StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Discuss

The old aurgment was Value VS Power

In a sense thats still true as the latest and greatest P4s are more powerful than the latest and great AMD chips however not by much(5-20% for 2-4x The Cost)

Mr Bean wrote:The old aurgment was Value VS Power

In a sense thats still true as the latest and greatest P4s are more powerful than the latest and great AMD chips however not by much(5-20% for 2-4x The Cost)

There's also some issues with architechture and its ability to deal with heat, etc. However I still think that for the buck your best bet is AMD.

*Argh forgot the heat issue, Thats the other things, Tradtionaly Intel Chips are the only way to go for mobile computing

Intel has the fastest processor at the moment. It is very expensive, however. AMD has more bang for the buck, as Greg said.

I'm waiting for Prescott and Hammer to come out - that will be interesting.

Indeed, that one will be intresting

I'm also waiting for PPC970 to come out - that looks like an interesting processor.

I'm also waiting for PPC970 to come out

Hmm is that another of Motorals?

I know there ARE some intresting CPUs out there such as a VIA 2.0GHTZ Chip designed to be sold for less than $50 in March

IIRC, that chip you're talking about is a revision of the C3, right? Not a bad chip, though slower than either the P4 or K7 at that clock speed.

PPC970 is an IBM chip. It is a derivative of POWER4.

Ahh, I have not seen anything from IBM for awhile

Mr Bean wrote:Ahh, I have not seen anything from IBM for awhile

http://arstechnica.com/cpu/02q2/ppc970/ppc970-1.html

due to the architecture of AMD chips, they are superior. the heat thing is an issue, but they don't really slag out after just a few seconds of the fan not being on, i've had the fan fail on my 1100 more times than i can remember, including the time it crapped out entirely during a lanparty playing UT, it took me about 4 hours before i got around to figuring out what that awful klaxon was for (overheat alarm), mind you the room temp was nearly 100F, 6 people, 8 comps, no windows open, no ventilation. i didn't even have a crash, i just waited till the round was over (was server), then shut down UT to fix the sound and it wouldn't shut up, so i turned it off, turned it back on, and it did it again right away, then i checked the bios, 218F was the chip temp with the board temp at 167F. obviously i shut it down and popped the top to check WTF was going on. the fan had been completely stopped by the cathair and dust in it, the fan was actually slagged (the things burn up if they don't turn), so i blew all the crap out of the heatsink fins, pulled a fan out of an old p90's p/s, slapped it on the side, turned the comp back on and finished the lanparty with that jury rigging. i replaced the fan and heatsink when i got home. i've had no problems with the comp as a result of it.

then there's the dude down the street with a p3-750, he's slagged like 3 chips already, all because of fan failure, the chips go sky high after just a couple minutes.

points of interest on AMD vs intel procs: AMD chips clock in lower than intel, but have more raw processing power, better multitasking (when was the last time you ran 6 exploder windows, 4 YM windows, 8 ICQ windows, 5 assorted trillian (AIM/MSN) windows, winamp, an add blocker, firewall, UT (windowed), AND lightwave on a 1280x1024 render with full AA. and NOT have the machine run worse than a 386 and/or crash out entirely. for me this is routene running, and yes, the framerate on UT at 800x600x32 is quite playable with that loadout, and yes, it was an internet game, the MP3's were not skipping either.)
granted intel chips clock in MUCH higher than AMD chips, but on most RL app tests (not benchmarking) the AMD at half the speed will easially give the intel a run for it, if not actually outperform it on speed. this is my experience at least.

Hyperion wrote: (when was the last time you ran 6 exploder windows, 4 YM windows, 8 ICQ windows, 5 assorted trillian (AIM/MSN) windows, winamp, an add blocker, firewall, UT (windowed), AND lightwave on a 1280x1024 render with full AA. and NOT have the machine run worse than a 386 and/or crash out entirely. for me this is routene running, and yes, the framerate on UT at 800x600x32 is quite playable with that loadout, and yes, it was an internet game, the MP3's were not skipping either.)

With the exception of LW and UT, most of the threads behind all those windows will be blocked 99% of the time will use very little CPU time. They might as well not be there as far as CPU performance is concerned. Running a huge number of largely idle programs simultainously is a test of memory quantity (as in, do you have enough memory to keep the system working set in RAM or will the system trash) rather than a test of processor performance.

Well, my max stress load wasn't quite as high, but...

Photoshop 6, Word+PowerPoint 2000, Acrobat Distiller, IE6, Mozilla 1.0, AIM, Folding@home, SSH Client, OpenSSH Server, XP Pro IIS. That's on my AXP 1.53GHz.

I've put our P4 that doubles as a server under a similar load and it runs like a champ.

phongn wrote:Well, my max stress load wasn't quite as high, but...

