Computing.Net > Forums > CPUs/Overclocking > You know what is sad?

You know what is sad?

Reply to Message Icon

Original Message
Name: Cobra_R
Date: February 26, 2005 at 01:59:08 Pacific
Subject: You know what is sad?
OS: Windows XP Pro
CPU/Ram: AMD Athlon 64 3000+/1gb D
Comment:

You know what is sad? When the AMD Athlon 3000+ 64 939 processor with 512k cache that is 100 dollars less, out benchmarks the Intel Pentium 4 EM64T GHz processor with 2mb of cache in gaming. I went to 10 diff benchmark testing sites and they all pretty much have the same results.

On the up side for Intel. The Intel Pentium 4 EM64T processors beats AMD Athlon 64 939 processors in multimedia applications, but I wasn't surprised by that since Intel always fairs better just area. But of course the reason why Intel scores higher in the multimedia area is because of the higher cache levels compared to AMD's.

If AMD 64's had 2mb of cache on them just like the new Intel EM64T's along with DDR-2, then Intel would get spanked in every benchmarks area, but then again AMD's prices would be as cheap as they are now.

As for the newer Intel Pentium 4 Extreme processors and the new AMD FX55 processors, the results are pretty much the same as the mainstream processors when it comes to comparing the two in gaming and multimedia apps.

Intel is good for multimedia apps and AMD is good for gaming. So if you are into gaming AMD all the way. If you are into multimedia stuff then go with an Intel.

Personally I prefer AMD more then Intel simply because I'm more into gaming and graphics then I am into multimedia stuff.


Report Offensive Message For Removal


Response Number 1
Name: CPU
Date: February 26, 2005 at 22:54:07 Pacific
Reply: (edit)

I agree, not to mention Intel does not run at the specified speed which I find rather interesting considering the FSB, Clock Speed, and L2 Cache are way higher on Intels. What's up with that?

Anyways, AMD all day long for me. Whether I'm gaming running multimedia or what have you.


Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal

Response Number 2
Name: Cobra_R
Date: February 27, 2005 at 00:05:00 Pacific
Reply: (edit)

Yeah You are right they don't run on the same exact speed that they post on the chips and what is really funny is they stll run hot. Even Though the new intel Pentium 4 6xx series runs cooler then the Intel Pentium 4 5xx series they still run hotter then AMD 64 939 processors. The new Intel Pentium 4 6xx series runs as about as hot as the old AMD 64 754 processors. This pretty much shows you how Intel has fallen behind AMD where they used to be ahead in these types of areas. I remember when AMD's used to run hotter then Intel's and now it's the complete opposite.



Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal







Use following form to reply to current message:

   Name: From My Computing.Net Settings
 E-Mail: From My Computing.Net Settings

Subject: You know what is sad?

Comments:

 


  Homepage URL (*): 
Homepage Title (*): 
         Image URL: 
 
Data Recovery Software




Have you ever used OpenOffice?

Yes, as my main suite.
Yes, occationally.
Yes, but only once.
No, never.


View Results

Poll Finishes In 3 Days.
Discuss in The Lounge