How to compare Intel to AMD?

[Jarlax3]

Let me first state that I AM NOT looking to start a flame war here!

But I am looking to buy a new motherboard and CPU and I am stuck at the crossroads of which camp to turn to. Does anyone know of any sites that compare the AMD chips to the Intels?

I am looking at the 2.4C or maybe the 2.8C on the intel side but I am not sure what the comparative chips on the AMD side would be?

Can anyone help?

[L337 M33P]

XP2400 and XP2800 :p


If you want a motherboard AND CPU for the price of a 2.4C, go with AMD. They clock as high as most Intels, but at a fraction of the price.

[SunRedRX7]

The comparative would be whatever in the AMD flavor cost the same as the Intel chip you are looking at.

If your Intel setup would cost $X00, look to see what an AMD system at $X00 would get you, then compare performance from there.

[gamer004]

ok i heard this analogy somewhere.....

think of a amd processor that is a bus that con hold 20 ppl, and intel is a bus that can hold only 10 ppl, the diiference is the intel bus travels twice as fast so both buses get to there destination at the same time

[AS3]

/quote/
ok i heard this analogy somewhere.....

think of a amd processor that is a bus that con hold 20 ppl, and intel is a bus that can hold only 10 ppl, the diiference is the intel bus travels twice as fast so both buses get to there destination at the same time
/quote/

That "analogy" is quite .... "misleading" to say the least

[Tyranos]

Actually the intel bus would get there first, and the amd bus would get there later, but it has more people (workload finished). So the intel bus would have to go back and get 10 more people, and then the time it took for each bus to get their work done would be around equal :) Thats if both busses were comparable models of course.

[Gautam]

In raw calculation ability, AMD's perform 128% of Intel per mHz. This ratio can be used quite effectively, barring software optimizations, etc.

[Supertrucker]

if you plan to overclock, look for the newest barton 2500+ or a jiuhb 1.5vcore(<~~~important detail) 1700+ on the amd side

or the 2.4c on the intel side, with a good canterwood board. the intel will cost more, but it will be faster in most applications by 5-10%.

i vote AMD!!!! you get great performance, if not bleeding edge, and you help to save the company that keeps intel somewhat honest, then we all win!

[Jarlax3]

Ok, so for example the comparison chart for models would look like this:

P4 2.4c ($170) = 1.83GHz (AMD Barton 2500+) ($88)
P4 2.6c ($212) = 2.08GHz (AMD Barton 2800+) ($173)
P4 2.8c ($271) = 2.17GHz (AMD Barton 3000+) ($244)

So at the 2.4 level, AMD is much cheaper, but as you go up the price is much more comparable.

Can anyone tell me how the barton 2500 is overclocking and what a good motherboard would be for that model?

[CamH]

By almost all accounts I have read, a 2500+ can overclock to 2.2GHz (400MHz higher than stock) without breaking a sweat.

[c627627]

:beer: Money :beer: Money :beer: Money.

That's how.

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=222201

:burn:

[Supertrucker]

the newest 2500+ is an 11x166 chip that several people have reported going to 11x200 at default voltage(thats a 3200+btw)

the best reported overclocking amd mobo is the nforce2 chipset based abit nf7, but the epox, asus, and msi nf2 boards are also pretty good.

[zabomb4163]

funny.

amd fanboys never once asked what his budget was. they automatically assumed 10% more peformance from the intel processor wasn't worth 100$.

Jarlax- what type of system do you plan on building

1. do you plan on overclocking
2. how much do you plan on spending
3. what programs do you use that require a lot of power (different processors work better in certain programs)
4. do you plan on upgrading the processor ever

[Jarlax3]

hehe, those are some good questions zabomb4163! :p

1. do you plan on overclocking
Yes, I do plan to overclock (air cooling only...at least for this rig). I am new to it but it is something I think I could have fun with. Which ever box setup I go with I will research that side of the fence and see what I can do!

2. how much do you plan on spending
Well I was hoping not to spend over $500 max for the MB, CPU, and memory. But spending less is desireable of course (and would make the wife happy). I just want the best performer for the money with the idea that it should last 2 to 3 years (see point 4)!

3. what programs do you use that require a lot of power
I play a lot of games. Most of them being first person. I plan to play Everquest2 or World of Warcraft, Unreal 2003, etc. Other than games I would still do some basic stuff like quicken, word, and surfing. But I do not plan on watching movies, recording video/music, or anything of that nature.

4. do you plan on upgrading the processor ever
I typically like to put a machine together every 2 to 3 years and only do minor upgrades inbetween (i.e. maybe a new video card)

Currently it looks like I am talking about either a:
Intel P4 2.4c with a Asus p4p800 Deluxe
- or -
AMD Barton 2500 with a Abit nf7-s version 2.0

Which way to go...I am really torn! I want to get the best performance that will last me for a little while!

