Athlon Xp 3000+ Vs. P4 3.06 Ghz

[Lamsey]

Microsoft wrights for the newest intell chips insturtsion set hence the name "wintel"
all AMD prossers are redesighins of the newest intell prosser

Lies.

Windows XP was written using AMD Athlon-based computers.

And AMD designs are just compatible with Intel x86 chips - the architecture is totally different (more efficient but unable to reach such high clock speeds).


And AMD are now just as reliable as Intel CPUs - they'll only burn out if you don't set your cooler up correctly (or even use the wrong kind).

[Xanex]

AMD designs are just compatible with Intel x86 chips - the architecture is totally different (more efficient but unable to reach such high clock speeds

If i remember my a-level computing, *86 chips are the generic name since Intel was practically the only chip manufacturer for major desktops Pc's back in the late 80's.

AMD never called there chips anything to do with *86 yet people called them that because they compared their power with such.

AMD used to take what intel did with their chips and look at the problem in a different way, and thus producing chips that where faster, more effiecient and more cost effective.

Now AMD are starting to use their own brains and come up with their own ideas, Intel effectivly did all the development for AMD, AMD just took it further and improved the "BASIC" design - they still had to make the chip *86 based or it would not work with windows, AMD used "hindsight" to beat Intel. Since AMD are thinking for themselves a bit more (baring in mind that AMD is relitivly new company compared to Intel) the chips are slighty more expensive in relation to previouse chips because AMD now do more development for them selves.

Windows XP was written using AMD Athlon-based computers

aye, that much is true, but the older versions of windows, when AMD was Cyrix before the merger, win 98 and the latter were done on Intel chips, i noticed that earlier versions of windows run slighty better on intel chips rather than amd's. remember the win2k patch that they had to release for the athlon t-bird.

its the same all over the world, a chinese cpu company (i think) has been working on their own *86 based chips, they call it the dragon (??) it now has the power of a p2 500 , they did it to make their econamy safer against american domination of the cpu industry. most of their government servers and some home pc's run these chips and from what i hear they are better than the amd and intel equivelents, that goes to show if you walk in someone elses shoes you can see where they went wrong. amd did that with intel and now the dragon does it with amd and intel

Xan

[imported_The__One]

Well, everywhere I go, i see ppl saying that Athlon is way cheaper then intel....then how come the prices on PriceWatch, wich r always the cheapest possible (in my experience), of the Athon XP 3000 and the Intel P4 3.06 Ghz r 'bout the same?

ps: personally I prefer the Pentium, as I have owned pentiums ever since the 186 to the P4 (186, 286, 486, P1, P2, P3 and P4), including several laptops with pentiums...and have always been perfectly satisfied

[Supernatural]

People who say "Athlon owns Intel" are just biased and ignorant. It's a fact that Intel dominates the chip-making industry, yet AMD ownz? That does not make much sense. It's true that athlon chips outperform similarily clocked Intel chips, but look at the price difference. Compare the price between the Athlon 3000+ (2.1Ghz) to a Pentium 4 2.2 Ghz. HUGE difference. So you can't say "Athlon is faster" while saying "Athlon is cheaper" at the same time. That is gross manipulation.

[Xanex]

You also cant compare the prices between the 2 chips you have mentiond.

The fact being that the amd 3000 is meant to be the equivelent of the intel p4 3ghz HT chip.

compare them like they are supposed to be compared and you will see that amd are cheaper by far.

and you still have the blatent fact that a slow chip keeps up with the faster (in terms of ghz) p4

if amd made a 3ghz chip then the p4 3ghz ht chip would be eating the athlons dust.

its a shame people cant do simple maths.

amd fastest chip = 2.1ghz
intel fastest chip = 3.2ghz HT

amd can still outperform and keep up with a faster clocked chip. FACT benchmarks proove it. users proove it.

the basic underlying thing is intel have made a sloppy chip so that they have room to make it have these high clock speeds. the internal design of the p4 means it can be developed quicker at the expense of real bare bones speed.

amd spend their time making the athlon efficient, and why shouldnt they, they show that you dont need higher clock speeds to have a faster chip.

Ghz is not everything

i have a athlon 1ghz cpu, compare that to a p3 1ghz and the athlon outperforms it but not by much.

now take the p4 3ghz chip, it has been found that due to the chip archtectue it IS NOT 3 times faster than my 1ghz athlon nor is it 3x's faster than their 1ghz p3.

the amd 2.1ghz chip (3000+) IS more than 2.8x's as fast as either of those 1ghz chips, yet it only clocks at 2ghz.

sadly the further we go up the ghz range the lower this becomes, if we go the intel way their 5ghz chip will only be more like 3.76 times faster than my 1ghz chip, but because amd are making the chip more efficient at its speed (rather than trying to fool the noobie pc user that ghz means faster) the amd way will be closer to 4.5 times as fast, until then or some other architecture comes along then this is how it will be.

Xan

[Schmiggy_JK23]

Well said!

And that is the story... that is why intel chips cost more, they have continued pushing in the ghz race.... becomming bloated in price/cost concept, where as amd has made their chips more efficent, better use of clock cycles, and thus... you dont have to pay for a 533mhz bus... because the amd is right on par with it... and cheaper.

[Supernatural]

Well, I don't care what anyone thinks. If I was to choose between P4 3.06 and XP3000+, I would go with Pentium 4. It's actually CHEAPER, contrary to popular belief (only by a few bucks, though).

[Xanex]

Choose the chip u feel rocks ur world, im an amd bloke myself for i see the true way a chip should be made. efficient NOT faster.
its like smaking a rock 10 times a second with a feather rather than hiting it once with a hammer. (no pun - athlon 64 lol)

the amd 3000 and p4 3ghz - amd ARE cheaper , i dont know where u do ur shopping.

+ have u seen the size of the p4's dye? its huge the chip itself is huge, while the athlon is still socket A. bigger dye size = more cost, cos u get few chips outta the wafer, and more chips are prone to flaws in the dye.

the only reason i can say that the amd chip took a jump in price is because the dye has increased to make room for the larger L1 and L2 cache and bus stuff.


going back to the scale thing (3 ghz chip not being faster than a 3x's 1ghz chip) number of instructions per clock cycle is what causes this flaw, the p4 may have a bigger bus, but it needs that to cope with the lack of L1 and L2 cache + the lack of instructions/sec the p4 can do, the athlon does more per cycle so doesnt need the bigger bus as the p4 with its smaller bus is stunted and cant breathe

there is some calculation i can do with Hz and IPCS (inst' per clok cyc) and bus speed but it late right now and i foget

Xanex

[Supernatural]

Pricewatch has the P4 3.06 cheaper by a few bucks. That's probably cause it's been out longer.

[Ad]

AMD the best no question about it intel runs okay but to expensive and u cant clock it like amd