[Mmmm]Sacrificial Lamb January 26, 2004 Share [Mmmm]Sacrificial Lamb Member January 26, 2004 Hey guys which cpu do you prefer AMD or Intels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullet-401 January 26, 2004 Share bullet-401 Member January 26, 2004 AMD The AMD 3200+ out performs the Intel Pentium 4 3.06 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 26, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 26, 2004 If you multitask get a Hyperthreaded p4. If you play games get AMD. If you play games while encoding Video go p4. If you want a future boost from 64 bit apps go AMD 64. If you want the fastest go AMD 64. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Kill3r January 26, 2004 Share All Kill3r Member January 26, 2004 (edited) AMD The AMD 3200+ out performs the Intel Pentium 4 3.06 rofl. 3.06 533mhz... just noticed that, nice comparison anyways. is that amd 3200 a Athlon64 or a Athlon XP ? heh guess it dont really matter because both are more expensive then a P42.8c coming from Intel, but AMD makes the cheap chips i thought. I think saying that Bullet is very misleading, sure it wins some benches, but not even close to all. I wouldnt trade my 2.8c intel cpu for a more expensive amd 3200+ whether it be XP or 64 Im having to much fun doing things with 3.66ghz speeds and at your rate you might see that in 3 years. Hey guys which cpu do you prefer AMD or Intels? What bird said. Really depends on what your going to be using it for. Edited January 26, 2004 by All Kill3r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mmmm]Homer January 26, 2004 Share [Mmmm]Homer Member January 26, 2004 Currently the AMD Athlon64 3000+ is the most bang for the buck. The P4 3.06ghz chip is old technology (533mhz FSB), not sure why it was mentioned here, although it does have HT (hyperthreading). All 800mhz FSB P4's have HT. In order of budget: 1. If your budget is extemely tight and you have less than 2ghz an AMD Barton (333mhz FSB chip) is a good option. 2500+/mobo (nForce2)/512mb RAM (2x256mb) = $221 2. Pentium 4 budget system: P4 2.6c (800mhz FSB)/mobo (865PE chipset)/(2x256mb) = $321 3. Athlon64 budget system: A64 3000+/mobo (SiS755 chipset)/512mb RAM = $391 Some benchmarks and review of current CPUs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 26, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 26, 2004 Homer has listed the top picks for anyone wanting something with some grunt to it. All his options would work fine in any computer I would build. Although if you’ve ever had an AMD tattoo on top of your head you may be tempted to rule out anything from the INTEL camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOFX January 27, 2004 Share NOFX Member January 27, 2004 If you multitask get a Hyperthreaded p4. If you play games get AMD. If you play games while encoding Video go p4. dont agree with you there. I went from OC 2500+ @3200+ to a P4 2.6@3.0Ghz. I get more FPS with the Intel and it doesnt bottleneck during gameplay. If the question is....Is the 70-80 bucks worth the extra 10-15 frames per second in Desert Combat? It your money, thats for you to decide... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 27, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 27, 2004 Its 70 bucks just for the processor. What mobo and Ram you gonna be using with that processor? The best N-force 2 overclocking board is 90 dollars at newegg. You only need PC 3200 ram for a 3200+ overclock and it doesnt have to be a matched pair. DOnt tell me your getting a 2.6 to 3.0 with generic 3200 ram like i am my 2500's. Bet that motherboard your using didnt cost 90 dollars either. so we are looking at more than a 70-80 dollar difference. ANd im not so sure that your 3.0 Ghz p4 could be a 2.2Ghz barton either. Got any benchmarks like super PI that your using? Something that is directly related to CPU? a 3000+ plus compares to a 2.8 Ghz p4 quite well. HArd to believe a 3.0 p4 can handily beat a 3200+. What kinda benchmarks were you using for Desert combat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 27, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 27, 2004 Please refer to the conclusion of this article before you reply. http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTU5LDg= Seems as if there is no increase whatsoever in FPS as you scale from 2.4-3.0Ghz with a midrange video card in actual gamepley. That goes for a wide range of games too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOFX January 27, 2004 Share NOFX Member January 27, 2004 (edited) Its 70 bucks just for the processor. What mobo and Ram you gonna be using with that processor? The best N-force 2 overclocking board is 90 dollars at newegg. You only need PC 3200 ram for a 3200+ overclock and it doesnt have to be a matched pair. DOnt tell me your getting a 2.6 to 3.0 with generic 3200 ram like i am my 2500's. Bet that motherboard your using didnt cost 90 dollars either. so we are looking at more than a 70-80 dollar difference. ANd im not so sure that your 3.0 Ghz p4 could be a 2.2Ghz barton either. Got any benchmarks like super PI that your using? Something that is directly related to CPU? a 3000+ plus compares to a 2.8 Ghz p4 quite well. HArd to believe a 3.0 p4 can handily beat a 3200+. What kinda benchmarks were you using for Desert combat? lets see.... I was using A7n8x-deluxe with my AMD 2500+ With my P4, Im not using generic ram. Im using Geil Ultra platinum PC 4200, but I dont think that made a whole lot of difference, and Im using a $85 Abit IS7 motherboard. I dont know what that article had to do with P4 vs AMD. seemed more like somethign directed toward Nvidias 5700. Im not using any benchmarks to test it. Im typing in console.showfps 1 in the console and checking it out. If