Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

The advantage of each CPU?

  • CPUs
  • Office
  • Intel
Last response: in CPUs
a b à CPUs
August 19, 2001 12:09:50 PM

Which CPU is better for office appication?(Intel, AMD or Cyrix) Why?
Which is better for 3D games?
Which is the best price for performance?
Please explain

More about : advantage cpu

a c 159 à CPUs
a b å Intel
August 19, 2001 12:17:22 PM

Office applications- pentium 4. As more new software is written for pentium 4 specs, it will eventually reach it's full potential. Games- the athlon and future generations. It's architecture works with a wide variety of games and 3d applications. For value- definately athlon. The 1.4 cpu dropped again in price to $107 this weekend. The comparable (in performance) pentium 4 1.7 starts at about $310.
August 19, 2001 12:21:04 PM

Intel: compatible and stable but pretty expensive. later P3s and P4s using SSE/SSE2 helps 3D but software should be able to use these facilities. Of course performance depends on the graphics card.

AMD: powerhouse at low cost, could be overclocked to as high as 150%, stability depends on the motherboard you choose! offers 3DNow! but not all games use it but many do. even apps like Photoshop are 3DNow! enabled. Best price/performance ratio.

Cyrix: good for nothing, even a 667/66 MHz Celeron beats the 667/133 C3. cheap solution if you intend to do day to day work with no heavy duty gaming.


<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
Related resources
August 19, 2001 1:07:49 PM

p4 only good for quake 3 and video/audio editing, amd tbirds, good all round... especially when considering price, cyrix as stated before, good for nothing...

if in doubt blame microsoft...
August 19, 2001 2:04:25 PM

Currrently the P4 outperforms Athlon in areas of 3D gaming and some higher bandwidth graphics editing operations due to SSE support. However, at the same clock speed, Athlon outperforms or performs about equal to the P4 in those operations. In nearly all other benchmarks/operations, Athlon outperforms P4 even with a 300 mhz clock speed difference.

Palomino should bring Athlons performance on par with P4 even at 300 mhz clock difference on SSE optimized apps generally.

So, overall, Athlon is best performing and will be for the foreseeable future.

There ARE some caveats though.

Thunderbird runs hot so needs good cooling. Athlons core chip is easy to damage because it's not protected. Some of the Pentiums are packaged similarly though so are also relatively easy to damage when installing the heatsink/cooling.

Finally, the Athlon chipsets are more varied, but some have had growing pains, namely the VIA chipsets. But even Ali Magick had some problems in its first iteration, namely poorer performance compared to competition. They have both (VIA and ALi) taken significant steps to correct these early growing pains.


When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
a b à CPUs
August 20, 2001 2:14:55 AM

The main advantage of Intel CPU's is that they allow you to use Intel Chipsets, which are lightyears ahead of anything else for stability and compatability.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
August 20, 2001 2:30:59 AM

For office applicactions i would say Athlon/Duron. As it stands now MS Office and other normal office apps cannot benefit from a more advance CPU then the Duron.. If you plan on running a DB on the other hand i would choose Athlon..

For games etc i would choose Athlon as it does not need special programming to do great and all current games do perfectly well with it.

Over all cost performance Stick with AMD for now. I am not a die hard fan of AMD though i currently do own one but i do think AMD has done its job in giving us a great price/performance ratio :) 


Why do I use LINUX ? Cause its the BEST OS
Why do I use Windows? Cause its the BEST Nintendo..
August 20, 2001 4:11:39 AM

Office use P4 is faster.In real proffesional apps AMD have tender to be faster.

Game P4 for all game new game directx 7 +.1 exception serious sam.No SSE or SSE2.

Performane/price Greatly win by AMD and is thunderbird.
In you just want power P4 1.8 is the world fastest cpu in overall.Also have way better rweputation on stability/compability and no via chipset.
a b à CPUs
August 20, 2001 7:45:49 AM

Office apps: any three year old CPU will do just fine.. Heck, even a lowly Celeron 500 runs Word, excel, acess etc so fast, you couldnt keep up.

For games, spend your money on a videocard. There is no noticable (if any) difference between any 800- 1+ Ghz cpu, wether it be Pentium III, IV Athlon or Duron when you run your games 1024+ 32 bit. You can be sure that e.g. Duron 900 + geforce 3 will outperform a Pentium IV 2 Ghz with a geforce MX in every game (1024+ resulution). (not bashing P4 here,just indicating its the videocard, not the cpu that matters).

Unless you spend your days ripping DVD's to Divx, or use photoshop on 30+Mb files (that is, not editing your photos from your digital camera) or you do 3D rendering.. you do not need anything faster than 1 Ghz. If it werent for games, even a 500 Mhz cpu with enough RAM, would probably do just fine. If money matters to you, get a 1 Ghz Athlon on a 760 DDR board with plenty of RAM, a nice 19" and a decent videocard (GFII Pro would be my current sweet spot). Upgrade to 1.5+ Ghz Athlon when you feel the need.

Like I said in another thread.. I currently own a cheapo Duron 600@933 with a cheapo Geforce MX.. and it runs *every* current game very nicely. That includes Max Paye, Operation Flashpoint, Black & White, etc.. all of them @1024x768 x 32 bit @medium to maximum detail. I may not get 200 fps, but its fluid, and very playable.

If you do some serious video editing consider a P4. If you do serious 3D rendering, buy a Atlhon MP (dual if you can afford it). If you surf, run word, play a game get a cheapo Duron/Athlon and a decent videocard.

You asked about price/performance ? AMD is cleary superior. Its faster AND cheaper. There is a small price to pay though, since Athlons tend to be a bit harder to assemble/configure especially with VIA chipsets. IF you've never assembled you own computer, you may want to ask a technician / shop to do this for you. Dont skimp on essential parts as HSF and PSU's either. You'll be sorried.

Basically, if there is one component of a computer to cut costs, it would be the CPU. Definatly not the monitor (there is no going back from a good 19" CRT or 17" TFT), not the 3D card if your into gaming. Not the ammount of RAM (get 256+ Mb). Not the motherboard. Oh, please, certainly not that. Not the harddisk(s).. a faster HD and/or RAID 0 will give much more of a percepted perfomance boost than a CPU upgrade. Not the PSU or HSF.

Consider this: whats the part that will most likely be upgraded within 6-12 months anyway ? And what part will cost half as much in 6 months: right, the CPU.

just my 2 cents

---- Owner of the only Dell computer with an AMD chip
August 20, 2001 9:21:46 AM

Nicely said.

Some other points.

Do not skimp on ram, getting good namebrand ram(crucial,corsair etc) will serve you well in the long run if you ever decide to overclock the beast into its existance. And I also agree that the place to put the most cash for games performance is the videocard, which is why i reccomend an amd system with a really nice gf3 for 500 bucks as opposed to an intel (p4) system with a gf2mx for 500 bucks. Just no comparison.

"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
August 20, 2001 10:26:08 AM

Kingmax pc150 is cl3 I believe, I just got some awesome dram online, pc166cl3, and it does cl2 up to 154.

got it here

good [-peep-], I have it and its running at 150, 222, nice ram Very happy with it.

"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"