Tom's Hardware: Topic P4 +DDR and XP+DDR doesn't it just make it even?
Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions.
Sign up now! Its free!
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.
get a grip dude.
"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
um ok sure
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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>
your still missing the point, the point is the actual spu it self with the same ram speed.
| Quote : If you ask me, I think its sad that a CPU needs 800mhz of ram speed just to keep up with the athlons. |
| Quote : 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?
| Quote : 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
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?
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
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."
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>
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!
I'm not sure I understand 100% of what you said, but let me try to address what I can.
| Quote : 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.
| Quote : 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.
| Quote : 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!
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!
| Quote : 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
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!
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!!
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
...and why is that?
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
I absolutly did not get what he meant.
--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
Why because 200 DDR is the max limit of SDRAM.Many chipset dont work well with DDR 333 i dont even speak of it DDR it 400 just good to make a benchmark.
Read you little book that come with your mobo.
cheap, cheap. Think cheap, and you'll always be cheap.AMD version of semi conducteur industrie
| Quote : Rambus does not cripple a CPU. |
No, I am saying that another one DDR will cripple P4, and I do not have no reason to make thus.
| Quote : If you mean the same number of FPU units, that is more of an issue in how the CPU is designed and built, |
RAM is also a part of as CPU is projected and constructed, me it does not see no reason to force one the same to be and not it another one.
Forgive my English please, I am of Portugal.
<A HREF="http://www.x86-secret.com/popups/articleswindow.php?id=41" target="_new">http://www.x86-secret.com/popups/articleswindow.php?id=41</A> If those guys can do it, you can. 
--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
Search the internet. Intel has got one dual channel DDR solution for dual Xeons : E7500, and is planning on two more. Also SiS and Via are working on that. Abit roadmapped a Via or SiS solution in june already. Check <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=507755#507755" target="_new">this monologue/thread</A> in the mobo section, where I already tried to start a discussion about this ... without result, however.
Greetz,
Bikeman
<i>Then again, that's just my opinion</i>
Very well written and detailed article, I'm impressed.
<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
Oh I know about Xeon, but we want home user CPUs!
That's why we can count on VIA's anti-licensing rebelious actions to provide us with something to compare our analogies. I mean if VIA doesn't step up to Intel, who will! Hopefully they do come out with the DC DDR chipset, so we can see.
--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
allready read hit it been a while it out.
http://www.rdram.com/downloads/RDRAM_IDF_Feb2002.pdf
Yes rdram.com all the source come from website benchmark come from toms
cheap, cheap. Think cheap, and you'll always be cheap.AMD version of semi conducteur industrie
Ok but that doesn't explain why it takes so many high numbers to beat an athlon. I might be a twisted freak for believing this, but the first thing to come to mind is poor CPU design. Thats what I think whenever I and many other think when we see a CPU that is running at a much slower clock speeds beat a CPU running at much higher clock speeds with much faster ram, much faster FSB, much larger cache, and a much larger price. For me I think Intel solutions=rip off. People like Fatburger and Bront might be very informed about CPU's and how they work, but that does not hide the facts here. Intels got the higher numbers on their side and they still loose.
Sometimes I wonder if even the pros get sucked in to P4's advertising lol. As for me I'll just stick to my common since and sellboth platforms. (one for the dumbies the other for the smarter comsumer)
*Let intel have the retail market *Keep AMD for the pros
I do hope that wasn't sarcasm!
Didn't you read it before?? I had posted the link many times where you were in X thread!
--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
Actually, that was the first time I've read it. And yes, I thought it was a very good article.
Taylanator, I take it you're a big fan of the Mac?
<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
Consider the fact that a companies like Intel and AMD are ... companies. Companies that are bound to economical laws. Companies that must maximise their sales numbers. Companies that use commercials to be living when obeying to those laws. And yesm they can lie when doing so. What do you expect? Intel saying it does not produce the fastest processor? Which company is saying that it does not have the best product available? Economy sucks in a way. Free market sucks in a way. But our world is not only based upon it, it grew like it is now because of it. So let Intel make their commercial, saying it has the best performing processor. That's just their way to make money.