i just spawn and am not moving Im locked on 100, never was I like that with my AMD. The Benchmarks I have that are CPU related are PCMark04. For the first setup, i have my 2500+ which normally runs on a 166 bus(333fsb) and I have it running at 210(420fsb) and im using dual channel PC3200 geil ram. General Information Operating System Microsoft Windows XP DirectX Version 9.0b Mobo Manufacturer ASUSTeK Computer INC. Mobo Model A7N8X AGP Rates (Current/Available) 8x / 4x, 8x CPU AMD Athlon™ Processor 2297 MHz Physical CPUs 1 HyperThreading Not Available FSB 210 MHz Memory 512 MB Display Information Graphics Chipset ATI RADEON 9700 PRO Driver Name RADEON 9700 PRO (Omega 2.4.78) Driver Version 6.14.10.6378 Video Memory 128 MB Core Clock 276 MHz Memory Clock 270 MHz Sound Information Sound Adapter Driver Name NVIDIA® nForce™ Audio Sound Adapter Driver Version 6.14.366.0 Hard Disk Information Model WDC WD400BB-00CAA1 Connection IDE Capacity 37.27 GB Benchmark Information Program Version PCMark04 Revision 0 Build 0 Main Test Results System Test Suite 4097 PCMarks Second setup is my P4 2.6c, 200bus(800 effective fsb) @3.2Ghz 245bus(980 effective) using PC4200 geil ultra platinum RAM General Information Operating System Microsoft Windows XP DirectX Version 9.0b Mobo Manufacturer http://www.abit.com.tw/ Mobo Model IS7/IS7-G/IS7-E(Intel i865-ICH5) AGP Rates (Current/Available) 8x / 4x, 8x CPU Intel Pentium 4 3189 MHz Physical CPUs 1 HyperThreading Available - 2 Logical Processors FSB 244 MHz Memory 512 MB Display Information Graphics Chipset ATI RADEON 9700 PRO Driver Name RADEON 9700 PRO Driver Version 6.14.10.6404 Video Memory 128 MB Core Clock 276 MHz Memory Clock 270 MHz Sound Information Sound Adapter Driver Name Creative Sound Blaster PCI Sound Adapter Driver Version 5.2.3633.0 Hard Disk Information Model WDC WD400BB-00CAA1 Connection IDE Capacity 37.27 GB Benchmark Information Program Version PCMark04 Revision 0 Build 0 Main Test Results System Test Suite 4876 PCMarks The only thing that changed in these test were the motherboard ram and processors. As you can see by my test results Intel beats AMD by a small margin. I can post direct links to those results if you like, but i can only do one at a time. All you need for a decent OC on a p4 is some PC3500 RAM and with a 5:4 ratio theres hardly any performance lose(compared to a 1:1 ratio @ 245 bus. The 865PE chipset is one of the best for P4, it came with my mobo and cost 5 dollars less than the cheapest AMD OC mobo also. Edited January 27, 2004 by NOFX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 27, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 27, 2004 pc 3500 ram is gonna cost you more than 3200 you are right. Im afraid you need to run some other actual game based benchmarks to test with. The point of the hardocp article is to show that with a midrange card the processor makes no difference in actual game play. If a 2.4 Ghz processor, whether its AMD or INtel, is as fast a 3.0Ghz one then why buy a more expensive processor for gaming. Your 70-80 dollar difference seems about 20 dollars off, depending on what kinda ram your gonna wanna use for a p4 system that your overclocking. So its more like 100 dollars difference. Thats 100 dollars more that can go towards a video card. To me that means AMD is better for gaming if I can save 100 dollars and put it towards a video card. Your testing methods for battlefield dont seem very reproducable or reliable. Show me some actual game benchmarks that arent canned to reflect your changes in setups. FRAPS is an excellent program to record sequences in games. Try that to see what changes in games. This is gonna require exact video card setttings on both runs. Make exact walkthroughs in different games and record your frames. Or get a benchmarking program like the one at the bottom of this page UT2k3 tester Run it at resolutions and settings that you would normally play with. I gotta see some hard proof from games that your intel setup is 15 frames faster and worthy of my 100 dollars. I dont think its gonna happen in any real world situation. By real world I mean games, not PC mark, 3dmark, or any other mark. Im talking Games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 27, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 27, 2004 "If i just spawn and am not moving Im locked on 100, never was I like that with my AMD" That could very well be related to your monitors refresh rate. I dont see how 100 FPS standing still is gonna benefit real gameplay either. Unless you play BF DC by standing at spawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOFX January 27, 2004 Share NOFX Member January 27, 2004 (edited) The point of the hardocp article is to show that with a midrange card the processor makes no difference in actual game play why do we have to be using midrange video cards? I dont see how 100 FPS standing still is gonna benefit real gameplay either. Unless you play BF DC by standing at spawn. I didnt say anything about benefiting, I just said I would get higher Frames per second with intel..My Amd could never hit 100. i dont care to show all those tests, I was just saying my opinon. I have tested both machines out. I ran PCMark and 3dmark on both machines. I played games on both machines. Not only that but I used the same video card in each machine. I used to wonder which was faster Intel or AMD, so I bought my AMD setup didnt like it exchanged for the intel. I know there was a definate increase in my frame per second in Eve of Destruction/ Desert Combat. Because I would always watch it when I played. I know for a fact I dont drop into the the 60's like I did with my amd setup. So im not tryin to prove anything, it would be impossible to prove intel is better. People