P4 +DDR and XP+DDR doesn't it just make it even?

[taylanator]

I'm not quite sure why people don't think the P4 should be used with DDR in benchmarks. Doesn't it just level the playing field? Why should the P4 get RDRAM and not AMD? What would and XP2100 do aginst the P4 if it had RDRAM and the P4 had DDR like the XP usualy does? What makes Intel so special that they deserve to pump their cpu's with RDRAM and not AMD. If you ask me, I think its sad that a CPU needs 800mhz of ram speed just to keep up with the athlons. What I don't get is why is it that intel has all the numbers on their side (mhz, ram speed ect.) but still just barely beats AMD after all that pumping up. Doesn't that say something about the P4's archetiecture? Personaly I don't like the constant battles between AMD users and Intel, but I do ask that you look at the validity of intels numbers vs. AMD's muscles. Its just something that has been bothering me, why people hate it when the P4 doesn't get the advantage with RDRAM.

Just a thought.

 

[AmdMELTDOWN]

get a grip dude.

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

 

[taylanator]

um ok sure

 

[IIB]

The Idea is to take the Best Intel platform and the Best AMD platform - If AMD Had an RDRAM chipset to work with - and it would outpreform the DDR chip-sets - it would have been used in benchmarks (BTW the other way around - if DDR would have been faster then RDR - then the DDR platform would have been used).

again - The Idea is to take the Best Intel platform and the Best AMD platform.


This post is best viewed with common sense enabled

 

[FatBurger]

Learn the facts first.

Fact #1: AMD already has an RDRAM license, they can use it anytime they choose.

Fact #2: RDRAM is currently available for the P4, so there is no reason to not use it in platform comparisions.

Fact #3: RDRAM is only 16-bit. Unless you believe that MHz is everything, you'd realize that the bandwidth difference (non-OCed) isn't as big as the MHz numbers would tell you.

Fact #4: The P4 was designed with RDRAM in mind, so it's not "leveling" the playing field. Would you call it fair to race two cars with the same tires, when one was specifically designed with different tires in mind?

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[taylanator]

yeah but if you put them on the same speed of ram then you are still putting the ACTUAL CPU's on the same playing ground arren't you? Because I thought the testing was to show what CPU it self is better isn't it? Thats why the THG tests intel cpus with DDR now isn't it? to see the difference between the actual CPU's. I don't know, your right in a since.

 

[IIB]

err just a comment - I dont think you can design a CPU for a certain memory...

I fully agree with your other points

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled

 

[taylanator]

well can you tell me what specific Optimizations that the P4 has with RDRAM? I don't think so. Sure they had RDRAM in "Mind" what the hek does that mean? I'm sure AMD had some super de duper ram in "mind" too. I haven't found anyone that can show me with a diagram why the P4 "needs" RDRAM in the first place. If it "needs" it to beat an athlon then sure the P4 "needs" RDRAM. Show me I'm wrong, I actualy want to be proven wrong. Show me why the P4 "needs" RDRAM and what specific Optimizations it has for it. Thanks

 

[IIB]

it would be usless to test the CPU strength without platform considration - wouldnt you think?

and in any case - if the platform allows for the CPU to work faster - and it is avalible - why not use it?


This post is best viewed with common sense enabled

 

[dhlucke]

WinXP was designed for the Pentium 4

<font color=red>God</font color=red><font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue><font color=red>America!</font color=red><font color=blue>

 

[taylanator]

your still missing the point, the point is the actual spu it self with the same ram speed.

 

[FatBurger]

If you ask me, I think its sad that a CPU needs 800mhz of ram speed just to keep up with the athlons.

I haven't found anyone that can show me with a diagram why the P4 "needs" RDRAM in the first place.

Way to contradict yourself.

The reason I say the P4 was designed for RDRAM is because they share the same bus speeds, which ensures greater memory efficiency. My P4 system is at around 90% RAM efficiency (benchmark result compared to theoretical bandwidth), I haven't seen any DDR P4 systems that are that close. Does that make sense?

your still missing the point, the point is the actual spu it self with the same ram speed.

Why is that the point? To show the CPU architecture? Then the exact same chipset would be needed too, as well as equal path legnths everywhere on the motherboard, etc, etc. I see the obvious merit in doing something like that, but it's impossible to do it right. Besides, part of the CPU is what else will be run with it. If the P4 had been limited to PC133, then I don't think they would've designed it the same way they did.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[Guest]

Because it is thus error that Intel can use Rambus? AMD can make the same at any time that they want, and does not have no reason to cripple one CPU for no cause. Perhaps we must also test Athlon and P4 with the same amount of FPUs?

