Athlon XP 2800+ OR Intel P 2.8 800Mhz

FlashFreak · Nov 18, 2003

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.html 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

Edited by FlashFreak on 11/18/03 12:16 PM.

shadus · Nov 18, 2003

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

SoDNighthawk · Nov 18, 2003

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.

»§øÐ«Ñighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.

TheMASK · Nov 18, 2003

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.

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

SoDNighthawk · Nov 18, 2003

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/0,,30_182_871_2367,00.html

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/0,,30_182_871_2336~4233,00.html

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

»§øÐ«Ñighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.

HardWareBoss · Nov 19, 2003

Buy the P4 2.8C.

TTZX · Nov 19, 2003

The 2.4C can beat the 2800+, the 2.8C basically slaps it around.

ChipDeath · Nov 19, 2003

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.

---
The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong

Edited by ChipDeath on 11/19/03 10:28 AM.

Mephistopheles · Nov 19, 2003

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

Mephistopheles

SoDNighthawk · Nov 19, 2003

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.

»§øÐ«Ñighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.

shadus · Nov 19, 2003

*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

ChipDeath · Nov 19, 2003

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:

it includes both the P4 2.8 800FSB and the XP2800+ in the benchies.

And as for Comments like:

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, and 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 of everyone else who's ever compared these chips.

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

---
The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong

shadus · Nov 19, 2003

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

*snicker*

Shadus

ad_rach · Nov 19, 2003

Benchmarks are for idiots that believe what others tell them.

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

no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]

Zoron · Nov 19, 2003

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.

 If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it.

ad_rach · Nov 19, 2003

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. :]

HardWareBoss · Nov 19, 2003

Your right. But since he asked about 2.8C. But you let him know about 2.4c.

SoDNighthawk · Nov 19, 2003

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.

»§øÐ«Ñighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.

Zoron · Nov 19, 2003

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.

 If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it.

Vapor · Nov 20, 2003

Here's your problem, you idiot.

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.

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.Edited by Vapor on 11/19/03 07:02 PM.

SoDNighthawk · Nov 20, 2003

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.

»§øÐ«Ñighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.

Zoron · Nov 20, 2003

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.

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.

 If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it.

SoDNighthawk · Nov 20, 2003

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

»§øÐ«Ñighthåwk™ Don't get mad at the player get mad at the game. Hackers drool and Skill's rule.

ChipDeath · Nov 20, 2003

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 possible 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....

---
The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong

ad_rach · Nov 20, 2003

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

!
<pre>I think you know that i am not being altogether serious either!

</pre>no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]

Athlon XP 2800+ OR Intel P 2.8 800Mhz

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Splendid

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Share this page