Intel P4 vs AMD

I kind of saw the light early as I went AMD in January 2004, more than the hailed seven quarters ago.

Lol and lol again!

I heard the Thunderbird Processor had a few compatibility issues, but when the Athlon XP came about, alongside the P4 Willamette, there was no comparison. Nowadays, a 3800mhz Pentium struggles to beat a 2200mhz AMD, highlighting the inefficiency of the architecture. The Northwood CPU was pretty good, but either side, things went a bit awry in the P4 camp.

 

I am right there with you brobear but I still feel that some people are so entrenched with AMD because it's past year performance and domination of Intel, that I feel people are to quick to accept that AMD will continue this trend. I guess I am just not one of those that stick with one brand and one brand only. Yes I have recently purchased a AMD Athlon "San Diego COre" chip and absolutely loves it but if Intel comes out with something significantly better and is reasonably price and I can afford it, I definitely will consider purchasing an Intel.

 

What do yall think about this???

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102004R

its a refurb, but i herd that the 1900 are substantially better than the 1800..

and here is the 1800:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102663

only 60.00 difference..

BTW: i live in florida...

and i finall founf out how to post benchmarks... so i will do it as soon as possible sophecles..

BTW: again... sorry.. do yall know who this is?

 

I wouldn't buy refurbished cards, despite the fact they're re-checked, they're still far more likely to give you problems, and at that price range, you can't afford to compromise. I'd stretch the extra $72 for the proper version.
The X1900XT has quite a marked improvement over the X1800.

And yes, welcome back Triock. Try and hold on to your account this time!

 

Sammorriss
You've already written your stand on the wall. You're a dyed in the wool "AMD fanboy". If AMD doesn't make it, you don't want it. Intel should be bulldozed into oblivion. At least that's the impression one gets.

The Donald
I mentioned why people bought AMDs besides performance, I said nothing about Intel advertising or why people bought Intels. Intel was advertising (possibly not as much) before 2 years ago, which was when AMD really started cutting a swath in the market with their "better mousetrap". The point was that AMD was making inroads for reasons other than performance. Sammorriss is my prime example. LOL If I didn't think you'd buy an Intel when/if they improve over AMD, I'd suspect your being anti-Intel and an "AMD fanboy".

Sophocles
I can trust your stance, (you're our "professional girl") you cheer for whoever is ahead and try to have the current equipment. You're the indifferent shopper. You're either Mr Jones or his neighbor. You went from a Northwood P4 Intel to an AMD. You'd be the best to tell The Donald that the Northwoods and Gallatins, though using the older manufaturing techniques, were superior to their Prescott replacement and was smoking what AMD had to offer at the time. Intel shot themself in the corporate foot with the change and the quest for speed. Those processors were lower powered and run cooler. The Northwoods and Gallatins were superior to anything AMD had at the time and are competitive with current single core offerings. Those 2 are also why P4 was better than P3. I'd put the top P4 Gallatin against the best P3 any day. You can mention it offhand sometimes when you're having a private chat. You might want to mention the excellent work Intel is doing with their mobile processors and the Centrino platform. Most of us here like "racin" those big desktops though.

It's interesting times we live in. Intel will never be able to live down the fact that AMD has thus far delivered the revolutionary tech breakthroughs in memory usage and multi core processors that has brought PCs to the current developmental pinnacle. But there's the future. As I mentioned before, that's still up for grabs. I suspect AMD to be making an even bigger splash in the PC market, but I doubt Intel is going to go quietly into the dark. Personally, I'm going to try to stay away from the Ford-Chevrolet mentality (Lincoln-Cadillac for the high rollers LOL). I'd buy from either vendor, depending on the need and the comparative current performance of the item I wanted.

This post was a bit tongue in cheek, so any names mentioned, look to the lighter side. I was spoofing a bunch of the politics of PCs. Those Nascar rednecks (which I'm proud to be amongst) have nothing on the computer geeks who like racing their processors. "I'm a goin to get under yur AMD with my Intel and put er into the wall." "Oh yeah, you'll never see the tailpipes of my AMD with that little Intel under yur hood." I can see it now, the good ole boy crew chief walks over to his buddy and says, "you know, those new Fords have superior processing power, we may be able to get excellent benches this season and outperform the competition." Nuff said. LOL

I forgot. Baltekmi, yer a dyed in the wool "Intel fanboy". LOL

You guys take this stuff too seriously at times.

As an addition, novicebb, you can proudly move into the section with Sophocles. LOL

 

Then I've obviously given the wrong impression. If Intel made something well and truly better than AMD on most counts, then I'd be for it, despite my views on the company. However, at the moment I'm just a bit of an AMD well-wisher, since they're kind of the underdogs.

 

LOL That's what I meant, you hedge all your bets in favor of AMD. Currently AMD is only the underdog on the entire market share. Being the tech leader and cutting into the over all market as well as improving in the growing market share, I don't see AMD hurting too much.

If you promise to play nice, you can join novicebb and Sophocles.

 

And what counts as playing nice? Seriously I would consider an Intel if they were better - I've only had two PCs the first an Intel and the second an AMD, and I had the P3 longer before I bought this than how long I've had this XP so far. What kind of surprises me is that you can still get CPUs slower than it, after over 2 years, that's not bad.

 

True. The Donald called it right when he pointed out the P4 was rushed and didn't do a great job of replacing the P3 early on. That happens. Within the P4 family Intel made the similar error of having a Prescott that couldn't perform better than its predecessor. Only this time before they could improve the performance AMD came along and made the single cores obsolete as the basis for a performance system. Now the P4 as the performance Intel is gone as the developmental priority, or should be (think Conroe vapors). The P4 is still excellent for a lot of work and I don't see them disappearing in the immediate future. I don't think Intel needs to keep the Celerons now, unless they can put them in little game boxes for younger children. It's going to be interesting to see what happens the next couple of years.

