|
Intel vs. AMD
|
|
|
wg1
Newbie
|
31. December 2006 @ 05:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
I've been solidly behind Intel since 1999. At that time I was running an AMD Thunderbird 1.5 and my son had an Intel P3/733. We both had comparable ram, the same video cards, and in all respects (except mb and cpu) basically the same layout. His P3 definitely blew me out of the water in performance and stability. That was my last AMD system.
BTW... that P3/733 is still running strong (I'm using it right now). When my son upgraded to his P4/3.0, I bumped up the P3 with 1gb RAM and 250gb HD .. same mb & running XP without a hitch as well as crunching out videos. I only use my P4/2.8 for things I want done a bit faster or are more graphic intensive.
This is a solid Intel family here. Just built a P4/2.8 for my daughter.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
1. January 2007 @ 01:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Then I've no idea what happened, a 1.5 Thunderbird should be far faster than a P3 733, although the Thunderbird was not one of AMD's best processors, it should be better than that! At the moment, Intel are the performance king, but you're quite small-minded to only ever buy Intel products, and have been missing out over these last few years!
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
1. January 2007 @ 08:47 |
Link to this message
|
Wg1,
Quote:
I've been solidly behind Intel since 1999. At that time I was running an AMD Thunderbird 1.5 and my son had an Intel P3/733. We both had comparable ram, the same video cards, and in all respects (except mb and cpu) basically the same layout. His P3 definitely blew me out of the water in performance and stability. That was my last AMD system. I only use my P4/2.8 for things I want done a bit faster or are more graphic intensive.
Back then, the P3 was the class of the field if your MB supported the 133MHz front side bus. If you had the 733/512/133, you had the best of the day. I still have a dual P3 1000/512/133 and it will run rings around any P4 until the Northwood came along.
The type of memory had a lot to do with that speed as well. Rambus Ram was a good deal faster than the SDRAM. Many of the P3s of the day had MBs that supported Rambus, while the Athlons were stuck with PC100 or PC133. Heat was also a big issue with some of the old Athlons given the poor CPU coolers back then.
As far as your P4 2.8 being fast, if it's a 2.8/800 and not a 2.8/533 it's OK but an Athlon XP 2800+ will smoke both of them! I own an Intel 3.2GHz D-940 dual-core which is OK but the 2.4GHz Opteron I plan to replace it with will be a good 25% faster and will run much cooler than the D-940 when both are overclocked. I used to own a 3.0/800/Prescott and the 2.4 GHz Athlon 64 4000+ I just built is better in every way, stock or overclocked! The dual-core 2.4GHz Opteron 180 will be roughly twice as fast as the 4000+. Below the Conroe, Intel has nothing to compete with the AMDs!
Happy Holidays,
theone
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. January 2007 @ 08:49
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
1. January 2007 @ 11:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
25%? A bit conservative isn't it? LOL
|
Senior Member
|
1. January 2007 @ 17:15 |
Link to this message
|
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813127005
would be my recommendation for a cheap 775 mobo if you had overclocking in mind. the ga 945pl s3 is a good cheap board but i dont think you would get much more than a 30mhz oc. the ab9 should give you around 3 times that when you overclock it. assuming your ram will take you there.
plus at stock speeds it is the fastest mobo you can buy for a conroe(bios defaults to 272mhz fsb).
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
1. January 2007 @ 17:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
I already made my purchase on Sunday. I'm gonna stick with Gigabyte on this one unless the Fatl1ty drops some more :)
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
|
1. January 2007 @ 20:30 |
Link to this message
|
Sammorris,
Quote:
25%? A bit conservative isn't it? LOL
I fully expect the 180 to do stock what my D-940 does overclocked! The great unknown is how well the TF MB will handle things when I OC it. I just have to try it, given how well it did with the A 64 4000+. The TF isn't expensive enough to lose a lot of sleep over if it doesn't work out. Besides, I like stepping into the great unknown! LOL!! As you well know, I'm not a "Me Too" person and I can always use an extra AMD board for my next customer build! To my knowlege, no one in either Forum has done a 180 on any MB so it will be something me and everyone else can learn from.
