMD cpu :wink: !
<pre>I think you know that i am not being altogether serious either! :smile: </pre><p>no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]
November 20, 2003 11:01:41 AM

Chip Death pull your head out of your ass man no one said anything about a Ram chip running at 166 MHz the damn computer was using Kingston DDR P.C 2700 at a minimum setting of 333 MHz.
The 2 AMD systems both ran the same type of RAM @ 333 MHz and work perfectly!! After 2 weeks of <[-peep-] Around> with the piece of crap 3.0 GHz Intel chip we gave up on it doing anything right in an online game. YES we even overclocked it and the ram up to 400 MHz still ran like <[-peep-]>.
The fact that Intel CPU's don't even seem to work right in the first place for graphics applications and all you INTEL boys feel the need to overclock every INTEL CPU made as soon as you plug the damn thing in.... only proves they run like [-peep-] for graphics applications you are all obsessed with overclocking.

Aside from that said the.... AMD CPU's posted the fastest computer award in the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Overclocked. That was only in front of 200 and 50 thousand geeks to see it happen. All this even before the 64's get a good testing. Intel is sucked out the knot hole backwards for now, the new 64 CPU eats anything they have right out of the packaging that is even after you overclock an Intel 3.0 it still cant get near the new AMD CPU's.

If you want to fly MS word at light speed use Intel!! If you want to fly games at transwarp light speed use AMD.

Oh you can bite me now you are not worthy and an ass to boot!!

»§øЫÑighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.
November 20, 2003 11:02:00 AM

> It's pretty hard for me to blame Intel
> CPUs since I can't recreate any of the
> issues you say you're having.

No one can Zoron.

Shadus
November 20, 2003 11:05:53 AM

You are nothing but an unskilled moron who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Half the time you make claims about a 9800 Ultra and the other half about a 5800 Pro. You claim your amd system can beat a c varient p4 but you won't even post benchmark numbers in a way that proves you aren't just rattling numbers off the top of your head. When someone points out a system configuration issue-- you shrug it off even when its completely valid. Basically you're a clueless, skilless, moron.

Shadus
November 20, 2003 11:07:03 AM

> You have to use your head and expect that
> people know what they are doing.

Except everytime you open your mouth you prove that at least YOU don't.

Shadus
November 20, 2003 11:59:26 AM

Quote:
said anything about a Ram chip running at 166 MHz the damn computer was using Kingston DDR P.C 2700 at a <b>minimum setting of 333 MHz.</b>
The 2 AMD systems both ran the same type of RAM <b>@ 333 MHz</b>

I bow to your superior skills. There's no way I could get PC2700 to run at an <b>actual clock</b> of 333Mhz, as that would then be 666DDR, and is precisely <b>double</b> the actual speed of the RAM...

Ok, seeing as my previous sarcasm seems to have not quite worked, I'll also add a non-sarcastic translation:
<font color=red>DDR333 RAM <i>actually</i> runs at a speed of 166.6[recurring]Mhz. So to actually say 333<b>Mhz</b> is wrong. It's a common enough little slip, and most people use Mhz when it's not really, but it doesn't bother me so I don't pedantically point it out when people do. Usually though, I personally tend to refer to things as <b>actual</b> clock, because that is just my preference. That was my reason for '166Mhz'.

In fact most BIOSes will show the actual clock, so the fact that you did not realise what I meant is proof that you've never bothered even <i>looking</i> at these settings..
</font color=red>

The rate you're digging a hole for yourself you'll pop out in china within days. :lol: 

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
November 20, 2003 12:56:07 PM

> The rate you're digging a hole for yourself you'll
> pop out in china within days.

Already did, they sent him back with a postmark saying something to the tune of "Only in north america can ignorance of this magnitude be accepted with this degree of ego"

Shadus
November 20, 2003 1:17:29 PM

Quote:
I OWN my own computer Store I have worked in Quality control Engineering for the previous 17 years I am fibre Optic certified and I am also a AN Electrical Engineer as well as a SMT specialist in computer placement robotics and repair. I have developed both Software and Hardware for Nortel Networks and designed proto-type fibre optic switches for JDS-Unifase

WOW, THOSE ARE GREAT CREDENTIALS! MAYBE I CAN DO ALL THAT AND BECOME A DOUCHEBAG LIKE YOU!!!

Other than your store, those are nothing worth [-peep-] in this argument. This is a direct comparision of AXP to P4C, where everybody else, from experience and from benchmarks, knows that the P4C will outperform the AXP in a great majority of circumstances.

Quote:
the amount of knowledge you have compared to mine... is none existant!!

Oh really?! Look who is using the AXP and claiming it is a better processor than the 3.0C. Beyond your system's inability to function like the rest do, you have no way to substantiate any evidence. The AXP was meant to compete with the P4B, which it did very well. Then Intel released the P4C, which slapped the P4B around as well as the competition of P4B, namely AXP. A64 is meant to compete with P4C and Scotty, and AMD <b>KNOWS</b> that they lost against the P4C originally.

