AmdMELTDOWN

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,000
0
19,780
this can't be!!!

as seen on pricewatch.com
<A HREF="http://www.pricewatch.com" target="_new">P4 1.7GHz is < $400 now!</A>

"AMD...you are the weakest link, good bye!"
 

lemming

Distinguished
Feb 7, 2001
232
0
18,680
And all you need now is that expensive memory, and motherboard, and a new case and powersuppy, because of the amount of current that processor draws.

Ops, sorry, got you wrong again you dork, after all, I thought only AMD systems required special power supplys, so I guess you are wrong yet again. Maybe you should just go away, and stop dribbling crap


Jump, Jump Now!!
 

Raystonn

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2001
2,273
0
19,780
PC800 RDRAM 256MB total = $186
P4 1.7GHZ = $395
Good P4 motherboard = $159
----------------
Total $740

PC800 RDRAM 256MB total = $186
P4 1.3GHZ = $207
Good P4 motherboard = $159
-----------------
Total $552


AMD Athlon 1.33GHz = $181
PC2100 DDR CAS 2, 256MB total = $186
Decent Athlon DDR motherboard = $140
--------------------
$507


Seems to me a decent Athlon system costs about as much as the P4 system running at about the same clockspeed.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
 

SammyBoy

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2001
689
0
18,980
Sorry to inform you, but you do remember that, especially with the release of the P4, that the clockspeed is becoming less of a factor in the <b> true </b> speed of the system. When benched, an AMD 1.33GHz beats the pants off a P4 1.5GHz in gaming, and is neck and neck with the P4 1.7GHz. And the P4 1.3GHz that you posted at $552 won't even beat out a AMD 1.0GHz in most anything. So, to get a comperable system to the AMD that you posted, you'd have get the P4 1.7GHz and spend nearly $240 more. Also, you neglect to mention that the current incarnation of the P4 was DOA, as this fall, it will be replaced by the <i> real </i> P4, which will have no compatibility with the current motherboards. So, if you want a real P4 with the actual speed that 2GHz should give you for the price that it will cost, you're better off waiting until the fall release of the Northwood and Brookdale. And to those who will jump on me for getting timelines wrong, or some type of speed rating, or some other pointless info, big deal, and it really doesn't make a dime's worth of difference to the advice herein. All in all, don't buy a P4 that isn't for the Northwood or Brookdale, cause your ability to upgrade later will be nil, and the money you spend would do better in a bank, collecting interest to get the real P4 later on.
That's my $0.02.

-SammyBoy

Without Evil, there can be no Good. Therefore, without an Intel, there can be no AMD.
 

AmdMELTDOWN

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,000
0
19,780
hey now dont kill the messenger just reporting on the g :smile: :smile: dness.

face it, you're just a frustrated lemming, get over it.

"AMD...you are the weakest link, good bye!"
 

TheAntipop

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,315
0
19,280
PC2100 DDR CAS 2, 256MB total = $186
where the hell is that price from? get crucial: $115 for 256 PC2100 CAS2 shipped free. that drops the athlon price down to $436, and thats a hell of a lot cheaper for something that performs as well or better than the P4 1.7ghz. besides who are you kidding, if you like to spend you money on more expensive, yet slower components, thats your own business.
oh yea and the cheapest price for PC800 RDRAM on pricewatch is $227, where did you get $186? quit makin up sh!t when you post, then we might start believing you.

<A HREF="http://www.512productions.com/lobstermagnet/" target="_new">Hyakugojyuuichi!!</A>
 

Raystonn

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2001
2,273
0
19,780
"where the hell is that price from? get crucial: $115 for 256 PC2100 CAS2 shipped free."

Crucial doesn't sell PC2100 CAS2 DDR memory. Check your facts.

"cheapest price for PC800 RDRAM on pricewatch is $227, where did you get $186? quit makin up sh!t when you post, then we might start believing you."

Once again, check your facts. For 256MB of total memory you purchase 2 memory module of 128MB each. These are $93 each.

This is the second time you've sent out some nasty flames with a personal attack based on false data. You aren't looking very good right now.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
 

Raystonn

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2001
2,273
0
19,780
"you're better off waiting until the fall release of the Northwood and Brookdale"

I agree for those of us who plan on upgrading our cpu within about 1-1.5 years of purchase. For those who plan on keeping their CPU for 2-3 years though, keeping the motherboard becomes highly unlikely anyway.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
 

SammyBoy

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2001
689
0
18,980
"you're better off waiting until the fall release of the Northwood and Brookdale"

I agree for those of us who plan on upgrading our cpu within about 1-1.5 years of purchase. For those who plan on keeping their CPU for 2-3 years though, keeping the motherboard becomes highly unlikely anyway.
Actually, if you read the whole post, and in context, you will see that I am not arguing about the upgradability, but I'm arguing against the whole idea of purchasing a P4 in its current incarnation. I see spending $300+ on a chip that isn't the real thing that is not living up to its advertised GHz (okay, I know the formula for the GHz rating, but I'm saying that chips of lower speed and earlier technology are still comperable to it, despite the increased GHz) as a waste of hard earned money. If you truly want a P4 system, and you want it the way it should be, there is no way to do it but to get the Northwood or Brookdale version, as they won't be a castrated version, like the one selling today is.

Intel made a big mistake in wanting to get the P4 out ASAP. By doing that, they have garnered much negative press concerning the price and performance of it. What Intel forgot is that people now are informed, no longer confined to tangible sources of news. They have the internet, and on the 'net, the P4 was flamed by many, mostly for it's outragous initial price. People research with the 'net now, and for many, instead of getting their first computer, are onto number two or three, and know people who also have computers; ergo, they know what they are looking for; they are "experienced". The P4 as it is leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many, and by releasing a poorly planned "dumbed-down" version of the P4, Intel has soiled the name, and too many people out there know about it. People will tell you, and I'm sure Intel would too, after the Northwood and Brookdale are out and selling, that they [Intel] blundered when releasing the P4 when they did.

Now, the tech savvy people we are know better and know that the current P4 is just not what it should be. I see the real P4 as kicking the T-Bird's ass, just because of the high clock speed, not to mention the SSE2, if it is ever used by developers and brought into the mainstream. Face it, the P4 the we know today really sucks compared to what it should be, and what it was touted to be (that Net Burst BS really makes me laugh). The P4 that is relased later on should be a mad, code crunching machine that will probably run circles around the T-bird.

But, if you're like me, and <i> need </i> a new system soon, you're kinda screwed. The P3 is at the end; the 1.13GHz, if it is stable, will be the last P3, and Intel will slowly pull the plug on it. The T-bird will be phased out this summer in favor of the Palomino, and there is the hope that the Palomino will run just as well on the current T-bird motherboards, but only time will tell. So, you have a choice to make. You can either go all out and buy a bleeding edge P3 or T-bird system, or keep waiting until the Palomino and <b> <i> true </i> </b> P4 are out and see how the two compare. But I implore all who wish to upgrade soon <b> avoid the current, castrated, fake, and "dumbed-down" version of the P4 </b>. It is a failed processor, dead on arrival, and all it will do is offer you pain and hardship as you realize that cheaper, "slower" AMDs are killing you, and the new 1.13GHz P3 (if it scales as well as the rest) beats you as well. So don't do it. Don't buy the P4, unless it's the Northwood or Brookdale version. Just don't get it. It's not worth the money, the time, or the effort. Wait for the real P4 and you will be very happy, and it will last you a long time, as we all know that a 2GHz CPU is at least 1.2GHz more than you need right now, and will easily last you for at least 2 years.

-SammyBoy

Without Evil, there can be no Good. Therefore, without an Intel, there can be no AMD.
 

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
Do to the serial nature of Rambus aren't you better off with one stick at 256? Or does this not become an issue until considering the third and forth stick? And, have you noticed DDR Ram cas 2 is dropping....how many weeks I got left on my bet...4?

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
 

Raystonn

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2001
2,273
0
19,780
"Do to the serial nature of Rambus aren't you better off with one stick at 256?"

It must be installed in pairs. You install one module in each channel. The channels operate in parallel with each other. You get additional latency when you install more than one module on the same channel.

"have you noticed DDR Ram cas 2 is dropping....how many weeks I got left on my bet...4?"

Yes I've noticed. It's currently the same price as PC800 RDRAM.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
 

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
"The channels operate in parallel with each other"

Ok then, slots 1 and two each have ther own channel ( dual channel IE. parrelel?) Then slots 3 and 4 operate in series with there perspective slots 1 and two. Occupying slots 1 and 2 give you optimal performance, but adding additional memory increases latency correct?

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
 

Raystonn

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2001
2,273
0
19,780
Correct. About 5ns of additional latency for adding the last two modules.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
 

TheAntipop

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,315
0
19,280
a thunderbird 1.33ghz system with cas2.5 memory will still outperform a p4 1.7ghz system with rdram, so i still dont see why you need cas2 memory when cas2.5 is $70 cheaper. and besides, you can most likely get a good stick of crucial and run it at cas2 even though its only rated at 2.5, thats what i do with my current memory, and although im aware that ddr is more sensitive, i still think it can be done.

