Athlonxp's faster then p4's, why?

[Xevuhtess7]

why are athlon xp's faster then p4's for folding? i have my p4 running at 3ghz and my friend's who i just convinced to start folding, has a 1800+ and is getting 3 minute frames on a tinker while im getting 5 minutes frames on a gromacs. i know it's true, but i just wanna know why?

(by the way i have added my friend's 1800+ and 800mhz athlon to the arsenal :), more to come!)

[emericanchaos]

with gromacs vs him you have a chance. but i think the tinker core works more on processor efficiency.

[Xevuhtess7]

giving athlon xp's a huge advantage?

[emericanchaos]

yeah considering they do 50% more work per cycle.

[Xevuhtess7]

so then what hsould happen with gromacs?

[emericanchaos]

gromacs utilizes memory bandwidth as well. that's the P4's big advantage over athlons

[Kendan]

When you compare youu have to compare using the same Work Unit on both boxes. The Work Units are different sizes and are different between Gromacs and Tinkers. Gromacs are giving more points for me:D

[nikhsub1]

Originally posted by emericanchaos
gromacs utilizes memory bandwidth as well. that's the P4's big advantage over athlons
No not really. I have 2 machines, both running at 2200Mhz. 1 is at 169 x 13 and the other is at 138 x 16 and they fold at virtually the same rate...

[axlecrusher]

P4s have a lot of GHz but they do a crappy amount of work each cycle. That's the only wahy they can get so many GHz out of them.

Axle

[SniperXX]

Originally posted by axlecrusher
P4s have a lot of GHz but they do a crappy amount of work each cycle.

Thats why I bought a Athlon XP. Actually it was cheaper and I got hooked back in the T-Bird days to AMD. ;) :p :D

Yes Axle is correct it is about the more efficient the processor. There are most lickly lots of other reasons, but that seems to be a big one.

[Ray44420]

Originally posted by Xevuhtess7
why are athlon xp's faster then p4's for folding?

I've noticed that anytime you write Intel on something it runs slower... :D

[Hawk]

I have 6 p4 @2.66Ghz and 2 xp2000+ and each p4 kick butt on the each xp on gromacs to the tune of at least 40% gain in production. I dont know where you guys are getting your numbers but I have to disagree that the xps out fold p4s.
As far as price goes you can pick up a 2.4 p4 retail for $169 at new egg and you are almost garranteed to get 2.8 from them and most of the time more.

[seamadan000]

the reason that AXPs are faster is the architecture has a better floating-point unit. Folding works the FPU pretty much exclusively. In any floating point intensive app an AXP with a PR comparable to the MHz of a P4 will own.
________
Blonde German (http://www.****tube.com/categories/314/german/videos/1)

[OCn00b]

seamadan000's right, the FPU is the reason the XP's own the p4's on the tinker core. The reason it's closer with the gromacs core is the memory bandwidth. Basically with gromacs, the p4's are almost even with the XP's but from the frame times I've seen, the XP's are still faster though.

[nikhsub1]

No no no... It is NOT about mem bandwidth!!! Gromacs give a huge boost on BOTH XP's and P4's... It is the SSE instructions that give the boost and with P4's it makes a huge difference from tinker, on the XP it is a good boost, but not as dramatic as the P4/P3's. Again, it has nothing to do with mem bandwidth! It is different than SETI...

[seamadan000]

yeah, P4 is closer on gromacs because its SSE engine is better than the AXP's, so it makes up for some of the better FPU of the AXP.
________
CHEAP DAISY 500CT PELLET 557 PELLETS (http://airsoft-shop.info/p/daisy-500ct-pellet-557-pellets/)

[Xevuhtess7]

very interesting information guys... really startin to clear things up!

[Edward2]

Hawk, I have to disagree with you regarding the P4 vs XP. Your P4's are running at 2.66 GHz, while the XP's (I assume in your sig) are running at 1.7 GHz. That is a difference of 56% (2.66/1.7), but the P4's are only producing 40% more PPW. Therefore, the P4's are slower on a points per GHz basis.

