Athlon 64 advantages

[gobeavers]

Ok, so besides 64-bit computing, what advantages does the Athlon 64 have over an Intel C version CPU? Like the FX has an on-die mem controller, does Athlon 64 have anything good?

 

[raretech]

The Athlon64 also has the on-die mem controller. The difference is the 64s is 64bit and the FXs is 128bit, doubling the *memory* bandwidth on the FX(64=3.2gb/s, fx=6.4gb/s). Other than that, I'm not aware of a difference between the two. They also both have the integrated 128bit northbridge and 1mb of integrated L2 cache.

So yes, the 64 has some good things.

<i>SCO is to Linux what a flea is to a dog.</i>

 

[gobeavers]

But it is still faster than the P4's right?

 

[silverpig]

In most things yes, in some others, no.

I just know I'm gonna get one when they come down in price a little. I can't wait to get a 64 bit gentoo system installed on one.

Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.

 

[raretech]

Overall, they are faster, based upon what I've read(no, not from AMD fanboy sites). Before some Intel fanboy jumps in, let us all be clear that this is about comparing the P4, not the EE.

but then, it could all be BS, but I doubt it. The 64 is a new generation chip and the P4s have been out for a while, so it only makes sense. Also, in the off chance that you use Linux, the AMD64 will slaughter a P4 when using a 64bit kernel. But, that's linux specific, for now...

<i>SCO is to Linux what a flea is to a dog.</i>

 

[Unseen]

A64/FX perform quite well agaist top end p4. I think they basically even. However my only complaint is the price, there is not real mid range A64. There is only 3200 A64 for $400, nothing mid range like 2.4 or 2.6 ghz p4 for $170 or so. I just wish AMD has released something lower rated and cheaper A64! If you have crash for it, its all good though

 

[raretech]

64bit linux is a large slice of heaven, let me tell you...

I am soooo glad I went AMD this time around. that isn't to say I won't jump ship when Intel comes up with something more appealing, but for now, AMD is Linux king. I'd be very surprised if the EE could hang with it under Linux.

<i>SCO is to Linux what a flea is to a dog.</i>

 

[gobeavers]

That is my concern, I can save 200 dollars by going P4 and OC'ing, which could transfer into say, 2 36 gb raptors in RAID 0, do I want to give up that for the A64?

 

[raretech]

"That is my concern, I can save 200 dollars by going P4 and OC'ing, which could transfer into say, 2 36 gb raptors in RAID 0, do I want to give up that for the A64?"

If I was in your shoes, running primarily/only Windows, and the budget was this fixed, I'd go with the P4 and get the raptors. 10k drives seriously enhance the performance of the overall system, and the P4 is no slouch.

Processor's are only part of the overall system performance equation(albeit a substantial part). I just think you'll get more bang for the buck going with the P4 and getting the faster harddrives. Windows boot times will be substantially faster, same as app load times, and if you hit swap, that will be faster too. Of course, if you're trying to spec out a system for 3dmark bragging rights like some of the people around here, they won't help, but the system will be noticeably faster in your day to day real world use.

Go through the benchmark results at this article, the P4 is included as well as the Athlon64, Fx, and EE:
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/index.html

and just in case you do decide to go Athlon64, check this motherboard review:
http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20031201/index.html

<i>SCO is to Linux what a flea is to a dog.</i>