Author Topic: pent 4 vs. athlon 64? (Read 661 times)

MOSQ · « **Reply #15 on:** September 30, 2004, 06:09:50 PM »

Quote

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 In other words, at the point a 754 based system is obsolete, so will be any current 939 system.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.

Kev367th · « **Reply #16 on:** September 30, 2004, 06:50:15 PM »

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.

JCLerch · « **Reply #17 on:** September 30, 2004, 06:58:36 PM »

Quote

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

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...)

NUTTZ · « **Reply #18 on:** September 30, 2004, 07:01:49 PM »

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

Quote

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.

Kev367th · « **Reply #19 on:** September 30, 2004, 07:06:40 PM »

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.

NUTTZ · « **Reply #20 on:** September 30, 2004, 07:10:12 PM »

My luck i'm using the other 10% of software.

NUTTZ

Quote

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.

Kev367th · « **Reply #21 on:** September 30, 2004, 07:26:23 PM »

Quote

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.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #22 on:** September 30, 2004, 10:33:08 PM »

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.

Roscoroo · « **Reply #23 on:** September 30, 2004, 10:49:34 PM »

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 ...

Kev367th · « **Reply #24 on:** October 01, 2004, 06:18:37 AM »

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.

acetnt367th · « **Reply #25 on:** October 01, 2004, 10:07:11 AM »

Skuzzy,

Like Kev, I am interested to know what AMD 64 system you compared to the Pentium 4.

Thanks a lot

Acetnt

Skuzzy · « **Reply #26 on:** October 01, 2004, 11:27:30 AM »

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).

acetnt367th · « **Reply #27 on:** October 01, 2004, 06:22:16 PM »

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

MOSQ · « **Reply #28 on:** October 01, 2004, 06:36:20 PM »

Quote

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.