P4 vs. Atom

July 16, 2010 at 01:22:41
Specs: Windows 7 x64, Dual-core Opteron 185 @ 3.2GHz, 4GB
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews...

Interesting little article. Either the Atom isn't that bad, or the P4 really sucks.

Overall:
Atom D510 (1.66 dual)>>>P4-3200>>>P4-2200>>>Atom 230 (1.60 single)

IMHO, they should've included an unlocked PIII-S overclocked to 1.8GHz, just to further humiliate the 2.2GHz P4. :-)

HTPC | Pentium M @ 2.82GHz, 2MB L2) | 4GB | 1.0TB | Radeon HD5750
Blu-Ray | Win7 Pro | HDMI out to Onkyo TX-SR707


See More: P4 vs. Atom

Report •


#1
July 16, 2010 at 01:32:46
The P4 really sucks...

Skip
Audares Juvo


Report •

#2
July 16, 2010 at 13:22:58
I thought so.

HTPC | Pentium M @ 2.82GHz, 2MB L2) | 4GB | 1.0TB | Radeon HD5750
Blu-Ray | Win7 Pro | HDMI out to Onkyo TX-SR707


Report •

#3
July 16, 2010 at 15:23:35
The 4 cores of the atom give it too big of an advantage, the results would be quite similar with the athlon xp of the same era. Tests should have been done with only one core to get a truer comparison. When the northwood core came out intel and amd were very close in performance...now price...thats another story

Report •

Related Solutions

#4
July 16, 2010 at 16:07:29
"The 4 cores of the atom give it too big of an advantage"

Huh? There is no quad-core Atom. The tests were done using a single core & dual core Atom. And the numbers speak for themselves - the P4 sucks!


Report •

#5
July 16, 2010 at 17:05:09
"When the northwood core came out intel and amd were very close in performance...now price...thats another story"

1. An AMD 2200+ would embarrass a Northwood 2.2. Close to 20% faster overall.

2. The AMD chip was only slightly less expensive when they were new.

3. My 2ยข says an Athlon XP 2200+ would make a much better showing against the Atom D510 and make the Atom 230 want to hide under a rock.

Skip
Audares Juvo


Report •

#6
July 16, 2010 at 18:09:26
2 cores and hyperthreading give 4 logical cores and yes it is a BIG advantage
The p4 had a huge clockspeed advantage over the athlon at the time and the top end parts vere very close in performance in april 2002 athlon 1733mhz and the p4 was 2.53. The 2200+ was not out when the 2.2 northwood was available.These chips were very close in performance. Am i saying the p4 is a good chip...NO
I am saying the tested was biased

Report •

#7
July 16, 2010 at 19:41:39
It was not biased...they tested two versions of two crappy processors.

"2 cores and hyperthreading give 4 logical cores and yes it is a BIG advantage"

But remember that the P4-C is also hyperthreaded, and at 3.2GHz, it's running at twice the clock speed. The fact that Atom won means that it is actually faster per clock cycle than the 800MHz FSB P4.

HTPC | Pentium M @ 2.82GHz, 2MB L2) | 4GB | 1.0TB | Radeon HD5750
Blu-Ray | Win7 Pro | HDMI out to Onkyo TX-SR707


Report •

#8
July 17, 2010 at 20:29:31
It's all about architecture. Even the Atom 230 single core puts up a fight against the P4 2.2ghz which is 600mhz faster then the Atom 230.

Just like my Core i7 720qm on my laptop. for as slow as the clock speed is @ 1.6ghz it rivals that of a Core 2 Quad Q6600 running @ 2.4ghz and consumes less power.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-...

Iron Sharpens Iron.


Report •

Ask Question