[Lt. Max]

depends how much you spend on the computer the end performance/buck could end up same either way you go, intel will cost more and perform better and lets take zabombs example of 100$ for 10% performance, if your system costs 1000 with amd and 1100 with intel then you get the 10% performance for 10% extra cost and you would be getting the same bang for buck..

it all depends on your budget still though, if you have a smaller budget amd will be your choice, i build both systems for my friends , depending on their budget, lower budget gets amd, normal budget gets intel. i got intel myself since i think hyperthreading is well worth it.

max

edit: doh u sent in a message b4 i got mine written. leme read it and reply accordingly..

[Lt. Max]

ic7 - 130$
2.4c retail - 171$
512 ram - ~100$

that will cost u under 400 bucks if you go intel, a bit cheaper if you go amd. if you can then if you go intel go for 2x512 for a gig of ram, games will be a lot better with that, especially the future ones you mentioned, running 2 sticks in an amd system i think isnt that good since my friend tried doing that and he had to relax his timings (he got jealous that i had a gig, he had corsair xm3200c2 b4 u ask) also if u get ic7 my friend had problems with that and his corsair xms.. i got 2x512 buffalo pc3700 in mine and its running great at 208 2 2 2 5 2.8v, thats about when it maxes out and i think its good for the price i paid for it (99 a stick)

[Supertrucker]

if you buy the intel, you will wonder if it was worth the extra cost, if you buy the amd, you will wonder if the intel would have been that much better, its just the way it goes.

either one of those mobo/cpu combos are a great start to a computer that could easily last 2-3 years, just dont skimp on rest of the hardware, like the ram, and i would plan to have a gig of it at some piont, even if it isnt commonplace now, it will be by the end of that comps life

[mtedder]

I am in the same boat. I have been planning my new system that I plan to build in Sept. I have a 9700 clock above pro levels and plenty of drives and such. I have been planning on a Intel 2.4C on a good board and a gig of PC4000 ram. I ran my numbers and its about $700. Very reasonable to me. Not being a fool or a 'fanboy' I looked at AMD also. If go AMD it would be a Barton 2500 on a Abit NF7-S and a gig of PC3700 ram. This seem to work out to about $400, also very reasonable.

I do plan on overclocking. From every thing I can find, reasonable overclocks on air seem to be Intel @3.0 and the Barton @2.2+. Later I may move to water cooling, but that not a real issue now. I need for which ever system I buy to be useful for aleast 18 months. After that I will upgrade again.

Any thoughts or direct comparison? Thanks.

[hitechjb1]

This link looked at the CPU raw power on integer and floating pointing calculations of P4 and XP, as well as the memory bandwidth.

How to interpret Sandra CPU benchmark, IPC and comparing Tbred B/Barton with P4 (http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1734081#post1734081)

[zabomb4163]

Jarlax. the reason i asked about your price range was to determine if 100$ extra on the video card would yield much better performance. If going from intel to amd means you can afford a 9700 instead of a 9600pro, then by all means go amd.

But if your price rangle ALREADY includes a good video card, such as the 9800np or 9700pro, then i suggest going intel.

if you are currently debating
"Intel P4 2.4c with a Asus p4p800 Deluxe
- or -
AMD Barton 2500 with a Abit nf7-s version 2.0"
You only have to ask yourself one question. will choosing one over the other affect the other parts you use? If it won't, i'd choose intel without looking back. The 2400C will outperform any amd processor. Before we get any debates with benchmark links.....i refer to both processors overclocked to their max, not stock speeds. If he had answered "do you plan on overclocking" i would have recommended a barton.

[Mark Larson]

I recommend waiting for the Athlon64 so you can make a more informed choice.

[JoJoMoJo]

Prices@ excaliberpc.com

Intel P4C 2.4 188.50
Abit IC7 or Asus P4P800 motherboard 125.00

AMD Xp2500 Bartone boxed 101.00
Abit NF-7S 113.00

Total on AMD 213.00
Total on Intel 313.50

100.00 price difference between the setups. Now I have not yet seen a stock AMD heatsink worth anything in regards to overclock so add that price in to the AMD system. And even than It will still not touch the FSB overclock the and memory bandwidth that the intel will achieve. More than likely the intel will run @ stock Vcore voltages. From what the users are reporting the wall for the intel systems seem to be 265 FSB. What are the AMDs? Ill go out on a limb and just say that more than likely the Intel is going to achieve another 20-40 fsb higher. That extra fsb was worth another 118 frames per second on my graphics card. And another 3000 pts in 3dmark. I still dont see the justification I would get buying the next best graphics card instead of putting that 100.00 towards the motherboard and processor. The increased memory band, stability, multitasking, higher fsb to me is worth the 100.00. Oh i forgot to deduct the heatsink so we will just say its 60.00.

