Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

.13 P3 512k VS A4 Benchmarks@!

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Cache
  • Servers
Last response: in CPUs
July 29, 2001 1:16:09 PM

I found this on hardocp, looks like the new p3(even the server part 512k cache) cant keep up with the A4

I did not read in depth,(got to be first to post before tbirdinside discredits the whole thing) if anything is out of whack let me know.

Only thing I can see right off is the large fsb difference.
But the p3 was tested at a higher mhz, any thoughts?
http://www.kumagaya.or.jp/~touma/repoe/sl5ql-1551.html


LINK TO A4 RESULTS http://www.kumagaya.or.jp/~touma/repoe/palo-1494.html

PS: I just realized I linked to the a4(instead of p3) results in one previous thread, my bad.

~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~

More about : 512k benchmarks

July 30, 2001 1:23:42 AM

well so... i dont really care about that its slower by 00.2% what i care about is out now. Basically the P3 Tually come first. There fast enough beside my system pulls better then what they tested. only 128mb SDRAM on it. I have 512mb on my system. It depends you cant say its the fastest with over fast things with it.

Would you choose a 1.5ghz A4 with 128mb ddr-sdram in win2k
over a
P4 Tually 1.2ghz @ 1.5ghz with 386mb PC133 sdram in win2k

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
July 30, 2001 1:54:39 AM

hmmms. dunno.
is the Tully a new core design? or its it just a die shrink of the aging P3 core?
if it is that might have something to do with it. the A4 is a revision/upgrade of newer k7 core.

just a thought.


"i love the smell of Overclocking in the morning!" Says my Hamster.
Related resources
July 30, 2001 11:07:06 AM

The tests were on evenly matched systems, 128 megs of ram in both, it was a direct comparison.

It was the new pentium512k cache server part.

the p3 was clocked at 1551 mhz in the test
the a4(athlon mp) was clocked at 1494 mhz


here are the results liquified down in one post
3dbench2
p3=643.4
a4=804.0

HDbench
p3
ALL Integer Float MemR MemW MemRW Rectangle Text Ellipse
36196 62456 65633 22520 21345 32251 81942 82758 10612 1859
BitBlt DD Read Write Copy
359 33839 22831 40183

a4
ALL Integer Float MemR MemW MemRW Rectangle Text Ellipse
36041 60100 72858 26769 39466 42892 72963 69730 9975 1859
BitBlt DD Read Write Copy
360 34144 21847 36651

3dmark 2001
p3=7004
a4=7066

Final reality 1.01
p3 http://www.kumagaya.or.jp/~touma/image13/frtu1551.gif
a4 http://www.kumagaya.or.jp/~touma/image12/frmp1494.gif

winbench99
p3 http://www.kumagaya.or.jp/~touma/image13/wintu1551.gif
a4 http://www.kumagaya.or.jp/~touma/image12/winmp1494.gif


it breaks it down indepth, the a4 system whomps in 3d score. however the faster bus is probably the reason for that, given the p3's 60 some mhz clock lead, I would compare their cpu bench scores pretty much dead on, the kicker is, that the 512k p3 costs an arm and a leg, so we are pretty much in the same situation for p3vs a4 as we are in p4 vs a4.

.13 athlon is gonna be interesting.

In closing, despite my signature(which would read pentium4's if it wasnt taken by a guy on anandtech) I am not anti intel. I am merely posting some benchmarks for the new p3 and comparision benchmarks for the a4 for reference.

Thanks.



~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~
July 30, 2001 1:22:09 PM

Considering the Price differences between the Athlon and P3, You could probably buy more RAM if you go Athlon... as you could afford it... And if the P3 is that close to the Performance of the A4... Then what good is the P4 that is already slapped silly in Benchmarks by the A4? I'd like to see what Northwood can do...

--Fltsimbuff
July 30, 2001 2:39:52 PM

I don't know about you people its like talking to a wall. Did you even read my post. I guess not. I dont want to talk to you to *Bashers*. Well when you get out of the 5th grade then we will talk.

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
July 30, 2001 3:47:52 PM

OK Lets try this 1 more time. OKAY...

The A4 1.5ghz system has 128mb of PC2100 DDR SDRAM "the mobo cant support more then 128mb"

and

The P3 1.5ghz system has 386mb of PC130 SDRAM

Lets but it into real world testing okay... Lets run 4 IE windows, MS Word, AIM and ICQ open, Play a MP3, While play UT in 640x480-32bit w/ 4x FSAA in a window. Well what will win. The P3 cuz of more RAM.