 

Hmm, I just had an advert for a Celeron D from overclockers, one of my UK suppliers for £28.49+VAT working out at $59.78 in US money - that's the cheapest I've seen a processor since the time of the Duron after the Athlon64 3500+ had come out.

 

Intel made a classic business error, because they had such a huge share of the market they got too comfortable with what they had.

AMD has been beating Intel in the gaming market since the P3 days but they really started to challenge Intel when they were the first to break the 1 Ghz core speed. This forced Intel to rush their first P4 release which turned out to be even slower than the P3 before it. It wasn't long before Intel released the Northwood core and AMD released the Barton core. For video compression the Northwood won but for pushing frames in gaming the Barton core won so the one that you would buy depends on what you do, I was into video compression more than gaming so I went with the Northwood core.

Intel's next response to this was to lose their freaking minds (I suspect they were all on drugs)and release the Prescott core. To this day I don't know why they didn't just move the Northwood core to the 9.5 nm core size. That would have lowered voltage requirements, reduced the heat, and allowed for a higher clock speeds. That would have given them some time to begin working on a completely new design. But no they decided on anther brilliant strategy, add two Prescott's on a single chip and force them to share the same front side bus. As "Forrest Gump's" mom always said "stupid is as stupid does."

Intel deserves to be bashed because the alternative is to not pay attention and become obsolete. Does anyone remember when the Voodoo graphics cards were the first choice of enthusiasts?

 

And they're just a little pissed off about it too.


http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/27/technology/fastforward_fortune0427intel/?cnn=yes

 

valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Name</b></small></td><td><small>AMD Athlon 64 3700+</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Code Name</b></small></td><td><small>San Diego</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Specification</b></small></td><td><small>AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3700+</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Family / Model / Stepping</b></small></td><td><small>F 7 1</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Extended Family / Model</b></small></td><td><small>F 27</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Brand ID</b></small></td><td><small>4</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Package</b></small></td><td><small>Socket 939</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Core Stepping</b></small></td><td><small>SH-E4</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Technology</b></small></td><td><small>90 nm</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Supported Instructions Sets</b></small></td><td><small>MMX, Extended MMX, 3DNow!, Extended 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, x86-64</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>CPU Clock Speed</b></small></td><td><small>2704.9 MHz</small></td></tr>
<tr valign=top><td width=40%><small><b>Clock multiplier</b></small></td><td><small>x 11.0</small></td></tr>








Number of CPUs 1
APIC ID 0
Name AMD Athlon 64 3700+
Code name San Diego
Specification AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3700+
Family/Model/Stepping F71
Extended Family/Model F/27
Brand ID 4
Package Socket 939
Core Stepping SH-E4
Technology 90nm
Instructions Sets MMX, Extended MMX, 3DNow!, Extended 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, x86-64
Features NX
Clock Speed 2208.0 MHz
Clock multiplier x11.0
HTT Bus Frequency 200.7 MHz
P-Rating 3700+
L1 Data Cache 64 KBytes, 2-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
L1 Instruction Cache 64 KBytes, 2-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size

 

Sophocles is probably right; Gump rules Intel if they're just getting around to realizing that fact. LOL Seriously though, that's just business. A company never wants to admit they're second, even if they are. Intel would be more credible now if they were selling chips intead of "vapors".

 

@FIHSNERD
Was there some purpose to your post?

 

Brobear,

Beg Pardon!!! That's Ferarri and Pantera, if you please!!! One has his stardards!!

To All,
I ran into a little bit of a snag with my computer. Sometimes it just sits there with the Windows XP logo and the blue thing going across the slot. If I reset it and go into safe mode I try to do a system restore. the restore fails but the computer now works.

I've run a virus scan with my latest version of CA AntiVirus. Nothing! I've run the latest version of Spybot. Nothing!! I've run Ad-Aware, Tune-Up Utilities 2004, I've cleaned my registry. It still does it every couple of days. I go through the same routine and every time the problem comes back!

My old neighbor's Dell 3000 was so messed up that it would pop up 13 registry changes and "allow" them. It opens your firewall and turns off your Anti-Vurus. It also stops you from un-installing the Anti-Virus program and re-installing it. I did a complete system restore from my Acronis True Image 9 program and it still does the same thing.

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated because it sure has me stumped. my next step is to burn it down and start over. Use Eraser or Acronis 8 to wipe the drive and do a fresh install of XP Professional. Maybe even check the M.B.R.

Thanking you in advance,
theonejrs

 

brobear,
Don Brobear Corleone, I bow to you and your wisdom.lol
As Forest Gump would say... Thats all I have to say about that.

 

theonejrs , i would try "Highjackthis" and maybe a better virse scan program "Trend Mirco" being my choice

 

theonejr,

If you have an image saved then go ahead and reload from scratch to test the hardware. If it comes back then you'll have to chase down the offending component a piece at a time. When you figure out the hardware problem then load the previous image.

I would test the harddrive including surface scan. A bad spot will sometimes make it reboot.
Go into msconfig from the run line. Kill all the startup programs, keeping an eye out for anything out of place.

I have had a DVD drive keep XP from loading.
When it happens do you have to reimage to get it running again?

 

Has anyone noticed, Intel is already dropping prices again. A 930 dual core 218 dollars. A 950 for 358 dollars. They are giving away processors to get back at AMD. I wonder how long before AMD has to match the move.