Photoshop 6, Word+PowerPoint 2000, Acrobat Distiller, IE6, Mozilla 1.0, AIM, Folding@home, SSH Client, OpenSSH Server, XP Pro IIS. That's on my AXP 1.53GHz.

I've put our P4 that doubles as a server under a similar load and it runs like a champ.

Have i mentioned recently that I hate you guys. I'm still running a 400 K6-2 that I built in '99.

CmdrWilkens wrote:

phongn wrote:Well, my max stress load wasn't quite as high, but...

Photoshop 6, Word+PowerPoint 2000, Acrobat Distiller, IE6, Mozilla 1.0, AIM, Folding@home, SSH Client, OpenSSH Server, XP Pro IIS. That's on my AXP 1.53GHz.

I've put our P4 that doubles as a server under a similar load and it runs like a champ.

Have i mentioned recently that I hate you guys. I'm still running a 400 K6-2 that I built in '99.

sell ya my old graphics workstation, it's based on the AMD K6-2 450/512/133 pretty nice little setup, still flies and can do halfway decent against even my main system. and yes, i am serious it's for sale, if you're interested, just ask for specs, i'm looking at $350 for it as it stands now.

Hyperion wrote:

CmdrWilkens wrote: Have i mentioned recently that I hate you guys. I'm still running a 400 K6-2 that I built in '99.

sell ya my old graphics workstation, it's based on the AMD K6-2 450/512/133 pretty nice little setup, still flies and can do halfway decent against even my main system. and yes, i am serious it's for sale, if you're interested, just ask for specs, i'm looking at $350 for it as it stands now.

Thanks but not really interested, I'm curretnly shopping for new board/chip deals online because my vid-card, hard drive, burner, and sound card are all good enough (for me) to get me through the next couple years. The main thing is I need a new motherbaord, chip, and memory...that's it.

This computer is using the the third AMD chip I've had. What was the original computer was an AMD 400, and I sold it to the place I work at and it still runs strong. My Dad's uses an AMD 1.3 processor and it has no problems. (Except it runs Windows XP and I really just don't like it. ) This one runs an XP 1700+ AMD with Windows 98 OS and it's running everything I have thrown at it. I figure I will upgrade again and either get an AMD 2.5 processor or whatever is faster that will fit my motherboard. I didn't really have a problem with the Intel chips, but considering the AMDs are not only cheaper, but are bitchin' then it doesnt matter.

Intel's about 6 months ahead of AMD as far as architechure goes. AMD is pushing the limits of their .18 micron die, whereas Intel has perfected their .13 micron die, and they have a .09 micron die in the works. But Hammer should catch them up quite nicely.

Alferd Packer wrote:Intel's about 6 months ahead of AMD as far as architechure goes. AMD is pushing the limits of their .18 micron die, whereas Intel has perfected their .13 micron die, and they have a .09 micron die in the works. But Hammer should catch them up quite nicely.

IIRC Athlon is already on the .13 die and has been for a while now.

Indeed the .18 Capped out with the 1400MHTZ Chips

intel it seems is behind the times...

Alferd Packer wrote:Intel's about 6 months ahead of AMD as far as architechure goes. AMD is pushing the limits of their .18 micron die, whereas Intel has perfected their .13 micron die, and they have a .09 micron die in the works. But Hammer should catch them up quite nicely.

Who cares? All that matters is results. Right now, the P4 can push more data faster than the Athlon, but on pure number-crunching FPU power, the Athlon still wins. Those are results. Everything else is noise.

CmdrWilkens wrote:

Alferd Packer wrote:Intel's about 6 months ahead of AMD as far as architechure goes. AMD is pushing the limits of their .18 micron die, whereas Intel has perfected their .13 micron die, and they have a .09 micron die in the works. But Hammer should catch them up quite nicely.

IIRC Athlon is already on the .13 die and has been for a while now.

Ach so! My bad, sorry.

phongn wrote: Photoshop 6, Word+PowerPoint 2000, Acrobat Distiller, IE6, Mozilla 1.0, AIM, Folding@home, SSH Client, OpenSSH Server, XP Pro IIS. That's on my AXP 1.53GHz.

Again, most of that stuff is going to be spending %99 of its time blocked on network IO or user input. All you're really testing here is if you have enough memory to keep all that stuff in RAM withou thrashing. For a real test of CPU multitasking abilities, run six or seven distributed computing clients (e.g. Folding@Home, SETI@Home, etc, etc, etc) at once.


(Currently running Mozilla, 3x 4NT prompts, Seti@Home, Squid, XNews, Mercury, Delegate, WebWasher, Roundup, FreeAmp, Enternet PPPoE & Win2K's OS overhead on a 400MHz Celeron w/ 384MB. Since virtually everything is spending most of its time blocked performance is just fine....)