Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: NUTTZ on September 29, 2004, 09:39:49 PM
-
I want to upgrade
Whats the pro's and con's between a pent 4 (fastest CPU) 533 fsb?
or the new generation athlon 64's ( with fastest CPU)?
NUTTZ
-
After hours and hours of research, I found that more folks believe the Athlon 64 processor with the Socket 939 motherboard is the preferred choice for gaming. It is usually faster in benchmarks and with the native 64 bit capability, it will handle newer 64 bit applications when they start coming out.
Don't get fooled by the clock speeds. The P4 3.6 ghz intel chip or even the 3.4 ghz extreme chip would appear to be faster than an Athlon 64 3500+ or maybe even the FX-53. But I believe there are architectural designs in the chips that enable the Athlon chips to task at higher rates, despite the listed speeds.
So...with all of that, I went searching for a good Athlon 64 based system. I found that I could get a comparable P4 3.6 ghz system for around a $1000 less. Since AH2 is the only game I run, I went with the less espensive P4 3.6 ghz system and hope it will run AH2 for several years. I made sure the motherboard is the newer 925 intel chipset so here's hoping I can upgrade processors when that becomes an issue.
-
Athlon runs at slower clock speed but better parallel execution which makes it faster/compareable to Intels.
I had the intention athlon64 system would come off cheaper overall than P4 system since you can run cheaper memory... what did you compare?
Forget about upgrading future processor and keeping the rest.
Mostly the future processor is either not significantly faster or wont fit to the current MB.
I know, everyone says newest chipset for upgrade possib., but upgrading to a slightly better processor wont give you a noteable performance boost, since ram, grafik, harddisk still run the same. And a much faster processor will need diffrent power, faster ram and faster interface to the grafik system.
ciao schutt
-
Athlons 64 execute more instructions per clock cycle, hence a seemingly 'slower' clock speed Athlon 64 outperforms a top of the range P4.
Another major difference is the memory controller. All Pentiums have it on the motherboard, Athlon 64 have it as part of the CPU. Result, ridiculously low latencies and insane memory transfer speeds that a P4 can't get near.
All those thinking of PCI-Express, not even the latest Vid cards come close to saturating the current AGP/Hypertransport bus on an Athlon 64.
-
Thanks, this new rig will be for doing Art, AH2 Terrains, and gaming.
I plan on building this new, so the Ram, graphix card, HD, ect. will be bought FOR the new MB, and CPU.
NUTTZ
-
IMHO the best bang for the $ are socket 754 Athlon 64 cpus and socket 754 mobos. The socket 939s may be slightly faster but lose out on the price/performance comparison.
And the socket 754s are much better $/performance than Intel.
-
True MOSQ but 754 is a dead end regarding future releases. E.g. 'Dual core" CPUs will only be available for s939 and s940.
The recent release of Athlon 64 (s939) 3000 is a good entry level cpu.
-
It depends on what you are doing. If you are into many of Adobe products, you will find the Pentium 4's w/HT smoke anything AMD has right now as Adobe apps make use of HT/multi CPU hardware.
Adobe Encore will burn a DVD almost twice as fast using an HT enabled P4 versus the AMD 64's.
Just FYI.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
It depends on what you are doing. If you are into many of Adobe products, you will find the Pentium 4's w/HT smoke anything AMD has right now as Adobe apps make use of HT/multi CPU hardware.
Adobe Encore will burn a DVD almost twice as fast using an HT enabled P4 versus the AMD 64's.
Just FYI.
How the heck can any software program burn a DVD 2x's as fast? Dvd Burning is limited to the media speed as well as the drive speed, software/processor cant speed up burning. Yeah maybe reauthoring, or encoding one, but simple burning (nope),
-
Ok,..I was too simple on the explanation. The encoding process allows the DVD to be burned in almost half the time. Better?
More details. I went through all this on both processors recently. Also encoding the sound to Dolby Digital 5.1 was done as well as the MPEG2 conversion from AVI source.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Ok,..I was too simple on the explanation. The encoding process allows the DVD to be burned in almost half the time. Better?
More details. I went through all this on both processors recently. Also encoding the sound to Dolby Digital 5.1 was done as well as the MPEG2 conversion from AVI source.
Thought thats what you meant, but I wanted to clarify. Thanks. Yeah a P4 will smoke any AMD processor when it comes to encoding,reauthoring, etc of video material.