You cant have the fastest processor unless you have things to lighten the System load first.

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
July 31, 2001 10:25:02 AM

Dude RCF what the hell are you talking about, why cant the a4 system have more than 128 megs of ram, Im not following you, ALSO. I did not bash anyone I merely posted a link, so dont get a burr up your ass dude.

(AND I DIDNT NAME THE POST P3 GETS WHOMPED BY A4 LIKE AMDMELTDOWN WOULD HAVE)
so please, explain what you are talking about, and why you got such an attitude at us.

~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~
July 31, 2001 10:28:41 AM

And another thing, both of the systems had 128 megs of ram in them. Making them equal, You asked whether I would rather have a 1.5ghz a4 with 128 megs of ram or a .13p3 with 300+, well I would rather have the a4 with 512 megs of ddr, AND pay less than the .13 to boot.

Your comments made no sense, and you got an attitude with us for posting a link which was not biased(it was not a shootout, it was just 2 seperate links to tested systems)

take a chill pill dude.

~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~
July 31, 2001 11:56:14 AM

I'd have to agree with these guys. But I kinda see your point. If I didn't have to pay for it, of course I'd consider the P3 over the Athlon. But then again, what is the overclock ceiling on the P3?? Was that a multiplier overclock or a FSB overclock? Basically if It was MY money being spent, I'd go A4 and DDR. Pump the FSB to about 160 and see how high I can go.

<b>"These are my thoughts, your mileage may vary."
July 31, 2001 11:57:53 AM

Hey another point worth making, is by the time the .13 P3 is widely available in the states (unlikely) I'd be willing to bet the Crush chipset will be out. Now match that with a A4 natively running 1.4ghz and compare those.

<b>"These are my thoughts, your mileage may vary."
July 31, 2001 12:06:25 PM

All pentiums are multiplier locked, the a4 would give you a much more favorable range of overclocking options. also, the a4 was out before the .13p3(they used an athlonMP overclocked in their tests.

~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~
July 31, 2001 2:13:17 PM

It's called the nForce now. The Crush was the code name for it while it was in development.

And since Pentiums are multiplier locked, it was a FSB overclock, for whoever asked that.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
July 31, 2001 9:07:36 PM

I simply would not buy a mobo that only supporta 128MB of RAM... If that's what he was getting at. Buy a different board, more RAM using the money you save, and you have the best of both worlds... What's so "bashing" about that?

--Fltsimbuff
August 1, 2001 2:23:47 AM

The nForce chipset isn't very impressive once you get past the marketing hype. It offers the same 2.1GB/sec of memory bandwidth that all the rest of the PC2100 DDR motherboards do. Read my post reading it in the memory forum, or just jump straight to that thread <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam..." target="_new">here</A>.

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
August 1, 2001 2:45:11 AM

Also its sound is AC97 now. There sound chip could i say an Add-on card making nvidia pockets bigger for more money

SPIT -> Nvidia <- Spit

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
August 1, 2001 3:09:19 PM

And just where did you see that? nVidia's website information hasn't changed.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
August 1, 2001 3:33:38 PM

<A HREF="http://www.nvnews.net/#996515281" target="_new">Here</A> you go, rcf. Sorry to burst your bubble.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
August 1, 2001 7:48:09 PM

Quote:
Also its sound is AC97 now. There sound chip could i say an Add-on card making nvidia pockets bigger for more money

<b><A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=996582855" target="_new">http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=996582855&lt;/A></b>

<font color=red>NVIDIA Protects Crush’s Reputation</font color=red>
Posted 7/31/01 at 8:34 am by Rat

<font color=blue>You may have come across a lot of info claiming that NVIDIA is having some problems with its Crush chipset recently. There have even appeared some stories saying that NVIDIA has to introduce some changes to its offsprings. However, today we managed to talk to one NVIDIA representative, who told us that the info about problems with Crush is absolutely not credible. The real state of things seems to look as follows.
It’s true that NVIDIA hasn’t yet started shipping the chipsets to the mainboard makers. The chipset is currently going through the finalizing stage, which has mostly to do with the chipset fine tuning and in no way with the modification. This way, NVIDIA wants to improve the performance and eliminate any issues, which occurred in the first chipset version. All in all, Crush will keep developing just the way the company had initially planned. Closer top mid August the final chipset versions should be available already and in early September Crush based products are supposed to hit the market.</font color=blue>

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
August 6, 2001 1:00:11 PM

Bump for amdmeltdown to see the benchmarks.

