Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Would anyone buy a P4 now?

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 3:42:18 AM

I dont think i need 300FPS for Quake 3 in low resolution and detail. What i want is > 60 FPS in 1600X1200X32 Max details, :)  . Further i dont use my computer for Quake 3 only hehe.

I would be better off with NV20, TBird 1.2Gig + DDR2100 Ram + MB which cost about the same with P4 + Rambus + MB ONLY.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Tbird 1Gig FOP38, A7V, 384 Meg VCM, Abit siluro GTS2 64 Meg, SBLive Player, 2 X 20Gig Baracuda ATAII, Asus DVD-Rom, AOpen 52X Cd-Rom.

More about : buy

November 21, 2000 3:56:30 AM

Well i personally would not buy a procesor until the end of next year (plus i just upgraded hehe)
Simply put we should see what AMD and even Intel will offer in reality in the future and see what best fits your budget and performance expectations. Personally if i had 100k for a new car and was to choose between a ferrari and a Porche i would choose a porche cause it handles great and it is still an awesome super car which i love. Now on the other hand if i had say 1million to spend i would probably buy bothe show off the ferrari and drive the porshe on a daily basis. (my analogy may be a bit drastic but it is my personal feelings :) )

Why do I use LINUX ? Cause its the BEST OS
Why do I use Windows? Cause its the BEST Nintendo..
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 6:21:50 AM

Uh no , with those mixed numbers and with expensive rdram, hell no, maybe the later next year with a revised p4 with more even benchmark numbers and on a cheaper ddr based platfroms ,maybe. The best bang for the buck right now is any PIIIe overclock to 133fbs or any simlar amd t-bird based system overclock or not
Related resources
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 6:43:52 AM

Well, first of all, Kudos to Tom for non-Intel-bashing review, as I haven't seen one of those in a while...Anyway, I myself would love to own a P4, as I mostly play FPS games, and am about to get into Video editing. However, I'll wait on 1)prices to come down, 2)3rd-party DDR chipsets in Q1 2001. Oh, and can anyone else see the stupidity in these articles that say that Intel's future is entirely on the P4? I mean, They will always have the majority of OEM systems, regardless of what AMD does, as, even though we don't like to admit it, We DIY's don't really matter much to either company's bottom line..Just some random thoughts...
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 10:28:30 AM

NO! Never again!
November 21, 2000 10:50:29 AM

No, i would not buy a P4, for the simple fact that lower clocked athlons beat the p4. Plus i'm sure that the first chipset and processors will have glitches. I will wait till it's profected and to see what AMD counters with.

"upgrading is no longer an option...it's a necessity"
Visit www.elitehunters.com
--SoulReaper =)
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 11:41:22 AM

NO way. Not even if you put a gun to head. AMD has ALWAYS beat Intel. The ball is now in AMDs cort. When they come out with their new 64 bit Hammer chip, I'm sure it run circles around Intel just like AMD has been doing for quite some time now. In addition, I'm sure it will be cheaper, not by much like in the past, but you will get more bang for you buck. JUST WAIT! MMMUUUUUHHHHHAAAAAAHHHH!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 12:11:05 PM

first of all you people do know that rdram will possibly be faster than ddr with the p4. second the athlon will have no chance to compete with the p4 considering its almost out of headroom and the p4 seems to have no end near. third wait until programs use sse2. i would defenitly wait until the new socket for the p4 comes out and by that time the p4 will probobly be around 2ghz crushing any athlon.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 12:59:32 PM

Yes, P4s with RDRAM WILL perform better than P4s with DDR SDRAM... however, you will pay 4x for that - I looked into pricelist of my local retailer, they don't sell DDR yet, but 128MB PC133 SDRAM costs $95, while 128MB PC800 RDRAM costs $450 - and it's not something I'm willing to pay for 5% performance gain. Thunderbird core doesn't seem to be anywhere near to being out of headroom, as AMD roadmaps show. We have 9-12 months until mass support of SSE2 by software, and by then AMD will support it too from what I know. 2GHz P4 will be competing with 1.5-1.6GHz Athlon - a competition which P4 will lose.

If you read carefully, the Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament benchmarks were done in 640x480x16 - do you spend over $3,000 on a system to play in THAT resolution? Here are some more complete benchmark results:

http://www.ixbt.com/cpu/pentium4/diagram/q3.gif

Sure the P4 1.4GHz beats T-Bird 1GHz by a wide margin in 640x480x16... but in 1280x1024x32 with full quality (which you WILL use - otherwise why spend $3k on a system?), P4 gives 50FPS, while T-Bird gives 55.3... benchmarks were done with an ASUS V7700 GeForce2 GTS card (core 200MHz, memory 166MHz DDR).

