Page 1 of 4 1 2 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 79
  1. #1
    Registered
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tehran
    Posts
    23

    I need an original 2.4 GHZ P4 owner

    Hi boys.
    I severely need some information.
    Let me brief you:
    I've got a 1.7 o.c. to 1.9, but last night i build up an AMD Athlon 1800+ for a friend, i put it throught typical tests and programs.
    I just got petrified when i found AMD terribly faster than mine!
    By now I'm so disspirited in my overclocking and even my cpu.

    Then i planed to purchase a faster P4, so i found that the 2.4 would be the best choice for me.(regarding the prices)
    But i'm not so sure whether it will satisfy me or not?
    One of my typical benchmarks is a simpe one:
    just run the windows 98/XP calculator and calculate this :
    20000!
    estimate how much time it takes until the answer appears on the screen,estimation can be carried out by simple a wrist watch.

    My result is 9.1 seconds for 1.7 GHZ when not overclocked .
    The fatest P4 cpu i could run the test on was a typical 2.0 GHZ and the result was 7.5 seconds,for AMD 1.8+ the result was 5 seconds!(all tests Under win 98)
    unfortunately i could'nt find any faster P4 cpu to run the test.If you got a faster one ,please send me your result and also your O/s type. It will take only bit of your time to do it.
    Please do note if your cpu is overclocked or not.(if not ,would be standard and better)

    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    AznSniper AZN's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,908
    what the heck kind of test is that???

    I got a 2.26 OCed to 2.55ghz and it took 5 seconds give or take .2 seconds...windows 2000 pro

    BTW... if this is how u based AMD to INTEL speed... then ur nutz... wouldnt a real benchmark be better? how about sandra, pcmark, or prime???

    AZN
    "The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him." Stanislaw Jerszy Lec

  3. #3
    Senior Member Maxvla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    OKC
    Posts
    9,289
    well lets see.

    p4 1.6a @ 2664mhz

    loaded tasks:

    playing mp3
    encoding large video files
    uploading to server
    downloading anime videos
    and surfing this site on opera and myie2

    using windowsxp with only 256mb of DDR ram clocked at 166mhz

    my time was 5.5 seconds
    The Black Hole
    Intel i7 860 2.8ghz
    Gigabyte P55M-UD2
    Mushkin 2x2GB DDR3 1600
    EVGA GTX460 1GB
    Intel X-25M 80GB SSD
    Magnetics - 2x2TB 4x1TB
    Corsair HX850W PSU
    NEC DVD-RW

  4. #4
    Senior Member Maxvla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    OKC
    Posts
    9,289
    just so you will know... AMD's have much better Math than intels. thats proven so your test is not worth running.

    you are testing just one aspect of a cpu.
    The Black Hole
    Intel i7 860 2.8ghz
    Gigabyte P55M-UD2
    Mushkin 2x2GB DDR3 1600
    EVGA GTX460 1GB
    Intel X-25M 80GB SSD
    Magnetics - 2x2TB 4x1TB
    Corsair HX850W PSU
    NEC DVD-RW

  5. #5
    New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1
    Got a 2.4 P4, brand spanking new. POS Dell mobo, which will be replaced w/ an Asus P4PE next week ...

    Anyway, got 256MB of PC2700 -- Took me 4.8-5.0 seconds.

  6. #6
    Member kamilkluczewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    419

    HAHAH F''Up and eMac

    Ran it on,
    900Mhz mobile P3 on my IBM T22 8seconds

    then on

    eMac
    god know what the hell is inside of this thing. But it died!!!!!

    AHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH

    just crapped out and turned off, couldnt turn it back on again.

    MACs officialy suck!!!!!!!