~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~
August 6, 2001 2:27:26 PM

p4 tually? i though they were p3s... oh they are... im sorry...

you do not strengthen the weak by weakening the strong
August 6, 2001 5:29:43 PM

Oh yes that thread is where you posted this little gem.

Quote:
The memory you place in the slot that's dedicated to the graphics chipset will be unusable as standard system memory by the CPU.

HUH? Surely you can't be serious? There is no memory slot on the nforce dedicated to only the integated video. In some very early test revisions this was the case but was long abandoned as it made it to costly for oem's to take advantage of the savings of having integrated graphics in the first place. You are a dangerous man, you take a bit of truth then extrapolate that into complete and utter nonsense. Your statement basically implies that if you were to take two 256 meg sticks of RAM and install them into the nforce motherbaord then only 256 megs of memory would be accesable to the system while 256 would be dedicated to video? You stand by that statement?

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
August 6, 2001 7:02:27 PM

Stop crying the p3 wasn't that bad. It just wasn't as good as the athlon.


<font color=red><i>Tomorrow I will live, the fool does say
today itself's too late; the wise lived yesterday
August 7, 2001 8:23:31 AM

Read further on. We've already been over that.

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
August 7, 2001 1:17:41 PM

A: the p3 has cas3 ram cause its damn fsb is set sky high, which is ALSO why it beat the a4 in scores.
B: do the math dullard, the p3 is some 75mhz faster than the a4, and its fsb is much faster. clock for clock, on the same fsb the a4 won the benchmark.

Youre right about one thing, it is a good link.
PS: pointing out a single bench result among 10 others to show your chip favorably is the act of a troll, and also notice how I only posted the benchmarks, I didnt draw any conclusions from them due to the fact it wasnt a head to head, and had no controls.
Troll

~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~
August 7, 2001 7:17:14 PM

Not very impressive? Their TwinBank Crossbar memory architecture is much more interesting, efficient, impressive, and practical than RDRAM's latency-generating dual channel implementation, if you had bothered to look at anything more than the pretty diagrams. The CPU is also not the only thing that uses system memory, so you will see a performance increase in nForce systems using an addon video card and dual channel memory over systems using single channel memory. Also, the 128bit memory interface isn't the only interesting aspect of the chipset. The integrated audio is the most advanced ever created. The HyperTransport implementation offers more bandwidth to its PCI devices than any other chipset save the SiS 735. This bandwidth allows the nForce to give devices priority access to the memory, which promises to offer at least some performance improvements in pretty much all peripherals, most noticeably their integrated ethernet adapter, which will no longer have to settle for first-come-first-serve memory access. I realize you'd probably like me to dig up documentation on all this, but its all been covered and discussed dozens of times on various hardware and news sites. Unfortunately I'm not a paid nVidia troll with endless hours to dig them up. Take your Intel FUD back to your lair and quit trying to recoup your Intel and Rambus stock losses by critizing long over due innovation in the chipset market.

-= This is our wading pool.
Stop pissing in it. =-
August 7, 2001 11:06:16 PM

"you will see a performance increase in nForce systems using an addon video card and dual channel memory over systems using single channel memory"

Yes, you will see a slight performance increase using nForce over the other DDR platforms. But you will still have less bandwidth than a Pentium 4 system using RDRAM.


"Take your Intel FUD back to your lair and quit trying to recoup your Intel and Rambus stock losses by critizing long over due innovation in the chipset market."

Did I hit a nerve? We need a hose over here folks. The flames have started up!

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
August 7, 2001 11:34:17 PM

Good info regarding the 2.1 GB/s. Question to you is this though: Why are you the only one saying this? I'm assuming it's true, but why wouldn't sites be breaking apart the Nforce marketing gimic?

<font color=red>Yeah, I took a crap on your lawn. Whatcha gonna do about it?</font color=red>
August 8, 2001 12:07:15 AM

This is usually because they do not like Rambus. Because of this, they will not use RDRAM, which was originally designed by Rambus. Thus, they look to alternatives and are thirsting for the best alternate technology, which is DDR SDRAM. Of that alternate technology, the nForce is the best chipset. It certainly does not beat the Pentium 4 with RDRAM as far as memory bandwidth to the CPU is concerned, but these people are a bit like religious zealots. Even if the technology is superior, they will not use it because they disagree with something done by the company that designed it (Rambus.) If Rambus did something wrong, let the courts punish them. I just want the memory technology that performs best. Currently, that is the dual-channel RDRAM used in the i850 chipset.

