AMD Unviels World's Highest-Performing Processor

[shallowbaby]

<A HREF="http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020821/202512_1.html" target="_new">http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020821/202512_1.html</A>
for you amd fanboys out there. enjoy it. good for amd.

<A HREF="http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/020820/tech_intel_pentium4_1.html" target="_new">http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/020820/tech_intel_pentium4_1.html</A>for you intel fanboys out there. enjoy it. good for intel.

pricewatch doesn't even have xp 2400+ or 2600+ yet, but the p4 2.8 is there. anyways, good to finally see progress.

<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>

 

[Matisaro]

Vindication.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[buddry]

Um, looking through tom's benchmarks, it looks to me that the 2.53 was still leading in more benchmarks. But anyways, its nice to see AMD finally do something about the performance gap.

<font color=blue>Unofficial Forum Cop</font color=blue>

 

[chuck232]

And plus, the 2.53B will be $243, therefore less than the ~$300 the XP2600+ will be.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>

 

[AMD_Man]

And plus, the 2.53B will be $243, therefore less than the ~$300 the XP2600+ will be.

AMD will probably lower the price accordingly. Since I have RDRAM now, my next processor will probably be a 3GHz+ P4 with Hyperthreading or a Prescott.

Intelligence is not merely the wealth of knowledge but the sum of perception, wisdom, and knowledge.

 

[AmdMELTDOWN]

AMD is lying, I smell a class action suit.

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

 

[Cooj]

What I find interesting is the Tom talks like the 2600+ completely destroys the P4 2.53... But from looking at those benchmarks it doesn't really seem that great.

That and yes chuck is right, the 2600+ is more expensive.

If you look at the article tom wrote, during their tests they O/Ced it to 2400mhz (or 3000+) but that was using the "best water cooling system available" which most people probably can't afford anywys so I doubt most normal end uesrs will be able to reproduce such results. Maybe they should have tried O/Cing it using more conventional means for more regular joe blow users.

So I don't see how the 2600+ which is more expensive, slower and being pushed closer to it's limit is better than a p4 2.53...

Cooj

 

[buddry]

Yeah, they just said they have the best processor.

<font color=blue>Unofficial Forum Cop</font color=blue>

 

[chuck232]

Hey go over to the "Comments on XP2600+" or whatever thread. I commented on that...

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>

 

[wolverinero79]

That's what we call bias. When the 2.53 p4 came out and was undoubtedly the fastest chip, Tom's article was that basically it barely beat the Athlon, even though it led in every test. Now that the 2.53 (or at the least the 2.8) p4 is neck and neck with the 2600, he treats it as Intel is dead, long live AMD...I don't know why i even bother reading these articles anymore. I should just go to www.amd.com if i want this type of "news".

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games

 

[Spitfire_x86]

What I find interesting is the Tom talks like the 2600+ completely destroys the P4 2.53... But from looking at those benchmarks it doesn't really seem that great.

THG never said AXP 2600+ compltely destroys P4 2.53. They said-

<b> In the benchmark tests, the Athlon XP 2600+ manages to surpass the Intel Pentium 4/2533 once more, but not in all disciplines. </b>

 

[chuck232]

But you see, it only beats it in a few occasions, the P4 2.53 still leads in most apps, yet they say the XP2600+ manages to surpass the 2.53, as though it leads most of the time.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>

 

[scamtrOn]

you know, the AXP 2600+ prolly would pass the 2.533Mhz performance and leave it in the dust <b>IF</b> it had a "real" chipset backing it up!</font color=red>

<b><font color=orange>sing to prolong HDD life; spin right round like a record baby Right round round round

 

[shallowbaby]

how come everyone is talking about 2600+ vs 2.533 when there's 2.800 is just around the corner.



<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>

 

[nja469]

There's a 2.8 around the corner, but then there's also faster and more powerful xp's based on the barton core "Around the corner" as well. While I said in a different thread, this athlon is no P4 killer, for it running 400+MHz slower, half the FSB speed, half the cache and a generally sh!t chipset it's pretty damn good.

"Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one"

 

[Crashman]

If AMD leads by 1% in 7 out of 10 test, but looses by 10% in 3 out of 10 test, that still leaves them trailing even if they won more test.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>

 

[Ncogneto]

Maybe, maybe not that would depend on the tests themselves and how much they translate to real world usage. Head over to anandtech or Ace's and you will see it all comes down to what test you choose to use. Its not a P4 killer, but the current p4 can't claim undisputed rights by any means. Give it a better chipset (aka nfore2), and things could really start to get interesting again. As for those p4 users hoping to upgrade to higher speed processors themselves, it looks like a new motherboard is in there future as well. <A HREF="http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2002/08/19&pages=14&seq=84" target="_new">http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2002/08/19&pages=14&seq=84</A>

It's not what they tell you, its what they don't tell you!

 

[scamtrOn]

um... what to say?...

for the same reason you wouldn't race a sentra with a McLarenF1

its kinda nice to see which CPU does what better at the same "speed rate". there is a point in racing cars of the same class, but it would be pointless to race a sentra with a McLarenF1 you see... i mean you would know the outcome!

<b><font color=orange>sing to prolong HDD life; spin right round like a record baby Right round round round

 

[LED]

"Around the corner" for Intel is about a week from now......you can already order the 2.8ghz. Wont ship till months end. Be a good while before you can get your hands on a XP2600, much less a Barton.....

This sig runs too hot.

 

[phsstpok]

You are right and once again THG's comments just don't match the evidence.

Crash, you have been saying all along how DDR (even fast DDR) kills the P4's performance. Now I was just looking at <A HREF="http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=50000284" target="_new">Aceshardware.com's review of the XP 2600+</A> where it fares far better (vs P4 2.53) but in this case both platforms use DDR. When compared to THG's review this seems to prove your claim, at least I think it does. Do you concur that the differing results of the two reviews can be explained by P4's memory bandwidth differences (RDRAM in one case, DDR in the other)?

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>

 

[eden]

As Crash would say: We need Dual Channel DDR to even match and outperform RDRAM based P4 systems.

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?

 

[eden]

Vindication.

Why do I always crack and ROFL when I read that word from your posts?!

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?

 

[eden]

The XP2600 WILL cost less than the 2.53GHZ. As I stated before, retailers always sell AMDs below MSRPs, while they sell overprice Intels.
And that is why my claim, that AMD's price/performance at stock, will NEVER be beaten

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?

 

[phsstpok]

Yeah, I remember that. Wasn't SIS working on a chipset with dual channel DDR support for the P4? Is DDR-II dual channel?

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>

 

[imgod2u]

First of all, the Athlon's current performance limitation seems to be its L2 cache. As the CPU scales, its L2 cache, with is relatively high latency (pipelined may I add), would not scale as fast as the CPU would. I think we're seeing it reach beyond the "sweet spot" where the L2 cache with 8 cycle latency is still useful, but not a bottleneck. But yes, we're also getting into memory limitations, although I doubt dual channel DDR is really needed. I'd say something along the lines of a bus increase to 166-200MHz DDR.
As for the price/performance thing. If you're talking about vendors, they actually charge a lot less for the CPU they sell in their machines than you'd find retail. Also, the 2.53's price has dropped to around $260 last I checked on pricewatch. Whether not it'll be a better deal than the $250ish (which is usually the price for the newest AMD chip upon introduction) is debatable.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.