Tom needs to stop padding his numbers.

For the last time, tom, or whatever drone is running the reviews. YOU DO NOT NEED TO PAY 40 BUCKS FOR A HEATSINK! If you do NOT plan to overclock the STOCK heatsink is PERFECTLY FINE!!!!!.

SO it comes out to be a 185 dollar difference between the two, not 140, which is nice especially considering the xp1900+ is faster than the p4.

Secondly, even if you did get a performance heatsink, why would he use the retail price for the cpu in his equasion if he planned on buying another heatsink, whoever did this review needs some assistance with his logic and math.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~

Did the athlon win the cinema 4d test in the last review?

I dont read toms for news or reviews any more, all of his validity and integrity has been shot in my book.



~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~

you are an idiot, in none of my post I say the Athlon is slow! I say it is a fragile POS it still is.

the AXP could be the fastest chip on the planet(who cares?)a fragile POS is a fragile POS and dealers make like 5 bucks per sale??? wtf?, RMA dept is full o' sh!t too, fu AMD.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"

I'm glad to see lightwave included in the tests. It has a wide user base, but it is often harder to find good benchmarks using it unlike the endless scores of 3ds Max and Maya.

I would have just liked to know more about the render setup and some additional commentary on the results.

Oh, I especially love <A HREF="http://www.blanos.com/benchmark/bprint.cgi?search=detail&id=1000910252" target="_new">this one</A>--especially since it's the one that gets the highest benchmarks of all.

Only reason the P4 stays in the top ten at all is that the fastest Athlon wasn't in the charts for a long time. Still isn't in all the charts--yet.

I guess you didn't want us to notice that the P4 got reamed again. Oops.

Kelledin
<A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."

I must say the benchs are really giving different results than Anandtech's. The latter has the AXP leading almost always, while here it seems the P4 is better. Yeah some of them are getting weird compared to the previous results. But why are you guys saying the Asus GF3 was a bad thing?

Also PLEASE stop putting the blame on old Tommy! He wasn't the one who did, and in both articles it was that Frank guy, who seems to really make the articles baaaadd. When Tom posts, we'll see the conclusion, but for then, stop putting his name if he didn't do the article!! And if Frank really is sucky this much, write to him for god's sake. Wanna petition? Go ahead, ask for our names, include them in one e-mail, requesting justice of the articles, he'll see that we do care! (except Meltdown please, or wait, include him as an AMD follower, just for the fun of it!)

Btw Mat, when you say Stock one, does that mean the Retail AthlonXP, comes with fan and heatsink, and what else would I need to add for an upgrade, aside from mobo and Power supply? Any other cooling devices?

*sigh*
flaming. how very sad. (this post is not aimed at anyone inparticular)


Is that a Northwoody in your pocket or are you just eXPited to see me?

The G4 has a lot less piplines than the Athlon and Pentium 4, that's why it's faster per clock cycle. Does it matter? Why would it be funny that the G4 beats the Athlon in a single (or even a few) benchmarks? MHz means nothing except clock cycles per second. The work done per clock cycle is another matter. Also, Mac software tends to be a lot more optimized for it's hardware than Windows software is. The Velocity Engine is utilized in most modern Mac software, as far as I know.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

BAH @ Meltdown, you MAC person everyone knows Dual P4 Xeon's w/ Jackson Tech would rape Dual 800mhz g4's.

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... Yummy

Hmmm...since your idol is now smacked into the concrete, you find a new idol. The bit of news about the G4 would be nice...if I cared. I can respect Macs, I just don't plan to ever buy a machine where a shipping screw-up might get me stuck with a boysenberry-colored paperweight.

Kelledin
<A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."

P.S. I would be rather more annoyed at PR ratings if Intel didn't try the same thing with meaningless MHz. As it is, I consider both sides equally deceptive.

I know tom didnt run the tests, but he is the editor he has final approval of posted articles, and if he dosent he runs a piss poor ship.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~

you aussies got it real bad! the only thing good about AUS is the roadwarrior movies, LOL! don't blame your living conditions on Intel dude, dealers are the ones who set the prices.

LOL! lower tier AMD dealers are getting less than $20 for selling AMD cpu, now that's funny.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"

Um, excuse me? You little trolls know better than to say something that stupid.... Intel and AMD set the processor prices, but the grey market determines how much of a variation there is between street price and listed price. When they make price cuts, dealers make price cuts too. Geographical boundaries that affect price are fair enough comparison... saying it's not fair is like Bin Laden saying it's not fair that the US is raping his troops up the arse. Um... or something like that, maybe not. ^_^

"Laziness is a talent to be cultivated like any other" - Walter Slovotsky

so spud, are you suggesting that aussie retailers say, "ah-ha, let's put a massive margin on Intel processors cause that's lots of fun".

in **reality** those prices are what we pay. You can't argue those figures away when they are what we're looking at at the end of the day.

just to back up the aussie price stand-point.
here's some nicer figures for ya Poobah.