Quote:
Next time you want to bleat off like a sheep you should realize that everyone knows that Kingston KVR333X64C25/1G is P.C 2700 Ram and the Default BIOS setting is 333 MHz but the ram can be set up higher then that.

I know it can go higher than that, but to 200MHz?? Not always (in fact, you haven't said if it did for you). I really doubt that it would since it is a 1GB DIMM, which has higher density RAM chips which are known to not be able to go at as high of speeds. Also, what chipset are you using?? I don't see any utilization of dual-channel RAM with your lowly single DIMM, without it, you have half the memory bandwidth and not exactly an ideal gaming system.

Also, didn't I say that you might have it OCed to 200MHz??? YES! Frankly, I don't believe you if you did, because of the crappiness of Kingston RAM (I have it in my system), and the improbability of making that DIMM run at 200MHz. If you did, I can imagine that it would be having errors like crazy, which might also explain your supposed lack of performance.

Quote:
The only failing that I can see is that you little goof balls need to have every aspect of a post spoon fed to you because you only read what was not posted and ignore what was posted.

Right, that's why I'm taking direct quotes from you, because I only read what was not posted. Maybe to understand why the 3.0C loses to any AXP I need to stop reading what is posted and reported and reviewed and make up my own [-peep-] (based off of a REALLY poorly arranged argument with no evidence other than your wanna-be anomaly because you don't know how to build a friggen system), JUST LIKE YOU.

Quote:
Guys like you are the clif clavins of the world always available to state the obvious but seldom able to come up with the original thought.

I don't see you having any original thought or any OBVIOUS thought. You just list your credentials and say that you are better because you think you are. Frankly, YOU AREN'T, you don't know how to build a friggen P4 system--which is OBVIOUS with your choice of RAM. If your 'store' was worth even a dime you (since you are the owner of it) would know that until the A64 and FX were released, the P4C was the OBVIOUS choice of processor for a high performance system. The main reason for anybody to buy an AXP would be because of budget.


BTW, you really need to work on your grammar and punctuation. Maybe you need to go "back to school for at least the next 15 years."

Damn Rambus.
November 20, 2003 2:16:26 PM

SoDNighthawk i assume you live in Ottawa right? I believe i live close to your cottage, i live halfway between Ottawa and Kingston on highway 15.

I dare you to come and try out my P4 rig.

I have a P4 3.0C, properly paired with two sticks of Corsair XMS 3500 running at 200MHz DDR at CL 2. I'm using a canterwood board(Asus P4C800-E) and a 9700 Pro AIW. Nothing is overclocked on my rig.

--------
The only thing that i truly know...

is that i know nothing at all.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by peter21 on 11/20/03 11:19 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 20, 2003 3:54:10 PM

Quote:
The rate you're digging a hole for yourself you'll pop out in china within days.

Hey Sod, when you get there, can you get me some Chinese food?? That'd be great.



More seriously though, I agree with you completely...if his BIOS is 'showing' 333MHz...HE DIDN'T LOOK! I, too, prefer actual clock just because it is the actual number, not a PRed number.

I'm really getting sick of this guy and his [-peep-]. I elect we stop responding to him (meaning this is my last post RE: Sod, other than future versions of what Shadus originally posted).

Damn Rambus.
November 21, 2003 8:05:32 AM

I find it quite funny to be honest...

But what I <i>do</i> object to is him giving people BS advice. Everyone makes the odd mistake when giving advice, but usually a couple of others will point it out & the one making the mistake realises.... But our mate Sod seems unable to realise when he's wrong, an continually spouts the same unsubstantiated crap, and someday someone's going to take his advice when it wouldn't be the best option for their needs...

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
November 21, 2003 8:14:04 AM

This guy is a total lamer. He's afraid to post his benchmark results, you know why? Go look at the thread titled "P4 2.6C vs 2800+", just look at the 3rd page down where I post my benchmark results with a stock 2.4C which beats his 2800+ results, which he typed in without providing a Link to, and he still denies it. I asked him to post his 3DMark link for comparison and he kept dodging my request. Now the fool wants us to believe that his 2800+ can hammer a 2.8C/3.0C, LMAO.

I know a few Electrical Engineers, but how could you be one since it takes brains to get a degree in that field.
November 21, 2003 4:50:23 PM

He's just a big time Amd troll. Who is lost in his own mind. IF he still has one.
November 21, 2003 10:11:11 PM

Hey dude, I play online with my Cyrix 1GHz system and I get 1000fps and I oWnZorZ everyone, everytime man. Then I play on my P4 3.0GHz and I can't even get 50fps and it lags like a bitch so I get killed a lot. :lol: 
November 22, 2003 2:20:12 AM

LOL I needed a good laugh.
!