Intel P4 vs AMD

lol lol lol lol lol

 

Sophocles,

I thought you did a nice job on setting up that article and just wanted to let you know I appreciated your humor when I mentioned in an indirect way about April Fools Day! <G>

 

I knew an April Fool once! Then again, He was always a fool! If the Dell deal is a joke, someone went to an awful lot of trouble to pull this one off. Just my thoughts.

Theonejrs

 

Including posting it a week early.

 

Date: 3/32/06

Brobear officially decrees there will be no April Fool's day this year. April will start on the 2nd.

What's in a date but numbers, if you can't confirm it? Some people take their April Fool jokes seriously and go to great lengths to pull them off.

 

Fools!

Yeah I'll go along with that, I had a lousy 1st of April, and beside there were no fools at all!

 

Hey i was wondering if Intel Xeons are better in performance than Intel Pentium 4........I know that Xeons are usually used in servers because of there size and you could have like 40 in a server....
But i want to know if they are better than intel
P4's

 

They almost certainly are because they're server processors but you're not going to see the difference using a PC as a normal person would. For games. multimedia etc. an AMD dual core will outperform two of those xeons in a special motherboard, for well under half the price in a standard motherboard.

 

Intel zeons are P4's and the most recent are in fact Prescott cores! It's a game that CPU manufacturers play. They have the same core as the prescott wtih the only difference being that they are optimized to work in dual processor setup. Just about any if not all Dual Core AMD's will take any two of them.

 

I wouldn't mind betting an X2 4200+ will best a seriously more expensive Dual Xeon setup.

 

P4 based Xeons are just P4s unlocked for multiple processors in a slightly different package. They usually lag the P4 a little in performance. It depends on the type of Xeon and how many procs in a system. Dated technology.
A Pentium D would blow a Xeon away.

 

P4s would work fine in multiple proc configuration. Intel purposely dissables this capability so they can push up the server chip prices.

 

tocool4u,

I don't know a lot about the Xeons, but I had a dual P3 Slot 1 1GHz/512 Dell Precision Workstation and it was very fast. Of course when it was new about 6 years ago it was $5000. It was the best and most reliable computer I ever owned. I just wish I could find some Rambus 400 or 450 for it that's affordable. It has 512 in it now but I would like to kick it up to 2 GB for my housemate. Great machine as it had everything for it's day. Scsi, onboard and external. It had Raid for both SCSI and IDE with dual boot from the boot manager. All you had to do was select which of the 6 (or more) drives you wanted to boot from and go. You could have an operating system on each drive. At one time I had 98, 2000 and XP all installed on seperate drives. It had 4x AGP. It also had a removable hard drive cage, so adding or removing a drive was a snap! Damn thing weighed over 50 lbs. It was a great buy too! $165 from Electro-Rents when it was less than 3 years old. It never broke or crashed and the quality was outstanding. One tough SOB thats still going strong!

Happy Computering,

theonejrs

 

That must still run quite well with 2 1Ghz chips in it...

 

sammorris,

For sure! I would still be using it right now except that I got a great deal??? on a Case, MB and CPU combo. The funniest thing was that the MB didn't support the supplied Prescott CPU, only the Northwood! If I had known then what I know now I would have bought a Northwood CPU and not had to spend so much on fans and an expensive CPU Cooler! Oh well, The learning experience was Grrreat! (pun intended) With heavy emphasis on the Grrr! Wouldn't have missed it for the world though. I learned a lot, thanks to this forum and the people in it who helped me get it to where it is now. I don't know too many people who can get a 20% OC out of a 3.0/800 Prescott with no problems!

Happy Computering,

theonejrs

 

The P3 coppermines were good because they weren't locked against SMP use. I have a couple of dual P3 units in mothballs. They are the slowest of my Dual proc machines so they don't get used any more.

 

You guys rock, thanks for all the tips. Yea I finally saw the difference between those two pictures, lol. Took me a while.

Anyways I don't know my FSB for my CPU. All I know is that its an Athlon 64 3700+ San Deigo Core meaning its got a 1 MB Cache instead of a 512.

FSB now is sholding steady at 878.69 although all in all I was really hoping for 1000 lol.

I might try to do it manual in bios later, but for now I think i'll leave it as is.

 

1000MHz from an 800MHz FSB system? Don't think it's gonna happen.

 

Brobear,

I don't think you could reach a 1000 fsb either on an 800 fsb MB. I'm at 960 now and I'm pretty well done. I could maybe get it to 965 but I wouldn't count on it. I had it up as high as 970 but had problems writing dVDs. Everything else worked good though and it didn't crash!

I said it before, and I'll say it again I don't see how a static pic can prove anything about how good a video card is. I can see everything thats there plus some things that others don't seem to see. The ATi pic is definately better, and there's no question that the 7800s wall looks blurry. The question is why, and is the pic representative of what it looks like in the game when you play it? By all rights this should be a very simple thing to program into the game. I mean it's straight lines with a minimal amount of colors, with no real complexities or action on the screen! To me it's not an ATi vs nVidia thing as I will be going ATi in the not too distant future, but it sure smells fishy to me. a scene like that should be a piece of cake for any decent video card. Am I hinting that I think the comparisum was skewed just a little bit in ATi's favor? You bet!!! That's the video card makers game. Make ours look better than theirs and hope that next week they don't do the same to you!

By the way I'm editing this post because I went back and looked at the pics again and discovered something very interesting. I would like someone to explain to me why the blue text is more fuzzy on the 7800 pic? This isn't a part of the game screen, it's been added by another graphics program to show what's what. All things being equal, it should look exactly the same and it doesn't! I tried adding text to a few different pics myself including these and the text was exactly the same!!! Nice and clear. If you blow it up, no matter what the pic the text looks exactly the same. If you keep blowing it up, the text starts to fall apart in each at the same time. Curious!!! If you don't believe me, try it yourself. Just save the image and open it with the Windows and Fax viewer. You will notice that the blue text on the 7800 side falls apart first and becomes less sharp than the text on the ATi as you increase the magnification. I'm not able to make it do this with 2 of the same pics using the text in PS7. Now why is that?? It's only one image so why the difference? Just my thoughts.

Happy Computering,
theonejrs

 

Fanboy?