My P4 @ 2.3 barely beats my 1800+ Tbred @ 1.8 on a PPW basis. I calculated the points per hour / GHz for all of my CPU's. I found that the P4 earns about 1.3 PPH/GHz, while the Tbred's earn about 1.5 PPH/GHz. These were all calculated using Gromacs (18 and 33 pointers). How do your CPU's compare?

[dagamore]

with gromacs, on my machines the p4's fold faster, but the XP are way cheaper so thats some thing to look at.

for speed testing reasons only, i have all 5 machines working on the same workuinit, ie i copyed the folder to all machines, and ran it times are from EMIII, keep in mind that my P4 eng, is running all of my other programs, and the XP/MP's have just win2k on them and folding is the only thing running.

the test frame, 602 p909_vill_stro (909)9/73/0[144] frames 90-93 for testing
p4 eng smpl 2.0 ghz at 2.0 ghz
6.39 per frame,
11.05.00 per wu

p4 2.0 ghz at stock
6.39 per frame,
11.05.00 per wu

AMD MP 2100 @ stock cpu 1
8.17 Per frame
13.48.20 per wu

AMD MP 2100 @ stock cpu 2
8.13 Per frame
13.41.40 per wu

AMD xp 2000 + @ stock
8.10 Per frame
13.36.40 per wu

all sysetms were running the console version, ie text, all have 512 mb of ram, and all were running win2k pro, with the exemption of the eng smpl, it has win xp pro on it.

p3 1.4 tully @ stock
10.28 Per frame
17.26.40 per wu

[Hawk]

How do you get that the XP's are cheaper??? 2.4 GHZ retail $159
2.1GHZ XP $320 OEM. That p4 will do 2.8-3.0 easily. There is no way XP's are cheaper.

[emericanchaos]

a $70 1700 will do 2.5 and have a pr of 3700

[Xevuhtess7]

emericanchaos is right, athlon xp's are cheaper, it's pretty much a fact. i dont really want this to turn into a intel vs. amd war, i just want to know what is going on with why i am seeing athlonxp's usually being faster then p4's.

[Hawk]

Originally posted by emericanchaos
a $70 1700 will do 2.5 and have a pr of 3700
The problem with that is all the high end stuff you have to buy to get it to do that. I am using cheap ram onboard video onboard nic. Total cost through out the system is pretty high when you have to overclock that high to get the speed and then there is the heat factor. It either costs more to cool or the proc dies faster. I run stock intel h/s fan on the p4's.
Honestly how much have you got in that 1700 @ 2.5? I can build a folding rig running a 2.4 p4 at 2.8 for under $350 you cant look at just the price of the CPU how much does it cost over all to get to that speed??

[emericanchaos]

120 abit nf7-s rev 2.0
150 corsair xms 512MB
100 antec TP550 (i have)
070 CPU (i have)
062 antec case
060 WD 40GB SE caviar
030 SB Live! (i have)
060 R7500 (i have
040 DVD ROM
040 52X CDROM
030 SLK 800 (i have)
030 fans and misc
180 19" monitor

total is $972 and i could've cut corners and still had a machine that runs at about the same speed.

"Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance"

[Hawk]