  7. #7
    Registered
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tehran
    Posts
    23
    Thanks for your help .
    But in reply to AZN , i have to say this kind of test is a really good one.The most simple way to see how much fast does your cpu handles the integer data, and it's only up to cpu's power.u know that the vast majority of the data handled by cpu is integer data.
    When you rendering a scence in 3dsmax, graphics and ....
    But u mentioned of some other testers like sandra and ...
    I only believe in the Sandra 2000 Professional, cause the higher editions are optimized for P4, giving higher scores for P4,when almost 99% of existing softwares on the earth! are not optimized yet.
    So if you have this version of sandra please do the favor and send me your result in both (CPU) and (CPU MULTIMEDIA) test.
    My result is 2173456 and 548345 in CPU
    and 3500 and 5590 in multimedia. for 1.7

    By the way the result you sent was a little bad .
    As MAxy got 5.5 with 2.6 when 1800+ AMD took only 5

    But BGL's result was not bad, are you sure you are runnig at 2.4 ,what's your O/S? thank you

    REPLY TO MAXVLA:How ever i am on intel's side,i can prove you that amd 1800+ (1533) MHZ is even faster than P4 2.0 in every aspect. My document is Sandra 2000 professional as i said before.

    Please send me more reults in sandra 2000 or in win calculator.

    Thanks a lot.

  8. #8
    Member micamica1217's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    4,874
    Originally posted by Afshin_BMW
    Thanks for your help .
    But in reply to AZN , i have to say this kind of test is a really good one.The most simple way to see how much fast does your cpu handles the integer data, and it's only up to cpu's power.u know that the vast majority of the data handled by cpu is integer data.
    When you rendering a scence in 3dsmax, graphics and ....
    But u mentioned of some other testers like sandra and ...
    I only believe in the Sandra 2000 Professional, cause the higher editions are optimized for P4, giving higher scores for P4,when almost 99% of existing softwares on the earth! are not optimized yet.
    So if you have this version of sandra please do the favor and send me your result in both (CPU) and (CPU MULTIMEDIA) test.
    My result is 2173456 and 548345 in CPU
    and 3500 and 5590 in multimedia. for 1.7

    By the way the result you sent was a little bad .
    As MAxy got 5.5 with 2.6 when 1800+ AMD took only 5

    But BGL's result was not bad, are you sure you are runnig at 2.4 ,what's your O/S? thank you

    REPLY TO MAXVLA:How ever i am on intel's side,i can prove you that amd 1800+ (1533) MHZ is even faster than P4 2.0 in every aspect. My document is Sandra 2000 professional as i said before.

    Please send me more reults in sandra 2000 or in win calculator.

    Thanks a lot.
    Oh my god,

    you are kidding, right........

    99% of todays software is not optimised for P4?????

    well I beg to differ....

    many if not most new or somewhat curent software IS optimised for the P4 in one way or another.

    infact most new software is also optimised for AMD as well, yet not as much as intel.

    most games, photo editing, video editing, and office proggies that have come out in the last 8 months are fully optimised for the P4.

    even photoshop elements 2.0 is fully optimised for both AMD and intel's latest cpus.

    what you might be thinking of is hyperthreading.....
    yet this wont happen in sandra at this time because no intel cpu has it yet.

    mica
    Q6600 @ 3.0 (3.2 max OC), MSI P6N SLI plat, 4gigs corsair xms2, 2x 9800gtx KO in SLI, X-Fi XGamer, 2x Seagate Barracuda 250gb, Light-on 20x DVD, Thermaltake 750w PSU, air cooled with Ultama-90 and Antec 900 case....Soyo (24D6) 24" wide 14139 vantage

    " Comparing the technical relevance of The Inquirer to Beyond3D is like comparing the technical prowess of Paris Hilton to John Carmack." -Albuquerque


    [OCG] Fraging at it's finest.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Maxvla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    OKC
    Posts
    9,289
    Originally posted by Afshin_BMW
    By the way the result you sent was a little bad .
    As MAxy got 5.5 with 2.6 when 1800+ AMD took only 5

    REPLY TO MAXVLA:How ever i am on intel's side,i can prove you that amd 1800+ (1533) MHZ is even faster than P4 2.0 in every aspect. My document is Sandra 2000 professional as i said before.

