amd vs intel article

[Wiggo]

Gee don't ya's just love all the totesterone flowin' around here?

[das9092]

Another thing which I find intresting is the fact that you expect us to trust a application never ever used let alone heard of by any known site or by any other known reviewer whilst ya can't trust well known everyday apps to show the difference between platforms.. Strange don't ya think.. Anyone could have written that software for any purpose..

Well first of all you might want to use the both cpu's to their fully potential which you can't do on those platforms.

Using 266 mhz fsb with a cpu that can do 400 isn't comparable at all since you ain't doing the same on your Athlon. It's simple math and I think you can manage it to if ya try really hard. That 266 mhz athlon of yours must be run with a chipset/memory on 133 mhz speed, aka sdram = half the fsb speed in order to get a fair comparizon.. Or rather give the P4 a platform that can support 400 fsb to give it what it needs to perfom to it's fully potential. After all this thread have had alot of whining about "unfair" testing so you for one should be intrested in doing things right..

~~~~~~

But sure, I ain't claiming that a 400 fsb P4 perform that well cause they don't, but you see we doesn't run P4's at 266 mhz fsb like you do today, we run them on 800 mhz in dual channel and pretty soon 1200 so why don't ya keep drooling over that john doe test of your's and let us others show some real facts like the one given in the start of this thread..

45:55
1.2GHz/200MHz + 133MHz (PC133) SDRAM = 44:59

As you can see, the laptop actually came in one minute faster. I can only attribute this to the fact that the laptop has a Palomino core with SSE and better branch prediction while the downclocked 1.4GHz system uses a standard Thunderbird core. (Or it's close enough that we might be able to attribute it to error.)

Now for the second round I took thing a little further. For these test I ran my main (Barton core) system downclocked to 1.4GHz but I ran the test three times. Once with a FSB of 266MHz, another with a FSB of 333MHz and finally with a FSB of 400MHz. Then I compared those scores with my 1.4GHz/266MHz Thunderbird system.

And the results I got are...

(Thunderbird)
1.4GHz/266MHz + 266MHz (PC2100) DDR-SDRAM = 38:54
(Barton)
1.4GHz/266MHz + 266MHz (PC2100) DDR-SDRAM = 35:10
1.4GHz/333MHz + 333MHz (PC2700) DDR-SDRAM = 34:24
1.4GHz/400MHz + 400MHz (PC3200) DDR-SDRAM = 34:33

As you can see, the different FSB speeds have very little effect on the outcome. And again, the Barton seems to pull ahead of the Thunderbird probably because of the SSE, better branch prediction and larger L2 cache.

So what does this prove? Nothing except that it appears that in this benchmark the FSB and/or memory bus speed have little to no effect on the outcome. This benchmark seems to rely on how much number crunching power the CPU has only.

Not satisfied? Well after those tests I decided to step it up a little more. I decided to do an "apples to apple" comparison. How? Well the P4 systems I ran the benchmark on ran at 2GHz with a 400MHz FSB but the RAM ran at 266MHz and was only 512MB.

So to do an apples to apples comparison I setup my main Barton system to run those same exact speeds. I set my FSB to 400MHz (200MHz DDR) and the multiplier to 10x. Then I set the memory bus ratio to 66% which gave me a RAM speed of 266MHz (133MHz DDR). And to make things even fairer, I only ran one stick of 512MB RAM so that my dual channel nForce 2 board wouldn't have the "dual" channel advantage. So with it set up this way, the only difference between the two platforms is one is an Intel platform and the other is an AMD platform. But specs wise, they are both running the exact same speed.

And the results I got are...

(Intel 845G system)
P4 2GHz/400MHz + 266MHz DDR-SDRAM = 36:00

(VIA P4M266 system)
P4 2GHz/400MHz + 266MHz DDR-SDRAM = 37:20

(nForce 2 system / single channel)
Athlon 2GHz/400MHz + 266MHz DDR-SDRAM = 24:56

As you can see even though they are all running at 2GHz, all have 512K L2 cache, all have a 400MHz FSB and are all coupled with slower 266MHz PC2100 DDR-RAM, the Athlon still handles the P4's (in this benchmark) quit nicely. :D

What do ya think? ;)

(To save space in this post I didn't include screen shots but I can provide them if you want.)

[Wiggo]

Damn for all the time it took ya replyin' I was expecting a full sized novel.

[das9092]

Damn for all the time it took ya replyin' I was expecting a full sized novel.

:?: :?:

[The__tweaker]

:rofl:

Gee this thread has gone way off topic, and since no one seem to stick to it then we better close the case. I for one Is still going to check out reviews before buying new hardware. But if you think otherwise then DO otherwise.. :D

Anyway I'm of for work, see ya guys in a couple of days, back friday..

[Wiggo]

As the old sayin' goes that I use in these topics, Certain horses for certain courses, each have their strengths and weaknesses so choose ya course first and then choose ya horse whether ya want the P4's turbo 4 cylinder feel or the Athlon's V8 one to suit the programs that ya generally run. :devil win

[das9092]

:rofl:

Gee this thread has gone way off topic, and since no one seem to stick to it then we better close the case. I for one Is still going to check out reviews before buying new hardware. But if you think otherwise then DO otherwise.. :D

Anyway I'm of for work, see ya guys in a couple of days, back friday..

Off topic? Hmmm.... I thought this was a thread called "amd vs intel article"....... isn't that what we're talking about? AMD vs Intel?

[The__tweaker]

Off topic? Hmmm.... I thought this was a thread called "amd vs intel article"....... isn't that what we're talking about? AMD vs Intel?

Maybe you should go back to the start and check. ;)

This thread is about the TT review on Intel and Amd's new cpu's.

The P4 won every test but one, but as they are all bogus don't even bother to read it. :2cents:

[The__tweaker]

As the old sayin' goes that I use in these topics, Certain horses for certain courses, each have their strengths and weaknesses so choose ya course first and then choose ya horse whether ya want the P4's turbo 4 cylinder feel or the Athlon's V8 one to suit the programs that ya generally run. :devil win

hehehe my heaviest apps makes my Amd feel like a damn tricyckle compared to the P4 plus all those reviews all around us, so then ya might understand why I have the attitude I express.. :devil win

[aznx]

look at what i started:confused:

[The__tweaker]

look at what i started:confused:

lol no worries, we are all men and full of totesterone and if we weren't 10 million km away from eatch other we could arange a Ultimate Fighting contest. The winner aka the survivor could win a brand new videocard or a free fully paid for visit at the dentist.. :D :D

Gee I would love that! More violence!! Maybe I could bring my nightstick from work and the show would be even more splendid.. :hammer:

[Shad0hawK]

:rofl:

Gee this thread has gone way off topic, and since no one seem to stick to it then we better close the case. I for one Is still going to check out reviews before buying new hardware. But if you think otherwise then DO otherwise.. :D

Anyway I'm of for work, see ya guys in a couple of days, back friday..

ahhh gotta alove hectic work schedules!! did you miss me? i read some of your posts, they are amusing. :D

anyway back to topic then...the article here is the infamous quote from the conclusion:

[The__tweaker]

Well if ya read my posts proper then ya would have seen that I did comment his statement as biased. However I really think he meant FUTURE apps and not the one we play with today. Most of us have discovered the fact that the XP line comes further and further back for every new released cpu they compare.

The XP line isn't going to stand the competition mutch longer and therefore the 64 bit processing will save Amd. but my friend, this review is all about a XP vs P4 cpu and nothing else. I have never claimed something bad at all about Opteron, exept the price.. :(

If you like Amd use them then, I run both but the P4 can't be beaten in my apps, no matter what XP you bring on. Let's face it, compared to my 2.26 ghz P4 the Amd 2100+ crawls when encoding movies and sutch.. :) And oc/tweaking doesn't help so don't even go there.. You can't tweak new instructions into a cpu which isn't there in the first place.. :devil win

[Shad0hawK]

the P4 can't be beaten in my apps, no matter what XP you bring on.

"did you say "any" xp processor? how about one running the same clock speed? 2.26 mhz vs 2.26 mhz, sounds fair to me! i only spent $90US on this processor, how much did your p4 2.2 cost? :D

[rkane]

So I guess it looks like my homemade benchmark won't do a lot in the world of high end computing. Maybe I can create a website and do a little more programming and get it into the world of business and workstations.

It's very obvious from the results of the tests being done with it that the Athlon is much better for a workstation processor doing typical Business apps.

Wonder why AMD is having so much trouble getting them into businesses around the world.