[zabomb4163]

JoJoMoJo- no offense, but your acting like a fanboy. intel systems have their special cost as do amd systems. amd users have to buy a heatsink and intel users have to buy more expensive ram. As cool as that extra memory bandwidth is....it doesnt make THAT big of difference. let the guy make an informed decision and not somthing based completely on opinions. I said it once and i'll say it again......the intel system will be about 10% faster. thats not just my opinion, almost anyone knowledable with both platforms knows it.

[JoJoMoJo]

No offense taken but why do you have to buy more expensive ram? There is no difference in the ram. Its the same AMD and Intel. The ram is identical and the ram will usually be the limiting factor of both the AMD and Intel system. Its just that the AMD platforms give out before the Intel platforms in regards to avg fsb stable clock. And actually as far as being a fan boy let me see here

AMD products I have purchased.

A7V333
A7V8X
A7N8X version 1.0
A7N8X version 2.0
NF7-S version 2.0
Tyan Dual AMD CPU I still have

T-Bird 900
T-Bird 1.33
XP1700 (2)
MP1800 (2)
XP2100
XP2200
XP2400
XP2600 266ddr
XP2600 333ddr@2.6 overclock 24-7


Intel P4C800 Delux
Intel 2.8c P4

All of the AMD systems I have owned I ran stable. The later ones were all capable of running over 200fsb. The same ram was used on the A7N8X version 2.0 and NF7-S version 2.0. Same ram put in the Intel platform was capable of running 20fsb higher @ stable 24-7 overclock. Guess I am an intel fan boy. But dont mistaken that with not knowing my AMD systems. All the AMD parts I have had were resold to local friends and still running strong.

[JoJoMoJo]

The point im makeing is I have seen alot of people upgradeing the graphics card for the 100.00 price diff. The the only point I am makeing is for that same price difference I could of just upgraded the graphics card in my system vs purchaseing a new platform.. even though the card i run is not to shabby. The difference I have seen from the running the higher fsb in frame rate ect.... was greater than when I upgraded from a PNY TI4600 to a 9700 pro. The system is just flat out faster in every aspect I use it for multimedia/gameing. When I upgraded from a 4600 nvidia card to an ati 9700 pro card I went from 14,300 to mid 15000. When I changed platforms and was able to achieve the high fsbs I went from 15000pts to 19,600 with over 460 frames per second with the same card. Your right all we can give is our own opinons. In my case I would not recommend it unless I didnt see the benefits. Price doesnt matter to me, but for the buck I saw more improvement from switching platforms.

[youngbuck]

Originally posted by Jarlax
I just want the best performer for the money

Right there answers it... go with AMD

[Jarlax3]

But I still fight with the question of in the long run (the next 2 to 3 years), will I be better served with the Intel who has HT and better Duel Channel implementation?

Grrr!

[Lithan]

Ok. Here is my recommendation. I wouldn't put intel out of the question with a budget of 500$. But you will be cutting it close if you want to get even slightly noticable improvement over amd. Why? Every part will cost you more.

150$ for mobo, 170$ for cpu, and ram might put you over. (You will NEED dual channel with intel. No dual channel and your performance advantage is umm... not there.

I would highly recommend the following.

CPU: 1700+ JIUHB 49$ shipped at gameve.com (256megs cache and 100-200mhz more will cost you 40$ more with a barton 2500+ at newegg, but it's your choice.

Motherboard: nf7-s 2.0 116$ shipped at Gameve.com (You get really good network and sound with this, so you can save quite alot of money).

Memory: Buffalo pc3200 cas 2.5 512Meg stick (winbond) 93$ shipped at newegg. You can get two and have a gig for dual channel if you like. Dont expect much gain from dual channel, but having a gig of ram will be nice (especially with everquest 2 I suspect, everquest was a behemoth.)

2-3 years? I don't know. That would be close. But any 32 bit processor will be in the same boat no matter how powerful, I believe. In 3 years I suspect that 64 bits will just be getting into the situation where 32bit users are second class citizens. (3-3.5 years maybe).

Waiting for intels 64 bit offerings and amd's entry level 64 bit offerings? I haven't heard much good about... prescott is it? and frankly if you lose dual channel support, I for one think amd's 64 bit chip loses it's primary advantage over its 32 bit processors.... massive memory bandwidth. I for one would get 1 stick of 512, a 1700+, and the abit... spend shy of 300$ and start saving for when full fledged, low speed opterons (with dual channel memory support) become relatively affordable (If they ever do.)