    Thanks a lot.
    i think you missed the part about me having about 15 things running eating 100% of my cpu while running that "benchmark" i am unfortunately doing the same thing right now and can't stop the encoder right now without losing valuable time. i predict with a idle computer i would be able to complete the calculator challenge in less than 4 seconds.

    and you also missed the part where i said AMD chips have much much better math than Intels which is why everyone wants AMD chips for Folding/SETI crunching.

    you are not however going to convince me that a 1800+ is faster than a p4 2.0a stock speeds in any "complete computer" benchmark such as 3dmark, PCMark, etc.
    The Black Hole
    Intel i7 860 2.8ghz
    Gigabyte P55M-UD2
    Mushkin 2x2GB DDR3 1600
    EVGA GTX460 1GB
    Intel X-25M 80GB SSD
    Magnetics - 2x2TB 4x1TB
    Corsair HX850W PSU
    NEC DVD-RW

  10. #10
    Member FIZZ3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    NL, Europe
    Posts
    3,127
    Originally posted by Maxvla

    i think you missed the part about me having about 15 things running eating 100% of my cpu while running that "benchmark" i am unfortunately doing the same thing right now and can't stop the encoder right now without losing valuable time. i predict with a idle computer i would be able to complete the calculator challenge in less than 4 seconds.

    and you also missed the part where i said AMD chips have much much better math than Intels which is why everyone wants AMD chips for Folding/SETI crunching.

    you are not however going to convince me that a 1800+ is faster than a p4 2.0a stock speeds in any "complete computer" benchmark such as 3dmark, PCMark, etc.
    Come on Maxvla, we all know the True Benchmark can only be how fast you can warm up your cold feet with your toes epoxied to the CPU heatsink. The XP wins hands down! Ownage!
    Desktop:
    Intel C2D E6700 @ 2.67Ghz / TR AXP-140 | Asus P5W DH Dlx | Corsair TwinX 4Gb PC6400 CL4
    Nvidia 8800 GTS 640Mb / TR HR-03 | Creative X-Fi
    2x WD Raptor 150Gb | Plextor PX-760SA
    Lian Li V2000 Plus | Corsair HX620
    Dell 2407WFP | Logitech Z-5500

    Laptop: Sony VAIO Z11
    Intel i5-520M | 4Gb | Nvidia GT330M | 2x64Gb RAID-0 SSD | 13" 1600x900 panel

  11. #11
    AznSniper AZN's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,908
    Originally posted by Afshin_BMW
    Thanks for your help .
    But in reply to AZN , i have to say this kind of test is a really good one.The most simple way to see how much fast does your cpu handles the integer data, and it's only up to cpu's power.u know that the vast majority of the data handled by cpu is integer data.
    When you rendering a scence in 3dsmax, graphics and ....
    But u mentioned of some other testers like sandra and ...
    I only believe in the Sandra 2000 Professional, cause the higher editions are optimized for P4, giving higher scores for P4,when almost 99% of existing softwares on the earth! are not optimized yet.


    By the way the result you sent was a little bad .
    As MAxy got 5.5 with 2.6 when 1800+ AMD took only 5

    jesus christ man.... u mean all this time the OCers have been doing benchmarks all wrong??? dude... thanks for the heads up... i will uninstall pcmark right now
    BTW what should a 2.55ghz p4 processor get for timming?

    AZN
    "The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him." Stanislaw Jerszy Lec

  12. #12
    Member micamica1217's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    4,874
    Originally posted by FIZZ3


    Come on Maxvla, we all know the True Benchmark can only be how fast you can warm up your cold feet with your toes epoxied to the CPU heatsink. The XP wins hands down! Ownage!
    LMAO

    mica
    Q6600 @ 3.0 (3.2 max OC), MSI P6N SLI plat, 4gigs corsair xms2, 2x 9800gtx KO in SLI, X-Fi XGamer, 2x Seagate Barracuda 250gb, Light-on 20x DVD, Thermaltake 750w PSU, air cooled with Ultama-90 and Antec 900 case....Soyo (24D6) 24" wide 14139 vantage

    " Comparing the technical relevance of The Inquirer to Beyond3D is like comparing the technical prowess of Paris Hilton to John Carmack." -Albuquerque


    [OCG] Fraging at it's finest.