BioStar was great to me in exchanging the first TF MB, same day and the problem seems to be related to the 4000+ only and is probably an nVidia problem. I plunked a 3800+ in it and it shuts right down with no problem. With the 4000+ it brings up the screen that says "it's safe to shut down your computer". No big deal as I always turn the PS off anyway. It's a minor annoyance at best, that will eventually be cured by a bios revision. It has no effect on the performance whatsoever. It's flat out the fastest single-core I'm likely to ever own! It does everything way better than my highly overstressed Prescott ever did and runs 20C cooler in the process.
Happy Computering,
theone
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
Senior Member
|
1. January 2007 @ 23:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
@Estuansis
i only read it last night as i have left my pc alone since before xmas.
if you do oc it could you post your findings in that thread please, as a new bios can work wonders on this and it may now be the case.
nice 1.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
2. January 2007 @ 13:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
...Dunno if an OC is really necesarry. I think I'll just suffer and appreciate it at stock :)
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
|
xomblei
Junior Member
|
3. January 2007 @ 08:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
To xomblei: Good for you, max quality has to be seen to be believed... Although I have my suspicions that having one 7600GT would probably give a similar result
TCStr8: The 7600GTS seems to sit squarely in the middle between the 7600GT and the 7600GS performance wise. It's a pretty decent card that sits midrange in today's performance spectrum. It can play FEAR at 47fps at 1280x1024 using high quality, so it performs quite well. The 4200+ is also a very good CPU (having used one!) and, is better than the Pentium D series.
yeah one 7600gt works the same right now, but most of the games i have/ that are out don't really need two... I'm mainly using two video cards for multi display... i edit audio for my band and i like to have all that desktop space for functionality and ease of use... i only enable sli when I'm playing something like quake 4 or fear... or COD2 on a really high res (1600 by some other crazy number)
but yeah mainly for multi display
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 3. January 2007 @ 08:09
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
3. January 2007 @ 08:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
Multi display? How many screens do you have? You can run two, or technically even 3 screens off a single graphics card!
|
|
xomblei
Junior Member
|
3. January 2007 @ 09:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
well right now i only have one, in the next month or so i'll be using 4 total.
yeah i COULD use my svideo out from one but i'd rather have 4 dvi outs
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
3. January 2007 @ 09:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
Fair enough, 4 monitors, what will you use them all for?
|
|
xomblei
Junior Member
|
3. January 2007 @ 09:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
i mix/ edit audio for my band and a few others on pro tools. First window is the edit window, second window is the mix window, third window is for plugins as well as the fourth, though if i'm not using that many plugins (which is highly unlikely) i can use it for maybe a movie or you know whatever else i could be doing while waiting for pro tools to bounce the audio... Gotta love that dual core :)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
3. January 2007 @ 09:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hehe yeah, you want a screen like mine, or even the smaller 24" version.
|
|
xomblei
Junior Member
|
3. January 2007 @ 11:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
the bigger the better right?
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
3. January 2007 @ 13:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well yeah, good for multitasking, even better for multimedia. I adore gaming at 2560x1600, I really do.
|
|
xomblei
Junior Member
|
3. January 2007 @ 13:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
yeah gaming at that res helps more than people think... you can see more of what's trying to kill you
i was playing hl2 the other day and could see a lot more zombies than i would have at 800x600 or even 1280x1024 for that matter
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
3. January 2007 @ 13:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah. Funny, at the LAN parties I've been to, during games of UT2004, when people use the 'Invisible' Adrenaline combo, the people who picked them off were always the ones with the big widescreens, 24" and 30". On a 15" laptop screen they're nearly invisible, but on my screen, they may as well not have bothered!
|
|
xomblei
Junior Member
|
3. January 2007 @ 13:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
there's a lot of small variables in gaming that give people an edge over one an other. A few small things here and there add up to be an amazing difference.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
3. January 2007 @ 14:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah absolutely, beside the looks!
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
3. January 2007 @ 14:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ahh! The lan gaming nirvana that is Unreal Tournament :)
It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy*head shot*inside.