<A HREF="http://www.512productions.com/lobstermagnet/" target="_new">Hyakugojyuuichi!!</A>
 

Raystonn

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2001
2,273
0
19,780
"a thunderbird 1.33ghz system with cas2.5 memory will still outperform a p4 1.7ghz system with rdram"

Not true. I notice you didn't bother supplying any benchmark scores where they use CAS2.5 memory. (There aren't any, all reviewers have been using CAS2 in benchmarks for almost 6 months now.)

"run it at cas2 even though its only rated at 2.5"

I'm not really discussing overclocking. You can most likely overclock just about any memory technology. But I prefer stability thanks. Memory is never 'underclocked' by manufacturers like CPUs can be. Anything that fails the CAS2 tests is sold as CAS2.5. Anything failing CAS2.5 tests is sold as CAS3. Anything failing CAS3 tests is thrown out. Because of this, it's inherently unsafe to overclock the CAS settings on memory. Most likely your ram was sold as CAS2.5 for a reason: It failed the CAS 2 test. Overclocking it can lead to random crashes and lockups without a clear pattern as to what's causing it.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
 

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
"<font color=red>Anything that fails the CAS2 tests is sold as CAS2.5. Anything failing CAS2.5 tests is sold as CAS3. Anything failing CAS3 tests is thrown out. Because of this, it's inherently unsafe to overclock the CAS settings on memory. Most likely your ram was sold as CAS2.5 for a reason: It failed the CAS 2 test. Overclocking it can lead to random crashes and lockups without a clear pattern as to what's causing it.</font color=red>"

Very true right now, most users that "overclock" there DDR memory ( or would it be underclock??) also have to up the voltage to it. However, as right as you may be now, that anolagy does not always hold up.

For instance, a culling procedure like this was used by intel when determining the p3 ( coppermines) and the celeron ( they are the same chip) A P3 that did not make the grade had half its cache disabled and was made a Celeron. But, as the yields got better and more and more P3's were made they had less and less bad p3's to cull down to the celeron level. But, the demand for the celeron still was there, so to fill this demand perfectly good p3's were used for celeron's as well. Something of the same applies for the Athlon as well, if a particular batch of processors all test good at say 900 mhz, but they need to fill a need for 800's some perfectly good 900's might be clocked as 800's to fill this need. the trouble with this is you just never know and it is all hit and miss from the buyers perspective. However, I sincerly doubt, AT THIS TIME, that any good cas2 ddr ram is filtering down to cas 2.5 level.

Also, in reply to 2 being 20 percent faster than 2.5, only on paper :) It might be that much faster alone but the increase in total system performance won't be 20% maybe if lucky 5%-10%.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
 

BuGaLoU

Distinguished
Apr 10, 2001
175
0
18,680
Blah Blah Blah... Who frocking cares already! You people act like your defending your Mothers or something. This topic can only be fought over so many damn times then it becomes VERY repeatitive! Talk about other things aside AMD versus Intel! please!

Computer: $2000 Internet Access: $40 Registering for forums: Free A good signature: Priceless
 

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
Obviously, you must care as it would appear that you took the time not only to read the post but to actually respond as well. But I digress, your reading skills must obviously be lacking because the true nature of the conversation was not Intel vs AMD as you state, but rather first on some questions I had about rdram and then some issues concerning DDR. So, please tell me, where, in the context of this thread, did I say anything negative aimed at Intel?

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
 

BuGaLoU

Distinguished
Apr 10, 2001
175
0
18,680
Whoa.. wait a sec... I wasn't pointing you out. Your just the closest reply button :wink: . Its just the very nature of this conversation is AMD vs Intel. I'm so sick of that. Yes, this is the CPU forum and it is a relative topic, but its the SAME people talking about the SAME thing and saying the SAME stuff over and over and over... Arg!

Computer: $2000 Internet Access: $40 Registering for forums: Free A good signature: Priceless
 

Grizely1

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
7,810
0
30,780
Thankyou for that, Raystonn! As you all can see, both Intel platforms are more money than the AMD one. I wonder which one performs the best? Hmmm......

---------
I am the first and only one with a 16MB GeForce2 GTS graphics card! :smile:
 

girish

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,885
0
20,780
thats true, have to wait for P4 to go Northwood with Brookdale to get the biggest bang for your buck.

And by that time, AMD will be coming out with Palomino Athlons running at 1.7~2.0 GHz!

girish

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
 

TheAntipop

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,315
0
19,280
Thank you griz, that was my main point before we got into the debate over cas2 and cas2.5 ddr ram.

<A HREF="http://www.512productions.com/lobstermagnet/" target="_new">Hyakugojyuuichi!!</A>