None of the current 3D cards seem to be able to utilize the performance of the high-end CPUs when running higher resolutions - they hit the fill rate cap - so if you want best gaming performance, your best bet would probably be T-Bird/OC'ed Duron with DDR memory and best 3D accelerator you can get your hands on (GeForce 2 Ultra currently).
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 1:21:57 PM

First of i wont buy a computer now for the future..The Golden rule is you buy what you need now. As no one knows what would happened in the future.. by the time SSE2 comes out 1.5Gig P4 would be selling for $300??? and new CPU from AMD?

I agree with Gholam that is better off to get a Good Graphic card for enjoyable FPS at 1280X1024 or even 1200X1600 instead of having 300 FPS 640X480. By the way could anyone feel the different of 100 FPS vs 300 FPS ?
( I dont wanna have 300 FPS in 1200X1600X32, just 60+ FPS@max quality will do..... :)  )

At the moment i reckon AMD CPU is better value for money. As i am not a fan of AMD nor Intel, infact all my previous computer was Intel (8 of them). At recently i upgrade my PIII866 to TBird 1 Gig was the biggest bang for buck.
November 21, 2000 2:51:02 PM

SCREW the p4

i say 1.2ghz tbird

or you could do dual p3 700 @ 900

smp is the rage even amd knows that
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 4:09:51 PM

Clearly the P4's shortcomings will ensure it doesn't have success in the present. Unfortunately, neither can it claim to have a future because while it may improve and mature (with future revisions, chipsets and memory configurations), so will the rest of the industry (ie. AMD). How people can claim that it is worth buying now because it is "going to get better" is beyond me. What we buy now does not miraculously download a new core/chipset from the Internet in six months' time. It's not a BIOS! What you pay for is what you're stuck with!

LaserPowder

(i820 took away my faith in Intel. Now I'm an I-theist.)
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 4:50:01 PM

I think it is not worth buying it yet. First is because of the price. Secondly, P4 need some more frequency to be able to compete directly against a lowerly clocked Athlon. Perhaps, when the price of P4 and RAMBUS drop by half and the frequency is up to 2.5 Ghz then perhaps I will consider again.

It seems very surprising to me this P4 performed better than I expected. I expect it to be very much worse than that. So, it seems that this Willie is finally benefiting from a high bandwidth memory huh?

--
Neither an Intel supporter or AMD supporter.
I am a supporter of my wallet.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2000 10:46:04 PM

Well, I'm just going to voice my opinions on this. The P4 has in incredable platform, but is a pathetic processor. Which is unfortunate. Because I think the i850 chipset(even with it's Rhambus) is a work of art. With the 400Mhz. bus, it's a bandwidth monster, and you have to agree with that. Wouldn't it be great if they could stick a Palamino core behind that chipset, man, that would be sweet.

I guess we'll have to live with Nvidia's chipset, with it's 128-bit interface.
November 22, 2000 12:08:47 AM

Nope, I look forward to seeing how AMDs 266fsb chips and DDR 256 compare with the P4 chips. That will probably be an upgrade option for me.
November 22, 2000 2:01:53 AM

you're one of those people who thinks evolution has stoped with humans right? we're the end all and be all? i guess you're right, amd will never make a new processor. the athlon was it. they might as well pack up and go home.

i agree that the p4 has some neat new toys. i'm not sure what head room you're talking about, it looked to me that on a lot of benches the p4 had a little trouble staying ahead of the athlon (even the classic on one and the p3 on another). and this from a processor that is supposedly a generation ahead of the athlon?

reread the article.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 22, 2000 8:28:15 AM

Sure it *may* scale to 2-3-5-100GHz. SSE2 may become the new standard. RAMBUS may rule with a hyperpipelined processor.