 

[FatBurger]

Is it just me, or have there been a lot of foreigners lately? Odd...

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[Quetzacoatl]

You are ignoring some serious points here bub. CPUs have NEVER been designed to work with the same RAM and interface. If AMD and Intel both used RDRAM, then they would likely be similar CPUs and could be tested against each other. However, in the real world, this would never happen. Intel took a risk, and bet all on the P4 with RDRAM, AMD stuck to their guns, and took the path of SDR, then later, DDR. You are probably thinking that you can compare benchmarks to actual CPU strength, which would be down to IPC times the Mhz. Big difference

"When there's a will, there's a way."

 

[bikeman]

How to optimize a cpu for a special type of memory: Adapt the caching algoritms to the memory characteristics.

I don't know wether this is done in the P4, but it could be a reason/method ...

Bikeman

<i>Then again, that's just my opinion</i>

 

[bront]

To get the best feel for the true speed a chip can offer, you need to test it with the best hardware. That is why the P4 is tested with RDRam.

Intel fans could just as easily say "It's unfair that the athlon has a 133 FSB while the P4 has only a 100." Doesn't mean that either side is right.

The architecture and platforms of both CPUs are wildly different. Both now need different hardware to perform at their top speeds.

The Athlon isn't as memory hungry as the P4. It doesn't need the extra added throughput that RDRam gives the P4. The P4 however, does, and was designed specificly for it. That's why they both have QDR.

Ultimately, most people want a fast performing system. That is made up of more than simply the CPU. Much like a car is made up of more than just the engine.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!

 

[bront]

I'm not sure I understand 100% of what you said, but let me try to address what I can.

AMD can make the same at any time that they want

Actualy, I don't believe AMD is licenced to make a Rambus solution for the Athlon.

does not have no reason to cripple one CPU for no cause.

Rambus does not cripple a CPU. In fact, what Rambus was designed to do was to give a CPU some added memory throughput. Up until very reciently, Rambus was still king of the data throughput arena. There are simply other areas of the technology that are still not as good as they could be. This isn't too much of a suprise, as it is a new technology compaired to SDram, so there are still likely possable tweeks in it.

Perhaps we must also test Athlon and P4 with the same amount of FPUs?

If you mean the same speed (Mhz/Ghz), then there is no point, as even Intel will admit that the Athlon is a more efficient CPU, clock per clock, in most areas. If you mean the same number of FPU units, that is more of an issue in how the CPU is designed and built, and I don't think you can make a valid test of that. Even if you could, it wouldn't help the consumer much, as FPU work is not indicitive of true performance of the overall chip in real world applications.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!

 

[bront]

Actualy, because the P4 bus is Quad pumped, and has the same bandwidth as the equivilent clocked RDRam, they definately had RDRam specificly in mind. Either that, or there is a HUGE coincidence.

You can only aim a CPU at technology you know is out or will be out. AMD isn't aiming a chip at DDR 1000, because it's nowhere in the near future. It's aiming hammer at DDR 333 and DDR 400, as that is just now being released, and will probably be the DDR standard for the next 6 months to a year once CPUs and chipsets that support it with significant gains come out.

As for specific optimizations for Rdram, the P4 has a 3.2 mb/s bandwidth, and the only thing that provides for that on the market today is PC800 ram.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!

 

[FatBurger]

Actualy, I don't believe AMD is licenced to make a Rambus solution for the Athlon.

They do, and have for quite some time.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[bront]

My appologies, I was not aware of this.

Where is there info on that? And is there any reason beyond the fact that the Athlon doesn't need it that they haven't at least produced a working chipset with it?

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!

 

[eden]

DDR400 can efficiently do 3.2GB/sec.
If Intel could wake up, try a P4 DDR Dual Channel solution, DDR400 would be the man on their doors by now. 6.4GB of bandwidth ready to serve it.

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!

 

[juin]

You still get hit why do you think Mckinley work with Pc1600 and not faster version.

cheap, cheap. Think cheap, and you'll always be cheap.AMD version of semi conducteur industrie

 

[AMD_Man]

...and why is that?

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

 

[eden]

I absolutly did not get what he meant.

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!