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
August 8, 2001 12:08:28 AM

An OC-ed tully with cas 3 ram. yuck.
probably would have been better to get the A4 underclocked so at least they could have the same ram speed...
A4 is always going to have an advantage anyways due to having DDR in that instance.

question is... how well does the Tully lend itself to DDR?
that would be the logical development.
as its based on the p3 archetecture i imagine there wouldnt be much change, as seen by the benchmarks of mating a p3 with DDR that tom did a while back.

could be wrong of course.
any ideas?


Quote from the Hamster: "Why is it that Morons are just smart enough to understand how to breed?"
August 8, 2001 12:17:19 AM

"question is... how well does the Tully lend itself to DDR?"

It wasn't designed with DDR memory in mind. The Pentium III is on its way out for the most part. It is useful in notebooks though.

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
August 8, 2001 4:58:55 AM

*nods*

i think people are overlooking that aspect.
good as it may be its still an aging design with the same inherent bottlenecks.

one can only pray that intel had the intelligence to release a proper fully equiped 0.13u P4. i.e. 512k L2 cache, better FPU etc.
also full pc2100 ddr support would be a blessing. get the costs down and offer more than one memory choice.

People on both sides of the fence bagg intel/amd. personally i dont want either to fail. otherwise, who will keep the other bastard honest?


Quote from the Hamster: "Why is it that Morons are just smart enough to understand how to breed?"
August 8, 2001 6:53:33 AM

I thought RDRAM provided 3200 megabits(or some close number) of memory bandwidth and nForce dual channel DDR offered 4200.
Thats why Pentium 4 with nForce as the chipset might make for the ultimate Video Editing, DVD ripping machine. Insane memory bandwidth for all that lovely video manipulation. P4 still needs to drop in price though.

I also don't understand why Intel dropped the P3 to .13 micron process except for laptops and maybe to add more cache. They should have done it with P4 so they could get higher clock speeds and run cooler. A P4 with .13 micron process will probably be able to clock from 2 GHz to 2.5 GHz and maybe higher while still running at reasonable temperatures.

At the same time I'd love to see an Athlon with .13 micron process. Maybe it'd finally get rid of all these heat issues because morons save $5 buying a crappy HSF.
August 8, 2001 8:34:52 AM

Quote:
It certainly does not beat the Pentium 4 with RDRAM as far as memory bandwidth to the CPU is concerned, but these people are a bit like religious zealots. Even if the technology is superior, they will not use it because they disagree with something done by the company that designed it (Rambus.)


This is because some people have moral standards. Do you fail to see that by supporting their products, one is also supporting the company, in this case the theives known as Rambus.

<font color=red><i>Tomorrow I will live, the fool does say
today itself's too late; the wise lived yesterday<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by holygrenade on 08/08/01 09:35 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
August 8, 2001 10:50:57 AM

Well, 4.2GB/sec won't do the CPU much good--Athlons currently only have 2.1GB/sec bandwidth to the FSB. The interleaving (if done) should reduce latency slightly though.

Kelledin

"/join #hackerz. See the Web. DoS interesting people."
August 8, 2001 11:07:17 AM

moo... both are good...

if in doubt blame microsoft...
August 8, 2001 11:13:46 AM

Cpu isnt the only thing which demands memory bandwidth, graphics card, etc. It should rock.

~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~
August 8, 2001 1:44:19 PM

Quote:
Yes, you will see a slight performance increase using nForce over the other DDR platforms. But you will still have less bandwidth than a Pentium 4 system using RDRAM.

Last time I checked, 4.2 > 3.1, so the nForce offers more bandwidth than RDRAM. We're not talking about the CPU, we're talking about the nForce chipset, and it offers higher bandwidth at lower latencies than Intel's RDRAM solution, and is more versitile to boot. If this makes the technologies used in the nForce boring and without merit, what does that say about Intel or Rambus?

Quote:
Did I hit a nerve? We need a hose over here folks. The flames have started up!

I've always had a shortage of patience when it comes to ignorance and deceit, one or both of which you're guilty of. Given your large stake in the fortunes of both Intel and Rambus, I am assuming in your case its at least the latter. I appologize if I was too blunt with the truth or my opinions on liars.

-= This is our wading pool.
Stop pissing in it. =-
August 8, 2001 3:38:49 PM

Remember that the CPU can't handle that much bandwidth (according to Raystonn, I haven't looked this up myself yet). The memory/chipset bandwidth is greater, but the memory/CPU bandwidth isn't as much.

Will that change with Palamino? Anyone know?

-----------------------
Quarter pounder inside