So would I buy one now? No. A big [-peep-] no. If it really does improve that much with time, why would I buy it now when it's underperforming and overpriced compared to other systems? Prices *will* drop. Mobos, processor, rambus, power&case if people see a need. Right now I wouldn't understand anybody who sees a need for it RIGHT NOW though.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 22, 2000 10:47:15 AM

Rambus has been out for QUITE a while already, and the prices haven't dropped much yet - if I were to go out to store and buy a 128mb stick of it, I'd still have to fork over $455 - and why should I, when I can get 128MB of PC133 SDRAM for $95, and it will run faster? P4 core NEEDS the bandwidth of RDRAM, Tom's tests showed that clearly, so it WILL remain an expensive platform, because even with DDR SDRAM it will run slow - while K75 core does not need the huge bandwidth of RDRAM to run faster than P4 - at lower price.
November 22, 2000 5:59:32 PM

Personally, I would not buy a P4 in it's current state. In a year we might be looking at a serious contender but there simpley isn't enough performance delta from the Athlon platform to justify the tremendous cost.
November 22, 2000 9:31:09 PM

Be carefull of what you wish for AMD fan's ( i consider myself among your ranks btw) We need both AMD and intell on equal level. Competition is what spurs inovation and keeps prices down. It is time to end the AMD vs. intel battle and simply buy the best for the dollar. WHo cares who has the fastest at the minute ( these days I do mean minute) This is were the battle needs to be drawn:

What components do I use if I want the best system for $1000.00?
for$1250.00?
for $1500.00 so on and so on.

Anybody that is buying the latest and best at the moment is a fool for sure and has way to much money to waste when he will be able to get the same thing in 2 months time for 30 percent cheaper.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 22, 2000 10:39:09 PM

Nope, not in a million year or at least until I can see a meaningfull reason to buy it. If nothing change regarding the lack of power in the P4, AMD is the next buy for me.

AoD :wink:

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/angelofdeathdk/index.html" target="_new"> :cool: </A>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 12:41:07 AM

.... I don't believe intel. I think PIV was originally intended to be launched at 700Mhz, then 1Ghz, then 1.3Ghz, then to save embarrassment at 1.5Ghz up near its design headroom of 1.6-1.7Ghz MAX. We know from PIII 1.13Ghz that their CPU's can't always go as high as they say they can. The PIV is already near max at .18u, it prolly can't do 2Ghz till it gets .13u, and 1.6-1.7Ghz isn't enough to even break even with AMD's Athlon performancewise. It needs 60-120% MORE HollowGhz than Athlon just to keep up and at this rate its NEVER going to keep up. The Athlon Ghz is going to keep rising also, and rumors are it can do 2Ghz at .18u. intel might just as well recall the PIV NOW and get it over with. Either that or sell it really cheap as a Celeron-replacement.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 2:58:29 AM

NO! I don't have that kind of cash for that kind of chip.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 3:10:28 AM

I WILL definitely buy a P4 when it's at 2.5Ghz where it's pure FPU performance in unoptimised situation (that should be the majority of uhm...everything we use right now) is pretty much on par with a 1.2Ghz Athlon AND be priced neck-to-neck with the 1.2Ghz (pffft like that's gonna happen)...

coz owning a 2.5Ghz machine is just cool...:p 
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 3:20:54 AM

I am not _entirely_ sure about these two, but if anyone can confirm/deny them I would appreciate it.

First, I seem to remember the average human eye topping out at 60-70hz.
Second, isn't the actual fps you see limited by the refresh rate of the monitor anyway? If thats the case, unless you have an impressively high refresh rate all you are doing is paying for a space heater.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 3:32:26 AM

still, I feel pretty uncomfortable with a refreash rate under 80hz but some of my friends are OK with that....I don't know it slightly varies with people but I think 85hz (thus 85 FPS??) is optimal...
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 6:58:38 AM

For benchmarking reviewer use low resolution to avoid bottleneck from the graphic card to show the raw power of a CPU. As in high resolution FPS will be limited by Graphic Card. So in theory PIV "should do" more FPS in high resolution than a TBird 1.2Gig in Quake 3 as long as Graphic card is not the limiting factor. Damn.. should a DIE HARD Quake 3 gamer get a PIV? Wondering would there be such a person just to get a PIV to play Quake 3... hehe
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 8:49:44 AM

Here's a benchmark of P4 1.4GHz vs T-Bird 1GHz vs P3 1GHz... test systems were using ASUS V7700 Geforce2 GTS (Core:200MHz; Mem:166MHz DDR):

http://www.ixbt.com/cpu/pentium4/diagram/q3.gif

Draw your own conclusions.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 10:03:29 AM