I tried dual DVI but I prefer one screen unless I'm working on a game that needs an e-Manual to figure it out. I just dig out my old Dell 15" flatscreen. Great quality but I love my 17" Sceptre Naga for it's excellent clarity and low response time. I've never seen ghosting in a game yet.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
3. January 2007 @ 14:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
hehe yeah.
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. January 2007 @ 07:56 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Estuansis:
theone, that last one seemed a bit "wonky". But I like this one:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131046
ASUS P5L-VM, 945G Chipset. Looks good. Maybe I should have checked higher prices to begin with! I'm gonna order this one methinks.
And if Conroe ever becomes a priority for me I'll be good.
My new Pentium 4 541 3.2GHz
ASUS P5L-VM 945G
2x512MB Corsair ValueSelect DDR2 667
My old Powercolor X800GTO 256MB
Samsung Combo Drive
120GB Seagate Barracuda SATA 3GB/s
Coolermaster Centurion 5
Thermaltake 430W PSU
Should I make the order?
Originally posted by Estuansis:
I already made my purchase on Sunday. I'm gonna stick with Gigabyte on this one unless the Fatl1ty drops some more :)
I was away for the holidays and missed the action. I would have suggested this board with plans for an upgradeable board, an open box P5N32-SLI for $129.99:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131564R
Look at the 8 phase power management on this board and all the bells and whistles. It has the full x16 slots for the SLI, if you ever decided to go with dual GPUs. With the OC options, it allows your system to perform at it's best. You don't have to turn up the power to where the board fries as some people have done. You can do a conservative OC and still have a stable working machine that doesn't have the system stressed.
Even at a bargain, I don't think I'd build with a single core anymore. Your choice though and with a good board the loss won't be too bad when you decide to move up to a dual core. Maybe you'll even be lucky enough to find a buyer needing a Prescott. Going with the newer processors, I'd look at the M2N32. Board choice has a lot to do with what's at hand and how the inventory affects future plans. With that in mind, the Gigabyte was a good choice (if you have the right parts on hand). Hopefully you paid attention to this note in the specs: Notice: Only DDR2-800 memory supporting JEDEC approved 1.8V operation with timings of 5-5-5 or 6-6-6 is supported on Intel Desktop Boards based on Intel 965 Express Chipsets. Definitely limits the choice of RAM and appears to exclude the DDR2 667 you have on hand. With about 1/2 off for the open box P5N32, I don't think I could have resisted, plus it supports a broader choice of RAM including the DDR2 667 which you're wanting to use. It also supports faster RAM.
If you have problems getting the Gigabyte board to work properly, make sure you paid attention to the note on the RAM it uses and the RAM voltage setting in the BIOS.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 5. January 2007 @ 08:30
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Ace_2
Senior Member
|
5. January 2007 @ 08:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
What's best between an AMD Athlon 64 3800+ and an Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 in terms of gaming performance(I'm looking to change my computer for a true gaming computer) and overall performance(more gaming, though)?
My console collection: Version 14A PlayStation 2(chipped), Version 7 PlayStation 2, PlayStation(both models), Wii, Gamecube, N64, Super NES(original from US and Japan and Mini), NES(front and top loader)Model 1 & 2 Genesis, Sega CD, Sega 32X, Atari 2600, Sega Saturn, Sega Dreamcast, Sega Master System(Model 1 and 2), Atari Flashback 1 & 2, FC Twin(2 in 1 NES/Super NES clone), GN Twin(2 in 1 NES/Genesis clone), Atari 7800, Intellivision II, TurboGrafx 16, GameBoy Color
My guides: Cardboard and Straw MOD: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/308926
3-method exploit for PS2s: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/337567 |