  13. #13
    Registered
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tehran
    Posts
    23
    oky oky mica.
    you're right, but you better say what should i do for my 3dsmax 3.1 to render faster than amd.cause when i use optimized version of 3dsmax,how ever intel takes over amd but the total time for rendering increases so much that i do not prefer to use it.

    by now i'm looking forward for your results to guide me to the best cpu .

    Do note this Maxvla:
    Yeah, you got the piont.i'm gonna turn you on my side.
    i'm gonna convince you, however i think i wont succeed!!
    You say 3dmark ,ok. i 've run the test on both amd & intel afore.
    knowing that the Graphic card was same on both. i had the same score for them, (amd added 29 scores to it)
    But you must consider the fact that amd 1800+ is rated as 1800 mhz and it runs at 1533 mhz, so if we want to make a comparison between P4 2000 and amd we should take at least amd 2400+ (1900 mhz).Then you will find amd too stunnig to compare to p4.
    what'd you say maxy?

    Please send more results.

    thanks in advance.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Maxvla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    OKC
    Posts
    9,289
    Originally posted by Afshin_BMW
    Do note this Maxvla:
    Yeah, you got the piont.i'm gonna turn you on my side.
    i'm gonna convince you, however i think i wont succeed!!
    You say 3dmark ,ok. i 've run the test on both amd & intel afore.
    knowing that the Graphic card was same on both. i had the same score for them, (amd added 29 scores to it)
    But you must consider the fact that amd 1800+ is rated as 1800 mhz and it runs at 1533 mhz, so if we want to make a comparison between P4 2000 and amd we should take at least amd 2400+ (1900 mhz).Then you will find amd too stunnig to compare to p4.
    what'd you say maxy?
    thats either max or maxvla... not maxy.

    have you actually done any research at all?

    the xp2400 is 2000mhz not 1900. and the amd PR (performance ratings... since you probably didn't know that) is based on Intel Mhz so the xp2000+ is the direct competition with the p4 2.0a not the 2400+.

    and you could build an amd 3dmark system to the gills and i could build a p4 3dmark system and outscore you by at least 2000 points even if you knew what you were doing.

    the bandwidth is the key to the p4s. AMD just doesn't have the memory speed to compete.
    The Black Hole
    Intel i7 860 2.8ghz
    Gigabyte P55M-UD2
    Mushkin 2x2GB DDR3 1600
    EVGA GTX460 1GB
    Intel X-25M 80GB SSD
    Magnetics - 2x2TB 4x1TB
    Corsair HX850W PSU
    NEC DVD-RW

  15. #15
    Registered
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tehran
    Posts
    23
    Oh man , take it easy AZN ,i didn mean that.
    Here is my implication:
    You can use pcmark to estimate your cpu's multimedia power.
    to rate your overall performance, you know pcmark tests are not all cpu dependent tests. there are other factors that can interfere in the result of pcmark.suck as ram,graphic card,mobo....
    But i believe 20000! is only cpu dependent.
    You may ask why this test? the answer is i prefer this ,cause it gives you the result so fast and there is no need to install any program.
    And i didn wan to bother the overclockers .
    now i think you got me man....

    But if you have pcmark 2000 or sandra 2000 results of your pc please send it too
    it would be so worthy for me

    thanks

  16. #16
    AznSniper AZN's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,908
    Originally posted by Afshin_BMW
    oky oky mica.
    you're right, but you better say what should i do for my 3dsmax 3.1 to render faster than amd.cause when i use optimized version of 3dsmax,how ever intel takes over amd but the total time for rendering increases so much that i do not prefer to use it.

    by now i'm looking forward for your results to guide me to the best cpu .

    Do note this Maxvla:
    Yeah, you got the piont.i'm gonna turn you on my side.
    i'm gonna convince you, however i think i wont succeed!!
    You say 3dmark ,ok. i 've run the test on both amd & intel afore.
    knowing that the Graphic card was same on both. i had the same score for them, (amd added 29 scores to it)
    But you must consider the fact that amd 1800+ is rated as 1800 mhz and it runs at 1533 mhz, so if we want to make a comparison between P4 2000 and amd we should take at least amd 2400+ (1900 mhz).Then you will find amd too stunnig to compare to p4.
    what'd you say maxy?

