AMD Athlon 64 vs P4 3.2 GHz

[Idiot Racers]

Originally posted by darklegion_ca
This is why amd's suck ass there not even at 3 ghz and intel is at 3.2 ghz. And why does amd have to have such dumb numbers like 4000 now equals 3 ghz like wtf.

The numbers are there to represent what speed that the CPU would be if it was made by Intel, or another company.

The 3200 is equivalent to the 3.2GHz Intel CPU, yet it operates at 2.2GHz (according to CPU sites...), a full 1GHz less than the 3.2, but still outstrips the 3.2 by quite a distance.

Like Flez said, once AMD bring out the 64 bit apps, Intel is gonna be left in the corner wondering what the fark just happened...

 

[Solid Fro]

Originally posted by darklegion_ca
This is why amd's suck ass there not even at 3 ghz and intel is at 3.2 ghz. And why does amd have to have such dumb numbers like 4000 now equals 3 ghz like wtf.

darklegion: go take a computer class at a local college, you need help badly.

AMD designs their CPUs differently from Intel so much that AMD chips can process more data per cycle than an Intel chip can. Intel would rather increase the clock speed and process less data, but more quickly.

Since the uninformed public (that means you darklegion) is not aware of this, AMD created a PR rating to show what their chips are equal to if compared to an Intel chip. For example: an AMD Athlon XP 1.67 GHz with a PR rating of 2000+ is equal or better to an Intel Pentium 4 2.0 GHz.

Intel might win the speed contest now, but in the long run, AMD will win. Intel is running out of room to clock the Pentium 4 and has now resorted to adding a L3 cache to the P4 EE (Extremely Expensive ). While AMD can freely up the clock speeds on their new Athlon 64 chips.

 

[Shannon]

Originally posted by darklegion_ca
This is why amd's suck ass there not even at 3 ghz and intel is at 3.2 ghz. And why does amd have to have such dumb numbers like 4000 now equals 3 ghz like wtf.

Edit: Viper Zero beat meto the punch. Read his post above.

Originally posted by Viper Zero
Since the uninformed public (that means you darklegion) is not aware of this, AMD created a PR rating to show what their chips are equal to if compared to an Intel chip. For example: an AMD Athlon XP 1.67 GHz with a PR rating of 2000+ is equal or better to an Intel Pentium 4 2.0 GHz.

Where can I find this PR rating VZ?

 

[Idiot Racers]

Originally posted by Viper Zero

Since the uninformed public (that means you darklegion) is not aware of this, AMD created a PR rating to show what their chips are equal to if compared to an Intel chip. For example: an AMD Athlon XP 1.67 GHz with a PR rating of 2000+ is equal or better to an Intel Pentium 4 2.0 GHz.

I beat you to the punch (as Shannon said) on this one.

BUT I agree with everything you've said.

 

[Flerbizky]

Originally posted by darklegion_ca
This is why amd's suck ass there not even at 3 ghz and intel is at 3.2 ghz. And why does amd have to have such dumb numbers like 4000 now equals 3 ghz like wtf.

Ohh do take your piss elsewhere fckstick

If Intel is so great, just answer this question:

Why does a 2.2Ghz AMD beat a P4 running at 3.2Ghz ?....

That's what I thought............ ​

 

[Flerbizky]

Originally posted by Idiot Racers
Like Flez said, once AMD bring out the 64 bit apps, Intel is gonna be left in the corner wondering what the fark just happened...

Heh - If the 64 bit apps were up to AMD I'm sure they would've been here at the launch of the 64 : Unfortunately, at the moment we're all (as usual) waiting for M$.. Most HW manufacturing companys have their 64 bit drivers available, now we just need an OS
.....(unless you wanna do Linux)

 

[Pako]

Isn't there currently a 64-bit MSOS available? I could have swarn that there was....for their dual XEON 64-bit processors on the market...., then again, maybe I'm just tired and should just get some sleep.