Greetz,
Bikeman
<i>Then again, that's just my opinion</i>
That was why I keep saying DDR400 Dual Channel on P4 would rule out the competition all around, or vice-versa RDRAM should move to 64-bit paths, gaining a huge jump over any DDR ever.
--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
Look at this link posted in another thread: <A HREF="http://freespace.virgin.net/m.warner/RoadmapQ302.htm" target="_new">http://freespace.virgin.net/m.warner/RoadmapQ302.htm</A>
It clearly states they think there is going to be a DC DDR-chipset for the Nortwood, aingle processor (Prestonia is the name):
<i>"Intel Granite Bay chipset for the Pentium 4 Northwood (and single processor Prestonia) is expected to be released in Q3. Granite Bay is expected to feature 533Mhz FSB support, dual channel DDR200/266 DDR SDRAM (giving a memory bandwidth of 4.2Gb/s), AGP 8X and Intel's ICH4 South Bridge."</i>
Greetz,
Bikeman
<i>Then again, that's just my opinion</i>
Problem is they're still on DDR266 when it only shows PC1066 competition, so they need to make a DDR333 DC chipset or above to shows some real strengh.
--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
| Quote : RDRAM should move to 64-bit paths, gaining a huge jump over any DDR ever. |
And if it was still dual-channel, it would be quite nice. Even at only 1066 or even 800 speeds.
Dual-channel DDR400 wouldn't be half bad either, though.
<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
Nope nope Noper! I'm not a mac fan, the ONLY reason being their compatibility with microsoft products STINKS! And I don't like the OS, its makes me feel nasty, but thats just me. Anyway, If a mac had Windows on it, holy cow I would buy them in bulk and sell them in my stores as regualr pc's. Their cpu's are awesome. Very well put together pc's I might add. But the answear is NO I do not like macs (the os).
LOL, well if you want to blow it WAY out of proportion, SURE! I agree with you completely. I completly understand that bot AMD and intel are squeezing the CRAP out of all of our wallets but I don't even care. I build computers all day long, the more they squeeze for money the more I squeeze for money which is fine by me. I just want to understand why anyone would buy a P4 for themselves. Maybe if I was very wealthy, no, actualy no I would never buy one for my self, They just seem so laggy to me. Maybe I'm not good at building P4's, I don't know, But I think that after about 95 P4 systems, I think that I would have got it right on some of them, but all of them have just allways fell behind the amd's. Allthough, I do feel that intel has better (more reliable) chipsets. But not that much better. I've also found that VIA stinks when it comes to reliability. Performance yes, anything else no. But thats besides the fact. The fact is that I have just lost what I was talking about, oh yeah, I don't like intel as you can tell by know so I'll stop blabering and stop posting because I just keep getting the beat down by all these "know it alls" so see ya later guys.
I'll do my thing, you can do yours.
Peace
Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > P4 +DDR and XP+DDR doesn't it just make it even?
There are 1215 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.
Please mind
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.
Sponsored links
Ad
Related Topics
- DDR 400! and finally some good bench marks
- why dont they just make 1 CPU per model
- Not just another computer thread
- Soon a dual channel DDR
- How do I make a proper system disk?
- I Just started to construct my own...
- I Just started to construct my own...
- SIS645+P4-1.6A+512 DDR. Would you upgrade?
- no beep, just black
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
- 01:00 traveler818 won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 quip13 won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 christophersommerhoff won the Uniformed badge
- 01:00 salkizar won the Uniformed badge
- 01:00 BadTrip won the Spy badge
- 01:00 frazamatazzle won the Freshman badge
- 20:11 ominous prime won the Sophmore badge
- 01:00 torbee won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 dba won the Uniformed badge
- 01:00 LoveMyslf won the Uniformed badge