1800+ (no fan) = $495 -> www.scorptec.com.au
P4-2GHz = $975 (423) or $999 (478) -> www.ddcc.com.au

2x256MB DDR = $170 (Hyundai) or $198 (Kingston - good stuff) -> scorptec
2x256MB RDRAM = $450 -> ddcc again.

so before MB and monitor blah blah balh,
I'm ~$700 for AMD
and about ~$1425 for Intel(423). ($1450 if 478 option)

all things considered, unless someone shows me that Intel is at least twice as fast as AMD, I will never buy Intel.

BTW poobah, your MB prices are really really good.

might check out those guys again, just for my MB. I'm looking for an Epox KT3A+ Pro, and want to see if anyone can beat scorptec at $245.

seeyas.

"I spilled coffee all over my wife's nighty... ...serves me right for wearing it?!?"

That's true... but look at what the UK pays for just about anything. They get the royal shaft We Americans get some pretty shweet deals.

"Laziness is a talent to be cultivated like any other" - Walter Slovotsky

Just to show that these heinous figures are not limited to mercedes type systems; here's soem figures of cheaper similarly performing systems.

Celeron 1.0GHz = $185 -> ddcc.
Duron 850MHz = $115 - >scorptec or ddcc.

P4 1.7GHz = $468 -> ddcc
Athlon 1.4GHz (266 FSB) = $289 -> ddcc
Athlon 1600+ = $295 -> scorptec


also, apologies to those that will probably flame me for forgetting a fan price in the last post of mine I realise that intel probably comes with fan , so the $700 can be rounded to $750 (being generous in light of my mistake).

now get debating all you fanatics, how else we gonna get all these opinions out in time for the next contraversial issue.
Balzi

"I spilled coffee all over my wife's nighty... ...serves me right for wearing it?!?"

Huh? Your kidding right? All other arguments aside ( amd vs intel) The athlon core is a much different core than the k6.
Your statement would hold merit (until the hammer) if you changed it to represent the athlon slota thru the current xp.

Another Cookie? Who is going to pay my dentist bill?

>Further more I haven’t seen AMD come out with a totally
>new core in a long long time they just keep doing
>revisions on the original k6

how many truly new cores has intel brought out since the PPRO ? One: the P4 (ignoring the itanium beta silicon you can buy). How many has AMD produced ever since ? One.. the Athlon (seeing K6 as an enhanced K5 core). Their development cycles arent in synch, but who cares ? Looks like the current P4 core will last for many many years. THe Athlon is about to be replaced by the Hammer. So what ?

Further more, personally, I wished intel would not have gotten out the P4 yet, and instead would have concentrated on improving the P3.. we all know how well these tualatins perform. If they would bring out a 1.4 or even >1.5 (which I am sure intel could.. if I recall correct these babies can be overclocked to 1.6) it might well be the fastest cpu out there. Then replace it with Northwood. I much prefer evolution over revolution if revolution doesnt bring extra performance (RDRAM vs SDRAM/DDR RAM, P4 vs P3, MMX, ..). WHy hassle with new interfaces, new memory types, new sockets, new software optimizations to get equal performance you had b4 ?

Anyway, I dont care if a manufacturer brings out new cores or not, or if it increases or decreases IPC, adds SSE57 or not. Performance is what matters to me. If that can be done with an old core.. why not ? Look at the Alpha. How old is that core ? Wasnt it released at 100 something megahertz ? Or even less ? I dont remember, its *that* long ago. Still it is by no means obsolete if someone would continue working on it, and give it a manufacturing process comparable to current high end cpu's from AMD or intel. From what I understand, the Alpha has been reworked and tweaked, but is basically the same core it was when originally released (much like the P3 is modified PPro).

Evolution is cheaper than revolution. Think about the r&d costs.. think about software that needs to be redone (eg Itanium vs Hammer).. I really think AMD is doing the smart thing here.. even if they're financial and market situation doesnt give many other options.

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

Ok we're losign the point here.
thing is, who cares why the prices are so up and down, who cares what reasons Intel may have for charging more, who cares why retailers think they can rake in a higher profit from P4s. The Point my friends is that to get a P4 or AMD processor you actually have to hand over a certain amount of money. IF performance is similar but one costs less (when memory and MB etc are considered aswell) then I'll buy the cheaper one.

If P4s cost more, but the RDRAM was $5 and Mb were half price compared to Socket A MBs, then I'd consider a P4. but the prices are usually the other way up?? I might even go for the name brand if they cost the same.

So unless I'm so technically illerate that i think AMD CPUs are unstable, I will go for the cheaper option.
Analogy -> I've go two tricycles. Both with life-time warranties, both made of titanium alloys with hardened rubber tyres. One is red one is blue. The company that made the red one calls their machine - a Hyperbalanced Dual wheel per rear-axle, mono-steering-mechanism with sychronous interlaced driver capabilities. The manufacturers of the blue one call theirs a tricycle - comes with 3 wheels, handle-bars, and pedals.

Red one costs $4,000. Blue one costs $2,000. Which one do you buy?? uneducated public buy red one, people who "know" tricycles buy blue one (unless they REALLY like red). public need to be told that dual wheels-per axle means handlebars.. etc.

just my thoughts..


"I spilled coffee all over my wife's nighty... ...serves me right for wearing it?!?"

for that price i'd go for a motor scooter instead. Easier to park than a car


"Just when you thought it was safe to log on..."

Spud.. since when are you making sense ??

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