I can get as high or higher OC with a given p4 as you can with a given xp, the advantage is that the p4 starts faster in the begining. It would cost me 159 bucks to start at 2.4 and thats a low end p4 these days. Whats the top speed you can get to start with in an xp? I can start out @3.0 at 800 MHZ FSB. $323 for 2.1GHz 266 MHz FSB XP, 377 for a 3.06 GHZ 533 FSB HT P4 It used to be that you AMD fanitics swore AMD was better across the board and now all you can try to argue is that you get a better chip price on the bottom quarter of the speed range which is not so because intel don't sell p4's that slow except for celerons.
Simple fact is AMD once did well against Intel but they sold thier chips cheaper than they could make them and are now behind because no money for R&D. They are just now getting a stable process running 200mm 130nm wafers while intel has ramped 2 HVM 300mm 90 nm fabs with The D1D 300mm 65nm fab ready to come on line late this year. Intel has now passed AMD in price / performance and all the semiconductor industry anyilists agree that intel is one generation ahead and continues to pull away.
From a folding point of view I watch the performance of the LOW END P42.4 out perform my AMDs all day long day after day. AMD's high end chips can only compete with intels lower end stuff.
I guess you meant it as an insult when you quoted my sig but thats ok too. people who hold on to beliefs despite the facts will always be a step behind. I strive to stay educated.

[Hawk]

Originally posted by emericanchaos
120 abit nf7-s rev 2.0
150 corsair xms 512MB
100 antec TP550 (i have)
070 CPU (i have)
062 antec case
060 WD 40GB SE caviar
030 SB Live! (i have)
060 R7500 (i have
040 DVD ROM
040 52X CDROM
030 SLK 800 (i have)
030 fans and misc
180 19" monitor

total is $972 and i could've cut corners and still had a machine that runs at about the same speed.

"Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance"
What was that list? And what did you mean by I have? Is this a real 1700 xp you have running at 2.5 or do you have just the parts you listed as I have? you lost me there.

[emericanchaos]

that is what it would cost to build a high end AMD machine that will fold at 2.3 -2.5Ghz. the stuff that says i have next to it is stuff in what i'm using right now. point is it doens't cost an arm and a leg to build a high end AMD machine that will out fold a P4. and also i put i have next to some of them because it's not gear that you *could use *if you were to do something like this. it's what i actually use and some of it alot of other people are using in very high powered amd based rigs (aside from the graphics anyway)

yeah you can OC higher but that doesn't make you faster than an AMD. you can't compare two different chips clock for clock. put a P4 2Ghz against a xp2400. equal clocks but the P4 gets stomped. hrmmmmm. wanna make it a little more fair put that P4 against a 2500 barton (slower clock). you still lose.

the whole point is the is A TOP OF THE LINE AMD based machine. the only area i skimped on in this setup was the graphics. i don't use hella fast graphics so it doesn't both me nor does it change how i fold.

build me a top of line P4 and lets compare prices. match my price and see if you can fold as hard as me.

[Hawk]

I'll take that challange!! You well spend ....say $500 each or you name the price? fold them under a new name and see who can out fold who. money on just computer not monitor you choose your parts and I chose mine we show online order or reciept what say 1 month to build?
I'll put my money where my mouth is will you?

[emericanchaos]

not all of us have money to blow. if i'm spending $500 i'm upgrading my main before i build a second machine. under different circumstances i'd accept but funds are tight and i'm in the process of rebuilding the motor in my car so i can get to college in august.

[Xevuhtess7]

just a thought... why do oyu want to get a 2.4 chip, why not get a 1.8a c1.. they will do 3gigs easy and cost a lot less. mine does.

aside from this intel vs. amd war... anyone else know the answer to why athlonxp's seem to be better at folding then p4's? by the way, in my situation i stated before, with my friend's 1800 outfolding my 3ghz p4 in frame times (him 3 minute frames, me 5 minute frames) actually depended on the work unit. the nex workunit i got i was folding at 3 minute frames too. but i have like twice the megahertz power.... and he is folding the same speed as me. hmm....

[nikhsub1]

Originally posted by Xevuhtess7
... anyone else know the answer to why athlonxp's seem to be better at folding then p4's? by the way, in my situation i stated before, with my friend's 1800 outfolding my 3ghz p4 in frame times (him 3 minute frames, me 5 minute frames) actually depended on the work unit. the nex workunit i got i was folding at 3 minute frames too. but i have like twice the megahertz power.... and he is folding the same speed as me. hmm....
Your ?? has been answered! To sum it up, the AMD XP has a better FPU which make it a better folder. It has NOTHING to do with mem bandwidth as stated. This is REALLY apparent with the tinker core, all Pentiums just choke and the AMD's (even T-Birds) just fly. With gromacs, it is a different ball game, the P3's and P4's do VERY well, almost as good as the XP's. Again this is due to the optimizations used in teh core, SSE. These optimizations sort of level the playing field between P4's and XP's although the XP's still have a slight advantage but not by a lot.