-
It's ok schizer. I was a bit too terse.
However, I think it is too general to say a P4 will always be faster in this area. I think it would be more dependent on the tools you use. Not all tools are written to take advantage of a multi-CPU environment.
-
I'm using Corel products. I'll probably upgrade to graphics suite 12 ( using Corel 9 at the moment) I'm not sure what you mean by "HT". I'm a die hard fan of Pentium, the 800 FSB. The AMD's 939,940 (53) series have 1600 FSB, but I see the cache is 1mb L2, the Pent4 is 512? My head is spinning. Sure I would like more BANG for the buck, but the reliability of the pent4 has more time under it's belt than the athlon 64's. I wouldn't be over clocking either so that wouldn't be a deciding factor. Still I wouldn't want it to be outdated anytime soon. I see the Pent4 3.6 Mhz, and the AMD 53 series chips are where I will be looking at. the Raedon x800 XT or pro. a few 1gig sticks of ram ( I see they have 2gig sticks also), Will any MoBo's handle 2-2gig sticks of ram?. Now I normally use 7200 RPM HD's i see they have 15k and 10k RPM drives also. Should I stick with 2-7200rpm HD's raided? or go with the faster rpm ( less Physical HD space)? And yes i will probably be mading some short animated films.
NUTTZ,
Thanks for the input.
Originally posted by Skuzzy
It depends on what you are doing. If you are into many of Adobe products, you will find the Pentium 4's w/HT smoke anything AMD has right now as Adobe apps make use of HT/multi CPU hardware.
Adobe Encore will burn a DVD almost twice as fast using an HT enabled P4 versus the AMD 64's.
Just FYI.
-
HT = Hyper Threaded. Basically, there are almost 2 CPU's in the HT CPU's. 'Almost' being the key word. They share a lot of stuff, and probably yeild about a 40 to 50% gain over a single CPU in performance (when using software that actually is written for multi-CPU environments).
It was the last innovative thing Intel did. Personally, I would not touch a 'Prescott' based Intel CPU with a ten foot pole (the 'E' designator or CPU's above 3.2Ghz). The Northwood cores were about the best Intel ever made of the P4 line ('C' designator available in 3.2Ghz or less).
The Prescott runs slower than the Northwood at the same clock rates, and to compound it, they also run much hotter than Northwood.
For what you are doing, an ATIX800Pro should be fine, but for long life the X800XT might be better.
I don't do RAID, so someone else can step in on that.
-
Lets see if we're on the same page, what you are saying is...? Get a dual CPU MoBo? A dual CPU MoBo using 2 Pent4 3.2 Northwood chips?
NUTTZ
Originally posted by Skuzzy
HT = Hyper Threaded. Basically, there are almost 2 CPU's in the HT CPU's. 'Almost' being the key word. They share a lot of stuff, and probably yeild about a 40 to 50% gain over a single CPU in performance (when using software that actually is written for multi-CPU environments).
It was the last innovative thing Intel did. Personally, I would not touch a 'Prescott' based Intel CPU with a ten foot pole (the 'E' designator or CPU's above 3.2Ghz). The Northwood cores were about the best Intel ever made of the P4 line ('C' designator available in 3.2Ghz or less).
The Prescott runs slower than the Northwood at the same clock rates, and to compound it, they also run much hotter than Northwood.
For what you are doing, an ATIX800Pro should be fine, but for long life the X800XT might be better.
I don't do RAID, so someone else can step in on that.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
True MOSQ but 754 is a dead end regarding future releases. E.g. 'Dual core" CPUs will only be available for s939 and s940.
The recent release of Athlon 64 (s939) 3000 is a good entry level cpu.
True, but in my experience with upgrading systems since my first 286 based system, you will need a new mobo at the same time. In other words, at the point a 754 based system is obsolete, so will be any current 939 system. If the 939 is still around at that point, you will want a new mobo to take advantage of the latest ram type and speeds; FSB speeds, PCI Express, and on and on.
So I still say the 754 is a far better value. IF you buy a 939 today and expect to simply upgrade with a faster 939 processor in a couple of years, you will be unhappy, because in two years you'll want faster RAM, FSB, and PCI Express too. So you'll end up buying a new mobo/cpu/ram/vid card anyway.
Might as well save the $ now and put em in the piggy bank for that full upgrade in 2 years.