    Please send more results.

    thanks in advance.
    this is good stuff....

    did it ever occur to u that AMD named the 1533mhz a xp1800 for a reason??? its becuzz the public doesnt understand quadspeed and all the mumbo jumbo technical bs...
    the xp1800 @ 1.533ghz is comparable to a 1.8ghz intel chip... i believe that how they got the name... if im wrong explain to me y its not called a xp1533...

    AZN
    "The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him." Stanislaw Jerszy Lec

  17. #17
    AznSniper AZN's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,908
    Originally posted by Afshin_BMW
    Oh man , take it easy AZN ,i didn mean that.
    Here is my implication:
    You can use pcmark to estimate your cpu's multimedia power.
    to rate your overall performance, you know pcmark tests are not all cpu dependent tests. there are other factors that can interfere in the result of pcmark.suck as ram,graphic card,mobo....
    But i believe 20000! is only cpu dependent.
    You may ask why this test? the answer is i prefer this ,cause it gives you the result so fast and there is no need to install any program.
    And i didn wan to bother the overclockers .
    now i think you got me man....

    But if you have pcmark 2000 or sandra 2000 results of your pc please send it too
    it would be so worthy for me

    thanks
    i honestly dont know... but longer tests should be more accurate.. well most the time not all
    i just dont fully understand the 20000! test... and if amd does better math then i dont think this 1 test can tell u which cpu is better... maybe amd wins in this department, but what about everything else?

    AZN
    "The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him." Stanislaw Jerszy Lec

  18. #18
    Senior Member Maxvla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    OKC
    Posts
    9,289
    Originally posted by Afshin_BMW
    Oh man , take it easy AZN ,i didn mean that.
    Here is my implication:
    You can use pcmark to estimate your cpu's multimedia power.
    to rate your overall performance, you know pcmark tests are not all cpu dependent tests. there are other factors that can interfere in the result of pcmark.suck as ram,graphic card,mobo....
    But i believe 20000! is only cpu dependent.
    You may ask why this test? the answer is i prefer this ,cause it gives you the result so fast and there is no need to install any program.
    And i didn wan to bother the overclockers .
    now i think you got me man....

    But if you have pcmark 2000 or sandra 2000 results of your pc please send it too
    it would be so worthy for me

    thanks
    you do know you can remove all optimizations for processors for Sandra correct? change your module options.

    20000! is the funniest homemade test i've ever seen. those benchmark companies make their programs for a reason you know. they aren't just doing it for the heck of it.

    wanna take a few minutes to read up before you post again?
    The Black Hole
    Intel i7 860 2.8ghz
    Gigabyte P55M-UD2
    Mushkin 2x2GB DDR3 1600
    EVGA GTX460 1GB
    Intel X-25M 80GB SSD
    Magnetics - 2x2TB 4x1TB
    Corsair HX850W PSU
    NEC DVD-RW

  19. #19
    AznSniper AZN's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,908
    Originally posted by Maxvla

    you do know you can remove all optimizations for processors for Sandra correct? change your module options.

    20000! is the funniest homemade test i've ever seen. those benchmark companies make their programs for a reason you know. they aren't just doing it for the heck of it.

    wanna take a few minutes to read up before you post again?
    how can i get a patent for the 20000! and sell this i'll put sandra out of buisness

    AZN
    "The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him." Stanislaw Jerszy Lec

  20. #20
    Senior Member Maxvla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    OKC
    Posts
    9,289
    Originally posted by AZN

    how can i get a patent for the 20000! and sell this i'll put sandra out of buisness

    AZN
    microsoft has the patent on the calc program. good luck

    The Black Hole
    Intel i7 860 2.8ghz
    Gigabyte P55M-UD2
    Mushkin 2x2GB DDR3 1600
    EVGA GTX460 1GB
    Intel X-25M 80GB SSD
    Magnetics - 2x2TB 4x1TB
    Corsair HX850W PSU
    NEC DVD-RW

Page 1 of 4 1 2 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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