CPU comparison


Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: CPU comparison

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,021

    CPU comparison

    Hi folks,

    AMD vs Intel

    I have been searching information on performance comparison of 64 bit CPUs from the captioned makers. Some folks hold opinion that AMD performs better than Intel. Others prefer Intel. I'm targeting on comparing following CUPs of same clock speed.

    AMD Athlon 64 socket 939 single core
    vs
    Intel P4 socket 775


    AMD Athlon 64 X2 socket 939 dual core
    vs
    Intel P4D socket 775 dual core

    Could you please shed me some light, their advantage and disadvantage. Does AMD support DDR2? TIA

    B.R.
    satimis

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    3,199
    You might want to check out some sites like http://www.anandtech.com/, and http://www.tomshardware.com to get some more detailed information. You can't really compare the chips clock-for-clock, because their architectures are vastly different now. They do the same things, mind you, it's just those implementations of the tasks are different.
    Registered Linux user #230403! Since March 2001! YAY.

    Try doing a forum search or a google search before asking a question. And please don't use HELP! in the topic of your post... it's so lame... Please don't PM me for help-- post a question in the forum instead.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Transplanted from beautiful La Quinta, CA to Long Beach, CA...there are no stars here at night!
    Posts
    1,240
    When we were comparing AMD -vs- intel (where such comparisons were easier to do) AMD usually came-out miles ahead in terms of microcode execution efficiency.

    In other words, clock-for-clock, AMD ran faster.

    The times have changed, and Alex is quite correct: Check things out first. (Overclockers and hardocp are good wanders in search of info.)

    One can select code extensions and optimizations which will make the 'other' uP look like garbage; while making the favored uP look like the solution to the problem of world peace and faster than light speed travel.

    At any rate, if you're asking for worthless opinions...I have stuck with AMD since the days of the '88/86/V20/V30' simply because I know the product; and, for what I do, it's usually best for ME.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Augusta, GA
    Posts
    5,461
    Right now, as of today, the AMD X2 3800+ (dual processor) runs around $295. It is widely viewed as the most "bang for the buck". Or if you are not playing games and do not need real fast frontside bus speed, the Pentium D(ual) 805 is $126 is a good deal and has decent perfromance.
    "There are several basic attitudes toward processor purchases. The first is to buy the fastest processor that you can afford, in which case, all of the AMD dual-core chips are worth considering. In truth, price is usually a far more important factor, making the more expensive chips less desirable. For the price/performance crowd, you want the best performance possible at the lowest price possible. The X2 3800+ currently costs $295 and runs at 2.0 GHz, and the next bump up is the 4200+ that costs $355 for 2.2 GHz. That means a roughly 10% faster chip for 20% more money, and it only gets worse as you go up the price scale.

    The final determining factor in what to purchase is whether or not you're an avid overclocker. If you are, almost all of the X2 chips can run at close to 2.6 GHz. (Of course, your mileage may vary, and going with water cooling or other alternative cooling options could add several hundred megahertz if you're lucky). Not everyone wants to overclock, but if you're willing, you can get close to the performance of the FX-64 at about one-third the price. The dual-core Opteron chips are also a possibility for the overclocking crowd, so if you're thinking about one of those chips, be sure to check out the last page of our article."
    "For the price/performance and overclocking crowds, Intel's latest dual-core chip looks exceptionally appealing. The Pentium D 805 [RTPE: BX80551PE2666FN] is going for $130, about half what any other dual-core chip costs. Granted, the chip has definitely been crippled, as the 133 MHz system bus (533 MHz FSB) is already a bottleneck on single core chips, and it becomes an even greater bottleneck on dual core chips. However, with a decent overclocking motherboard, you should be able to hit 3.5+ GHz quite easily.