As far as DVD burning with the Hyper Thread Technology, that's an example of real life software that gives Intel an advantage.
However what happens when DVD and graphics software comes out in 64 bit? Will AMD smoke the 32 bit Intel systems? I don't know. We use SUN Solaris 64 RISC systems here at our internet company and they are great. But I'm not saying to buy the Athlon for 64 bit computing because by the time 64 bit apps are commonplace at the Windows office/home level, you will be looking at a new system anyway. It's just an added benefit that in a couple of years when you will build that new super fast gaming rig that you'll still be able to use your old (today's) system in the 64 bit Windows environment.
NUTTZ as far as reliabilty, that's not really an issue. AMDs are just as reliable as Intel. Even more so if you are considering the Intel Prescott cpus, because they run so hot. Even SUN is offering AMD based x86 instruction set servers now. SUN's reputation is based on reliabilty, so I would have no qualms about the reliability of AMD processors.
IMHO the AMD Athlon 64 754 systems are the price/performance leader for at least the next 6 months in the gaming world.
-
All true MOSQ, but from what I've read the Dual Core cpus should work on current mobos with a BIOS upgrade. This would bring not only 2 cpus on one die, but support for P4/Intel hyperthreading (which is inefficient), and true dual core communication using the hypertransport bus.
This will not be available for s754.
Expected date of release is next year, in fact AMD recently demo'ed a 4 way opteron board with dual core cpus, so in effect there were 8 cpus on the board.
PCI-E is going to be another technology where people are going to be dissappointed. If the current AGPx8 bus can't be fully used whats the point of increasing it? The only advantage I can see is 2 x Vid cards using the equivalent of the old Voodoo SLI connection. Then again you wanna spend around $1000 on two good pci-e cards?
Yup the 2 year thing is very true, but if you continue to put off until something else comes along you'll still be sitting with a 486.
Skuzzy - 'Half the time'? That I'd like to see. The top of the range P4 only just beats the FX53 for encoding. EVERYTHING else it lags way behind. Not seen a single benchmark where the P4 has the advantage you are speaking of. And remember the FX55 is due out real soon.
-
Originally posted by MOSQ
Even SUN is offering AMD based x86 instruction set servers now. SUN's reputation is based on reliabilty, so I would have no qualms about the reliability of AMD processors.
I got to play with one of these for a few days:
http://sunsolve.sun.com/handbook_pub/Systems/SunFireV20z/component.top.html (http://sunsolve.sun.com/handbook_pub/Systems/SunFireV20z/component.top.html)
All I can say is WOW :)
Wow is it fast!
Wow is it LOUD :0 (the fans sound like little jet engines, but since it IS a server, and only one rack unit tall...)
-
I was looking on the net. The Pent4 3.2 mhz has a chip called the extreme, It has 2 gig cache? with hyperthreading. It seams to be much more $$ than the other Pent4 3.2's. So HT is on the chip? I misunderstood what Skuzzy said and took it for a dual chip MoBo. I couldn't find a dual chip pent4 based moBo Anyways. So that's how I came to the conclusion HT is in the chip. I also see HT chips come prescott, So don't buy that one... Right?
HAHAHA ... Now who can recommend a reliable Mobo that will hold 2 gigs of ram, have RAID, an 8x AGP, and utilize the 3.2 pent4 extreme chip?
And at least a 500 watt Power supply?
NUTTZ
Originally posted by Kev367th
All true MOSQ, but from what I've read the Dual Core cpus should work on current mobos with a BIOS upgrade. This would bring not only 2 cpus on one die, but support for P4/Intel hyperthreading (which is inefficient), and true dual core communication using the hypertransport bus.
This will not be available for s754.
Expected date of release is next year, in fact AMD recently demo'ed a 4 way opteron board with dual core cpus, so in effect there were 8 cpus on the board.
-
The P4EE (extreme edition), referred to by us AMD fans as the Emergency Edition was Intels attempt to compete with the AMD 64's. In fact the AMD64 and P4EE were released within days of each other if not the same day.
To be totally frank if your gonna spend $800+ on a CPU do yourself a favor and get an AMD64 FX53. Check out any benchmarks between the two, the FX53 whoops it bellybutton on 90%+ of the tests.
Some benchies you'll notice the FX53 actually outperforms the 3.4 never mind the 3.2 -
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjI2LDU=
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040318/athlon-fx53-12.html
Toms hardware is surprising as he is an avid Intel fan. Toms is a s940 FX53, the s939 version is faster because of dual channel memory support.
-
My luck i'm using the other 10% of software.
NUTTZ
Originally posted by Kev367th
The P4EE (extreme edition), referred to by us AMD fans as the Emergency Edition was Intels attempt to compete with the AMD 64's. In fact the AMD64 and P4EE were released within days of each other if not the same day.
To be totally frank if your gonna spend $800+ on a CPU do yourself a favor and get an AMD64 FX53. Check out any benchmarks between the two, the FX53 whoops it bellybutton on 90%+ of the tests.
-
My luck i'm using the other 10% of software.
?
Check my edited post above.
Oh, and the FX53 will overclock to from default 2.4 to a little over 2.6ghz out of the box.
-
Kev, I tested on the AMD 64 versus the P4 with the burner/rendering software I use (Adobe Premier and Encore). To my knowledge they are the only products making use of dual CPU architectures. Adobe also codes to the Intel architecture Kev.
The P4 finished a render and encoding in a little more than half the time the AMD system did. You can call me a liar all day long, it will not change what I personally observed.
I did not test against dual AMD systems, as I think those are just the Opteron right now. I could be in error on that one.
---
No NUTTZ, the HT technology has been available in the P4 Northwoods from the 2.4C and up.
By the way Kev, have you ever used Adobe Premier Pro 1.5 and Encore 1.5? One other thing. My Intel system is not exactly stock. You get in such a hurry to defend AMD you forget to ask questions. I do know what I am doing.
AMD makes some fine CPU's. In this particular area that lack a bit. Also, I do not beleive NUTTZ wants to be futzing around with overclocking.
-
ding ding ding ... go to your corners guys ....
Your not gonna go wrong with a top end northwood based system .
but as technology and programs start getting more 64bit based the 64bit (939) is gonna leave them in the dust .
its still a waiting game on the software writers in the 64bit dept.
ok Ding ...
-
Skuzzy - Wasn't calling you a liar, just all the benchies I had seen didn't put the P4 that far ahead on encoding. Which CPUs did you use? The only fair test agianst a P4EE would have been an FX53.
I remember seeing some benchmarks with the guy claiming Intel was way ahead, until you relaized it was dual Xeon system up against a single Opteron.
I have never compared 'clockspeeds, I always look at price, and for the equivalent price of a P4 you get a much better AMD64.
You are correct the only dual systems at the moment are Opterons, this will change next year with the introduction of 'Dual Core' CPUS.
Still think if someone is going to spend $800+ on a single CPU the best all round one out there is an FX53.
-
Skuzzy,
Like Kev, I am interested to know what AMD 64 system you compared to the Pentium 4.
Thanks a lot
Acetnt
-
Same motherboard/CPU Kev has. For the RAM, I used two sticks of 512MB Crucial Ballistix. I used an ATIX800Pro video card and a SB Audigy 2ZS Platinum sound card.
The SB Audigy did not do too well in this motherboard. A bit of noise/crackling was evident. I never did figure out why.
I did not overclock this one as it was running pretty toasty (stock HSF)
The P4 was a 3.2GHz (OC to 218Mhz FSB, stock HSF) Northwood in an ASUS P4P800 motherboard. I used the same ram and peripherals as above in it.
The project I used took a little less than 8 hours to finish on the AMD system and a little more than 5 hours to finish on the P4 system. That included rendering, encoding the video and transcoding the audio (WAV to DD5.1), and burn time.
The P4 did get pretty warm during this (59C).
-
Thanks Skuzzy,
In this case the choice is simple. If the main use of the pc is use of adobe products that can make use of HT then the P4 is the better choice. If the machine will be primarily used for gaming then the choose the A64. Decide on the primary use of your machine and you are good to go.
Regards
Acetnt
-
Originally posted by acetnt367th
Thanks Skuzzy,
In this case the choice is simple. If the main use of the pc is use of adobe products that can make use of HT then the P4 is the better choice. If the machine will be primarily used for gaming then the choose the A64. Decide on the primary use of your machine and you are good to go.
Regards
Acetnt
I'm sorry, that is far too simple for our BBS. Please modify your statement with a few "That's True, But" and some technology jargon or I'm afraid no one here will take you seriously.