[Xevuhtess7]

alright, with all the amd vs. intel stuff, i got sorta confused as to whwat the actual answer had to do with, the floatoing points or the actual megahertz.... thanks for clearing it up

[Hawk]

Originally posted by Xevuhtess7
just a thought... why do oyu want to get a 2.4 chip, why not get a 1.8a c1.. they will do 3gigs easy and cost a lot less. mine does.

aside from this intel vs. amd war... anyone else know the answer to why athlonxp's seem to be better at folding then p4's? by the way, in my situation i stated before, with my friend's 1800 outfolding my 3ghz p4 in frame times (him 3 minute frames, me 5 minute frames) actually depended on the work unit. the nex workunit i got i was folding at 3 minute frames too. but i have like twice the megahertz power.... and he is folding the same speed as me. hmm....
Just wondering where you got a 1.8 celly cheaper than my P4 2.4's. If you got them cheaper than free I want a truck load!

[Xevuhtess7]

no, not a celly. c1, the stepping. the 1.8a c1 is a northwood. soo it will be d stepping though.... the c1's are doing mad fast oc's, like jdmcnudgent's c1 that does 3.3 on deafult voltage air cooling. unfortunately my c1 is not a true champ, and can only do 3.3 at full voltage on water, but the price-performance ratio is better then a 2.4

[Hawk]

I don't know why you guy's like to call it a war. I call it a discussion. The war will never be over (I hope) but right now intel is winning the battles just as AMD did a few years back.
I dont doubt that an XP will do a fold little more MHz per MHZ I am talking dollar for dollar I can build a p4 To beat an xp dollar for dollar. for a xp 3000 @ 2.1GHz stock you will pay almost the same price as for an intel with HT @ 3GHZ stock and If you want to talk overclocking both will probably overclock well, but the 1 GHz higher Freq. head start intel has up frort coupled with HT and the heating factor intel wins hands down, both in graphics and FPU applications. We all know the FPU is better on the XP but it is not enough to keep up. The so called High end XP's can run with the mid to low end P4. Of course if intel were 2GHz ahead there will always be those who will say AMD is still the best chip....go figure

[Hawk]

Originally posted by Xevuhtess7
just a thought... why do oyu want to get a 2.4 chip, why not get a 1.8a c1.. they will do 3gigs easy and cost a lot less. mine does.

aside from this intel vs. amd war... anyone else know the answer to why athlonxp's seem to be better at folding then p4's? by the way, in my situation i stated before, with my friend's 1800 outfolding my 3ghz p4 in frame times (him 3 minute frames, me 5 minute frames) actually depended on the work unit. the nex workunit i got i was folding at 3 minute frames too. but i have like twice the megahertz power.... and he is folding the same speed as me. hmm....
Are you saying he is running that chip stock 1800? And you have a P4 overclocked to 3GHZ and he's out folding you?? How are your temps? WOW thats a heck of a chip to get a 12MHZ overclock. And those 1.8 P4's are pertty cheap. Is it a celeron or a p4? Great overclock dude!
OOPS missed that you said it was a northwood

[Xevuhtess7]

yeah it's a northwood. im using water so my temps are perfectly fine, highest it goes is like 37c. my friend is running stock 1800+ speeds and he folds about as fast as me. thats why i started this thread you see? its a lot easiler to get your hands on a 1.8a c1 these days, i got mine for 124 bucks so... jdmcnudgent's chip was just amazing. i think for value, 1.8a c1 is the way to go