Oh Thanks! Gholam

I definately wont buy a PIV now. I have planned my next CPU upgrade would be in 6 months time from now. What am i waiting for is a better Graphic Card that i can play @1200X1600X32.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 1:57:26 PM

iXBT review of Creative Labs 3D Blaster Annihilator2 Ultra:

http://www.ixbt.com/video/geforce2ultra-review.html

Review is in russian, but benchmarks are international, hehe. You can see it hitting 53 FPS in 1600x1200x32 in Q3 with anisotropic filtering on. The main concern is price - I believe this card currently retails for around $450.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2000 4:18:13 PM

I will be looking for NV20 or next generation ATI chips. Should be available in 2 or 3 months time.. Better to wait than regret as to what happen when i upgrade from CL Geforce Pro to Abit Siluro GTS 2 1.5 months ago, infact i should wait for the Pro or Ultra version.

Wiseman never make the same mistake twice..hehe
March 9, 2006 5:36:07 PM

Here's an old version of the "back in day flamefest" LOL
March 9, 2006 5:43:20 PM

ya i read lol man so there were fanboys before me,mike,ak,and alot more that acted as we do geez i feel kind of stupid now
March 9, 2006 5:57:14 PM

An Intel 805D fills an interesting niche in the processor market... a $150 dual core CPU (even if it is a NetBurst CPU) is a tempting price.
March 9, 2006 5:58:11 PM

:lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
March 9, 2006 6:02:16 PM

come on dude their inactive and his is pointless and do you want to create a time rift in which ppl of the past on these forumz know about the future procs well do you with that kind of knowledge they could rewrite the history books and we would all be using one proc one graphics card and one ram no competition no innovation no nothing<yelling>nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! <my mind>and they could enslave us so noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
April 9, 2006 7:16:51 AM

Quote:
come on dude their inactive and his is pointless and do you want to create a time rift in which ppl of the past on these forumz know about the future procs well do you with that kind of knowledge they could rewrite the history books and we would all be using one proc one graphics card and one ram no competition no innovation no nothing<yelling>nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! <my mind>and they could enslave us so noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!


This thread is so:

aslk;fsadlf;kjsadlfkjasl;kjsa;lkfjsal;kfjsdalkjasl;ku[iwqrupqweioruspofiausapofiusaoi32847219835uio5j4l5j;5lk2j;lj4k523l;j534;2lj52;lj52;ljk523;l5jk2;lkja;slkjf;aslfkjsda;lfkjsda;lfkjadslfj;ksda;lfkjsda;lfkjsda
fdsafjksalf;jsa;dlfkjsal;kfjsa;lkj;slkfj;salkfj;aslkfjs;dalfj;aslkja;dslfjksd;lfkjsad;lfjksa;lkjfsad;lfjsa;ldjf;saljfs;alfjksa;lfkjas;lkfjsa;dlfjksa;dlfj;aslfkjsad;lfjksda;lkfjsda;lksfa;lksjf;slakjf;salkjsljf;aksljf;slkjf;sljkf;asklj;salkfj;sldfj;aslkfj;slfakjd;salkjf;akslfj;slkjf;saljfs;akjf;asldjf;ksajf;aslkfj;aslkfjsla;kfja;sljfka;slkjfds;lkjfds;lkjfdsal;kjfsd;klsfa;klfsaj;klsaj;aslkjf;aslkfj;slfkjdsa;lfkjads;lfkjasd;lfjkas;lkfjdsa;lfkjsdlfkjads;lkfjsad;lkjfdsa;lkfjasd;lkjfdsal;kjfdsa;kjfs;klfjsda;lkfjdsa;kljfsd;klfsjd;lskfj;salkfjsa;lkjf;aslkf;klsfajds;ljf;aslfjkk;lsj;slfkja;lskfj;lsfkja;lkjfsd;alfjsa;lkjf;kasljf;aslkfj;salkjf;aslfjka;sklfja;lsfj;lskaj;salkjslk;ajdsfl;kjfsl;kajfds;lakjfdsl;sdlsdf;lfl;jkk;lfjk;ljsajklasfdjlkfdsaslklsfdk;ljsadflkafkjflsdakljsafdljk;fdalksadlslad;fk;jlajk;lsafdljk;fsa;jklasfk;ljsl;;jlsfdaklsfdkj;lsk;ljskj;lskj;lsfdl;kjfdk;ljsadflk;jfd;


LOL: I JUST MADE UR BROWSER WINDOW SOO MUCH WIDER :) 
a c 102 à CPUs
April 9, 2006 12:00:22 PM

You don't know how right you were...
!