Hi!
I got wondering, you know, after reading all those reviews comparing the P4 and the Athlon XP. I think that both top models (P4 2.2 and XP 2.0+) are performing quite equally in general, although I know that each of them has got its ups and downs. But, although I am sure that a lot of persons here would like to be discussing about my previous statemant, this is not that topic I am thinking about.
In some of the reviews around the web, there are some sentences that look quite weird to me. From the review of the newest Ali-chipset for the P4 on Tom's Hardware Guide I took the following quote:
<i>"... Its weak RAM performance caused it to stick out like a sore thumb in some of the benchmark disciplines. During the test, however, the board was impressively stable day after day - the reference system didn't crash even once. ..."</i>
What can make this quote make me worry about? Well, it surprises me that it is exceptional that a system keeps up and running for some days in a row under heavy loads. If I were to buy a new system, I would be immensly dissapointed if my computer would go down like once every week. From other reviews I read, I have the impression that system stability also appears to be more of a concern on Athlon systems than it is on P4-systems. Or is that a misconception I have? One very clear example is the video you could download about removing the cooling system from a processor. P4 kept on running, more exactly, it started to walk really slowly while the Athlon went up in smoke. Although this is an extreme example, I can imagine that under less critical situations, mistakes might not lead tot total distruction, but to a system crash, or even apparent, to calculation mistakes. Is this what is the difference between AMD and Intel? Is Intel more concerned about stability while AMD pays less attention to this to be capable of lowering the prices? There must be some explanation for the higher prices, I always thought. Could it be this issue? I actually don't know, and that's why I am asking you guys around here right now. Of course I know that this is not a straightforward question, but I would be quite pleased if anybody could give me an explanation.
Thanx!
Bikeman
I got wondering, you know, after reading all those reviews comparing the P4 and the Athlon XP. I think that both top models (P4 2.2 and XP 2.0+) are performing quite equally in general, although I know that each of them has got its ups and downs. But, although I am sure that a lot of persons here would like to be discussing about my previous statemant, this is not that topic I am thinking about.
In some of the reviews around the web, there are some sentences that look quite weird to me. From the review of the newest Ali-chipset for the P4 on Tom's Hardware Guide I took the following quote:
<i>"... Its weak RAM performance caused it to stick out like a sore thumb in some of the benchmark disciplines. During the test, however, the board was impressively stable day after day - the reference system didn't crash even once. ..."</i>
What can make this quote make me worry about? Well, it surprises me that it is exceptional that a system keeps up and running for some days in a row under heavy loads. If I were to buy a new system, I would be immensly dissapointed if my computer would go down like once every week. From other reviews I read, I have the impression that system stability also appears to be more of a concern on Athlon systems than it is on P4-systems. Or is that a misconception I have? One very clear example is the video you could download about removing the cooling system from a processor. P4 kept on running, more exactly, it started to walk really slowly while the Athlon went up in smoke. Although this is an extreme example, I can imagine that under less critical situations, mistakes might not lead tot total distruction, but to a system crash, or even apparent, to calculation mistakes. Is this what is the difference between AMD and Intel? Is Intel more concerned about stability while AMD pays less attention to this to be capable of lowering the prices? There must be some explanation for the higher prices, I always thought. Could it be this issue? I actually don't know, and that's why I am asking you guys around here right now. Of course I know that this is not a straightforward question, but I would be quite pleased if anybody could give me an explanation.
Thanx!
Bikeman