    If you're looking for a little bit more higher performance, the next best chip from Intel has to be the 920. Again, with an appropriate motherboard, you can get close to 4.0 GHz out of this chip! You may have to go out and buy an aftermarket cooler in order to deal with the heat generated at those clock speeds. In this case, we would take a look at the Thermaltake Big Typhoon or the Scythe Ninja as a couple heat sinks that will work well for overclocking. (Just know in advance that both of those heat sinks are huge - you will definitely want to make sure that they will fit on what ever motherboard you choose.)".
    From Anandtech Price Guide which is the same as all the other forums are saying.
    I went with the AMD X2 3800+ for my WinXP machine and it does run cooler than the Pentiums in my other computers. Of course I use a Scythe Ninja cooler and a 120mm fan to cool it to allowthe overclock to run cool.
    All that being said, Intel is coming out with their newer Core CPU's later this year, the Conroes. They blow away the AMD on the benchmarks and will supposedly run a little cheaper than the equivalent AMD CPU's.
    __________________________________________________ _______________________________________
    Bigboogie on boogienights.net:
    Ammo case
    Asus 8N32 SLI MB
    AMD Athlon x2 3800+
    2 GB Patriot Signature 400 DDR
    160 GB Hitachi 7200 IDE
    2 x-250 Seagate SATA2
    EVGA Nvidia 7900GT
    Dell 2007WFP
    Logitech 5.1 speakers
    Logitech MX1000 mouse
    Dell USB keyboard
    NEC 3500 DVD-RW
    Benq 1655 DVD-RW



    (God bless tax refunds)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    876
    I myself use mostly AMD, though on one of my systems I'm using is a dell that has dual p3 550s. One thing I did do for me was to look at the MB and being upgradable, with me money is always a factor. So what I did was buy a ASUS A8N-SLI deluxe 939, because that board had a wide range of CPU's it will take. Starting from Athlon 64 FX/Athlon 64/Athlon X2 so for a couple hundred for the CPU you can have a computer thats fairly fast and then a year down the road the X2's will come down in price, so upgrading will not be a big deal. Unless you have money to burn then get the fastest but like hard candy said
    The X2 3800+ currently costs $295 and runs at 2.0 GHz, and the next bump up is the 4200+ that costs $355 for 2.2 GHz. That means a roughly 10% faster chip for 20% more money, and it only gets worse as you go up the price scale.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Augusta, GA
    Posts
    5,461
    Cool'N Quiet has a driver for Linux for the AMD dual core processors. It is included with the 2.6.10 and later kernels.
    Found under /usr/src/linux/Documentation/cpu-freq:
    "PowerNow! and Cool'n'Quiet are AMD names for frequency
    management capabilities in AMD processors. As the hardware
    implementation changes in new generations of the processors,
    there is a different cpu-freq driver for each generation.

    Note that the driver's will not load on the "wrong" hardware,
    so it is safe to try each driver in turn when in doubt as to
    which is the correct driver.

    Note that the functionality to change frequency (and voltage)
    is not available in all processors. The drivers will refuse
    to load on processors without this capability. The capability
    is detected with the cpuid instruction.

    The drivers use BIOS supplied tables to obtain frequency and
    voltage information appropriate for a particular platform.
    Frequency transitions will be unavailable if the BIOS does
    not supply these tables.

    6th Generation: powernow-k6

    7th Generation: powernow-k7: Athlon, Duron, Geode.

    8th Generation: powernow-k8: Athlon, Athlon 64, Opteron, Sempron.
    Documentation on this functionality in 8th generation processors
    is available in the "BIOS and Kernel Developer's Guide", publication
    26094, in chapter 9, available for download from www.amd.com.

    BIOS supplied data, for powernow-k7 and for powernow-k8, may be
    from either the PSB table or from ACPI objects. The ACPI support
    is only available if the kernel config sets CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR.
    The powernow-k8 driver will attempt to use ACPI if so configured,
    and fall back to PST if that fails.
    The powernow-k7 driver will try to use the PSB support first, and
    fall back to ACPI if the PSB support fails. A module parameter,
    acpi_force, is provided to force ACPI support to be used instead
    of PSB support.
    Last edited by hard candy; 05-06-2006 at 08:39 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _______________________________________
    Bigboogie on boogienights.net:
    Ammo case
    Asus 8N32 SLI MB
    AMD Athlon x2 3800+
    2 GB Patriot Signature 400 DDR
    160 GB Hitachi 7200 IDE
    2 x-250 Seagate SATA2
    EVGA Nvidia 7900GT
    Dell 2007WFP
    Logitech 5.1 speakers
    Logitech MX1000 mouse
    Dell USB keyboard
    NEC 3500 DVD-RW
    Benq 1655 DVD-RW



    (God bless tax refunds)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Transplanted from beautiful La Quinta, CA to Long Beach, CA...there are no stars here at night!
    Posts
    1,240
    Can't I just stick with my LOX cooling system, HC?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •