Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Performance Difference

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
September 21, 2001 12:04:13 AM

I've been looking to build a new computer lately, and hopefully someone here will be able to answer a question I have.

I plan on getting a P4, and I've already determined that the 478-pin is the way to go. The 1.9GHz and higher are too pricey for my budget, so I've been comparing the 1.5 and 1.7.

My question is this: is the extra 200MHz worth the $60 price difference, or is there only a marginal performance increase from the 1.5 to 1.7? If it helps shed some light, I'll be using the machine mostly for gaming.

Also, has anyone had any experience with the Intel brand motherboards? I've heard Asus is a good mobo, but I haven't seen an Asus skt 478 i850.

More about : performance difference

a c 159 à CPUs
September 21, 2001 1:46:15 AM

I believe the board you want is the Asus P4T-e, which should be out any day now. I would go with a retail 1.7 socket 478, even if you had to get a cheaper board. I hope to see reviews on the shuttle av40 and azza p4x2 for ddram. The price for the azza board has dropped to only $93.
September 21, 2001 4:56:52 AM

Look at the benchmark comparisons on Tom's website and www.anandtech.com and make your own decision.

-MP Jesse

"Signatures Still Suck"
Related resources
September 21, 2001 8:57:10 AM

Not to attack your decision, but why may I ask did you decide on a p4? It is just a question so I dont want meltdown or fugger to take his thread over.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
September 21, 2001 4:29:52 PM

I think he's choosing the P4 because it is a better Overall system to have, right now and for the future.

ppl are finding out more about the tbird everyday and what they find they don't like!

the P4 is the better choice. the hard truth.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
September 21, 2001 4:47:56 PM

Hardtruth is the current p4's suck ass. Tbirds may not be getting much better, but they aren't getting anyworse. The only problems are thermal issues and fragile cores. What's the problem there? Those are both easy to take care of. Intel is constantly killing lines and upgrade paths. So why is it better? I guess I just don't see that. Yes, when the new P4's come out they should be significantly better. But he is talking about buying a current p4. The Palaminos are much better than the athlons and current p4's. That is why I have a dual MP setup. In the future that could change but in the here and now Intel doesn't really have anything substancial on AMD. So quit trolling.

Nice <b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> <b>crunch</b> Trolls cookies....... :smile: Yummy!! :smile:
September 22, 2001 2:00:10 AM

A 1.5ghz p4 system is the best system now and for the future?

LOL

Ok meltdown, run along little boy.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
September 22, 2001 2:41:21 AM

Do not bother arguing with Meltdown. It is like arguing with a child. Pointless, worthless, and futile.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
September 22, 2001 4:39:42 AM

Matisaro - I've built several machines over the years using Intel processors, and always gotten good results. They're are something I'm used to, something I've gotten good, reliable results from, and that's what I've decided to stick with. :-)

Besides, while they may be slower than some of the AMD chips, P4's are still pretty speedy in their own right. Far faster than my current p2 400!
September 22, 2001 9:20:56 AM

Damn people its not always about the speed, it also about the price, for now DDR works good with AMD not intel, the performance boost from DDR and the costs involved while comparing with RDRAM is just not neglegable.



<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*[k]eep <i>t imple tupid*
*******
</font color=green>
September 22, 2001 10:18:12 AM

well, I also prefer amd, but falke has a very valid point for wanting to buy intel, so instead of this thread turning into the boring amd vs intel shite, why not just try and help him? (I'd like to but im out of date with intel- havent done an intel system for some time so wouldnt like to offer misleading advice)


Next time you wave - use all your fingers
September 22, 2001 7:11:07 PM

I recommend you go with the 1.7GHz. The price difference is not all that much and your processor will be in the mainstream much longer before going obsolete. The 1.7GHz does perform about 13.3% better than the 1.5GHz. How much do the two cost you at your retailer of choice?

-Raystonn


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