are always debating which is better, AMD or Intel. Most of the people in the debate have probably never tried the others processor. I dont care about brand names. I want what gives me some power. Im an experianced builder/gamer and try to get the most out of my comp. I much prefer my Intel setup. I mean if your gettin a comp to just game on then I would go AMD all the way, but I wouldnt think I was getting a better gaming machine because I went with AMD instead of Intel. Edited January 27, 2004 by NOFX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mmmm]Homer January 27, 2004 Share [Mmmm]Homer Member January 27, 2004 NOFX, just a heads up for you: it will take a miracle before Birdman would accpet that Intel might be better than an AMD. your = you're Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 27, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 27, 2004 Alright. So throw out the fact that we were talking about midrange. Lets talk about Top of the line cards. ANy game that uses direct x 8 and 9 effects is not gonna benefit from a faster processor. Thats one point. Second. Ive tried several intel systems are they are excellent. I just dont think that you gained all that much performance in your games for 100 bucks. I may be wrong, but I think that in any newer game that p4 you have is gonna perform within 5 fps with a mid to upper range video card. I would rather buy a 9800 class card than a 9600 class card with my extra 100 dollars I saved getting an amd system. If one were to go intel they would be using a 9600 instead of a 9800 because they had to spend 100 dollars more on an intel CPU platform. In this case you have to believe AMD is better for games. WHY? becuase i got more gaming power for the same amount of money thats why. Even if you got an intel setup with a 9800(you're spending loads of cash) I dont think your gonna gain very much gaming performance at all. In games like UT2k3, Halo, Max Payne 2, Tomb Radider: AOD, Need for Speed: Underground, Call of Duty, XIII, and prolly farcry your not gonna see 15 FPS more on your intel system. Why? because new games are shader intensive(based on direct x 8 and 9) They are limited by your video card. AMD gets the job done in current and prolly future games too unless intel buys all the gaming companies. Intel will work(for more money) and AMD will also work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 27, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 27, 2004 You may have gained 15FPS in DC. Hard to believe that would be directly related to the AMD/Intel thingy though. Could be wrong. 60FPS wouldnt be all that bad on AMD would it I figure anything over bout 20 is playable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mmmm]Homer January 27, 2004 Share [Mmmm]Homer Member January 27, 2004 I don't necessarily disagree with you Birdman. But then for me the recent introduction of the A64 3000+ changed everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 27, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 27, 2004 True dat. It’s just that AMD gets treated like crap in the hardware industry. Gateway, Dell, and HP all pretty much refuse to help out AMD and still use crappy intel celerons in their lowend boxes even when a Duron or Athlon XP outperforms them by lots. ANd the durons and Xp's cost less than the celerons. That with the fact that IT peeps hate amd gets me fired up. When someone says intel flat beats a amd at something I want to have some facts cause most of the time people do buy intel because of Name and name alone. It's sad to see people buying cheap (overpriced) celeron computers that could be a much better value if they contained a duron. The p4 isnt the king of the hill in its class and other intel processors aren't either. AMDs are generally great for gaming and are almost always competitive in the price category. As for Overclocking AMd has recently become an overclocking star with their barton processor. Intel gets to much positive press for the things they do and AMD get too much negative. It's nice to see AMD come out with a great processor like the 64bit Athlon when you consider the fact that one mistake could make or break the company. Intel isn't slowing down, and they wouldn’t speed up any if it wasn’t for a company like AMD. You got to pull for the underdog and AMD is a underdog that produces great processors; so there’s no reason not to pull for them. I hope AMD can hang in there when Intel rolls out it new line in a couple days. AMD has the performance crown. They also have the best budget processors out. Im not gonna believe they are getting beat at something unless i see some actual game play numbers. Playing games is what I do. So im gonna love every day that AMD has a faster processor out than INtel becuase AMD is doing something that isnt at all easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 28, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 28, 2004 Anyone else like that picture besides me?^^^^ be awhile since the 286 eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mmmm]Homer January 28, 2004 Share [Mmmm]Homer Member January 28, 2004 Ummm, nice antique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdman January 28, 2004 Share Birdman Member January 28, 2004 (edited) Please note the AMD and Intel names on the same core(heatspreader really i suppose) Edited January 28, 2004 by Birdman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nut January 28, 2004 Share nut Member January 28, 2004 AMD Thinking about P4 eh? NuT- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
![[Mmmm]Sacrificial Lamb](https://gamrs.co/uploads/set_resources_5/84c1e40ea0e759e3f1505eb1788ddf3c_default_photo.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now