 

[Pako]

My bad...but it looks like there's a beta out:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/sep03/09-23Athlon64BetaPR.asp

 

[Flerbizky]

Originally posted by Pako
Isn't there currently a 64-bit MSOS available? I could have swarn that there was....for their dual XEON 64-bit processors on the market...., then again, maybe I'm just tired and should just get some sleep.

A Xeon 64 bit processor ?.. That would be the Itanium, and the Itanium M$OS (Server 2003) isn't compatible with anything but the Itanium since it travels another path than the X86 processors...

But yes - Overnet will get you a beta of the 64 bit version of Longhorn but that's another story

 

[Idiot Racers]

Originally posted by Flerbizky
Heh - If the 64 bit apps were up to AMD I'm sure they would've been here at the launch of the 64 : Unfortunately, at the moment we're all (as usual) waiting for M$.. Most HW manufacturing companys have their 64 bit drivers available, now we just need an OS

Ohh, damn. Sorry. It was 4:31AM, I was tired, wondering why I was on the net in the first place.

.....(unless you wanna do Linux)

SPEAKING of Linux, whatever happened to RadHats you dumbz3r arsehat?

 

[Solid Fro]

Originally posted by Shannon
Where can I find this PR rating VZ?

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/athlon_64-13.html

If you have an AMD processor, you can right click on My Computer > Properties > Under the compute name, it should say the PR number and the clock speed.

 

[Shannon]

Originally posted by Viper Zero
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/athlon_64-13.html

If you have an AMD processor, you can right click on My Computer > Properties > Under the compute name, it should say the PR number and the clock speed.

That's nice, but how to a find out what the Intel equivalent is?

 

[Solid Fro]

The PR number is the Intel equivalent.

AMD 2000+ = Intel 2.0 GHz (2000 MHz)

 

[Shannon]

Originally posted by Viper Zero
The PR number is the Intel equivalent.

AMD 2000+ = Intel 2.0 GHz (2000 MHz)

Oh, so my Athlon XP 2000+ is the equivalent to a 2ghz P4? Coolies.

 

[Pako]

Originally posted by Viper Zero
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/athlon_64-13.html

If you have an AMD processor, you can right click on My Computer > Properties > Under the compute name, it should say the PR number and the clock speed.

So there you have it, P4 3.2 "EE" wins, but not by much, and they only win if cost is not a concern. There's no doubt that the best bang for the buck will be AMD, it has always been and will always be the case.

 

[Idiot Racers]

Originally posted by Shannon
Oh, so my Athlon XP 2000+ is the equivalent to a 2ghz P4? Coolies.

MATE - how many times have I told you this exact same thing on MSN?

 

[Shannon]

Originally posted by Idiot Racers
MATE - how many times have I told you this exact same thing on MSN?

I thought you were meant that 2000+ meant the clock speed of the actuall processor itself, not the Intel counterpart. And that's why I didn't understand what you were talking about.

 

[Special]

Just put it this way, if AMD and Intel were running at the same MHz AMD would be way out of Intel's league. The reason most p4's are somewhat faster is because AMD is running at almost 1GHz less, if they were evenly matched MHz for MHz Intel would be much slower like a Civic vs a Corvette.

 

[Solid Fro]

and because the P4 ran at 400, 533, and 800 MHz FSB, while AMD struggled to bring Athlon XP past 266 MHz FSB.

 

[emad]

athlon 64 because almost all high end graphics apps are coded for 64 bit architecture or will soon be. So this, for me, will be the obvious choice since i love gaming and i do a lot of artwork. Also, my parents run a print shop and the athlon at the time i put their pc together, had the best graphic arts benchmarks. (first gen Athlon Xp 1900+).

That being said, i've run 3d apps under 64 bit athlons, and believe me, it is the holy grail of graphic machines . I'm planning on dropping one into the next pc i get (probably this coming summer or the winter after)