I would say a Pentium, there very good for multitasking but AMD's are good for gaming. I would say get a Pentium but if you like your games get a AMD. This is only my opinion others may say different.
I would say yes, 3500 means it's as good as a P4 3.5ghz as far as i know you cant get a 3.5 p4 for under £200.
i personally would choose p4 P4 Processor 640 3.2 GHz 200 MHz 2 MB £155 or pay little more and get P4 Processor 650 3.4 GHz 200 MHz 2 MB £228 reviewed here.. http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050221/prescott-11.html
Business/General Use - Athlon 64 3200+ Multitasking Content Creation - Tie Video Creation/Editing and Photoshop - Athlon 64 3200+ Audio/Video Encoding - Pentium 4 530 Gaming - Athlon 64 3200+ 3D Rendering with 3dsmax - Pentium 4 530 Workstation Performance - Athlon 64 3200+ Seems Like The amd is the best
Hurrahh! im not the only person on the planet who thinks this, it was totally overhyped for nothing AMD blew it away with sheer raw performance yet again. I built a system with a P4 to see what beast hyperthreading would unleash i was bitterly dissappointed to have a large hole in my pocket and with the crippled machine i had created. I was looking for a raging grizzly but instead presented with one of those stupid little sprite monster things. P4 =
A lot of people still to this day think P4's are better than AMD's and people are a bit naive in thinking this [bold]but millions of people out there don't know a thing about computers never mind the architecture of a CPU.[/bold] I too was loured into the whole Pentium 4 thing as you can tell by my user name but i know AMD's are better but i still prefer Intel, Pentiums are good for certain things over a AMD BUT there pretty much useless for everything else compared to the almighty AMD
The intel hyperthreading is a brilliant (IMHO) implementation and a decent way to counter AMD in producing chips that are more efficient per clock. AMD can only hope that as more parallel multithread applications are written for the many-core cpus, their chips remain efficient enough. On the flip side AMD should have some Mhz headroom in order to keep clocking over the processing speeds of the P4's (not 1 for 1 Mhz) I still say AMD are better because they are still packing the punches with cooler (more energy efficiency), fast chips. The majority of athlons overclock hundreds of Mhz's without numerical instability.
Quote; "just could you tell me which would be the fastest" It just not as simple as that, IIRR. AMD is the best for gaming. But gaming performance is ENTIRELY dictated by your graphics card. As long as you have at least a 2.5gig processor, you would be OK. Also I would lose the slight attitude in gleaning info from us all! A 3500 Athlon or a dual core would be nice. Depends on your budget. Pulsar
I dont think you get it... he asked what is the fastest on range price of $200. In my opnion, you should get AMD in any range price, cause it already proved that is the best processor around... no question about! I was reading a magazine the other day and even Pentium said that AMD have the fastest processor, saing that they have the best (Pentium4)processor in durability.
Quote; " dont think you get it... " Really? Which part. You can get a 3500Athlon for less than £200 at overclockers. Or the part explaining the intricasies of why it is just not only about numbers? Please explain! Pulsar
Dude just get the best AMD processor you can buy with yours $200, i spent $800 on my 64 FX and it is jaw droping, i had previus Pentium and AMD on laptop and i can say for own experience you wont go wrong with a AMD(best choise).
