Amd And Intel

[dustybyrd]

obviously you haven't been paying attention to the intel forum.

the greatest chip intel has released in a long time was the 2.4b the 2.4c is only marginally better because of the fsb. the chip is actually identical (i think) to the 2.4b except it has a lower multiplier and HT is enabled. they are hitting the same speeds. 3.4-3.6ghz on air.

i have been paying attention...it's just that i like to multitask a lot...and i feel that the hyperthreading is a really nice feature (although i haven't used it yet) and that is what makes the 2.4c better than the 2.4b...

 

[dustybyrd]

but hey instant ramen has pretty good price/performance too and most people don't live off of that.

 

[Maxvla]

i have been paying attention...it's just that i like to multitask a lot...and i feel that the hyperthreading is a really nice feature (although i haven't used it yet) and that is what makes the 2.4c better than the 2.4b...

i agree but if you remember... an amazing fsb overclock before the 2.4b C1's was 175-180. right out of the box on air you could do 190-195 and sometimes even 200fsb with the 2.4b costa week 52 sl6rz's.

also.. i love the ramen comment.

 

[AZN]

1st...i'm not trying to start a war...and i am not berating the p4 800mhz chips...i think the 2.4c is the first great chip intel has had in a while....

...the cost of two barton amd XP's that can be modded to run dual is about the same as a 2.4c...and an MSI k7d mobo is about $180...not much more than the abit or asus....or you can get two amd 1700xp's for about $100 and then run them almost the same speed after changing the multipliers...

i don't have this AMD duallie to compare benchmarks(although i would love one)---i made a mistake putting the p3 tually dually together instead (it cost me about $100 more and it's not as fast)

but i would be curious too...

i think if you averaged all the benchies the 2.4c would be slightly better....

but i would say that a true dual system might be a lot more responsive when really pushing the system with many tasks...

im not asking for a war just for people to back up their claims thats all. ive heard time after time u get this amd chip with this board for this price and it will beat this and that but when i ask for them to prove it they run off.
intel vs amd as we all know is beating a dead horse but the only reason its still discussed is cuzz of the fanboys supporting the underdog. now this is a good thing, without amd intel would still be asking for the insane prices for new chip as if the prices arnt bad enough.

 

[TC]

A true dual cpu system will definitely outperform a P4 HT in many benchmarks - there's no question about that. Don't get too excited about the Seti benchmark though. I have a dual AMD system running my SetiQ server. It's two XP 1600's overclocked to 1900+ on an A7M266D. Just to give you some idea of how that performs with respect to Seti - the dual AMD system turns out 11 units per day average. My single 3.0C OC to 3500 does 18 per day average. In my book that's serious computational power out of one physical cpu.

 

[Burning Phoenix]

Is it me or does it seem everytime a thread pops up with this title that the first few posts are only by AMDers?

 

[AZN]

Is it me or does it seem everytime a thread pops up with this title that the first few posts are only by AMDers?

yes ive notice that too. i guess its the AMDroid mind or something. they are like the borg, dont give up untill they get detached or somthing like unplugged from the matrix.
i remember when i use to be a AMDroid, boy did i say some dumb things. i guess i can see where they are comming from since i use to be a fanboy. I guess its that competitive attitude trying to keep the underdog alive.

BTW, i have no clue what i just said.

 

[dustybyrd]

you see, i've never even owned an AMD...but it just seems to me that if you actually got to use a dual AMD overclocked to 2.4ghz+ and a 2.4b @ 3.5ghz for a week each you would probably choose the dual AMD...

because i doubt you would notice the difference in raw speed...but you would notice the difference in multitasking...

now, i'm not sure about the 2.4c with hyperthreading...that might actually be comparable to a dual....

does anyone have both?

 

[AZN]

how much would it cost to make a dually at 2.4ghz amd? just chip and board and cooling

 

[Maxvla]

i would get the intel even if it did turn out to be slower.

one reason. stability.

intel doesn't make crappy chipsets. my BD7II is proof. this board (845E) is designed to run at 100mhz or 133mhz but i have it running right now at 195fsb completely stable. 200fsb is doable but not quite stable. mind you this is with stock cooling. just the hs on the northbridge and air cooling on the processor.

i can't even begin to count the massive numbers of amd board threads about how crappy the chipset is or problems with the board directly due to the chipset having a problem. you don't see intel board people getting excited over northbridge steppings do you? thats because its done right the very first time.

 

[dustybyrd]

how much would it cost to make a dually at 2.4ghz amd? just chip and board and cooling

board=180
cpus=88-180 (1700xp versus 2500barton)
cooling should be the same as p4...

are one of you rich guys thinking of putting one together and comparing it yourself?

 

[Maxvla]

cooling would be the same as the p4???

how can you say that?

cooling 1 processor is always cheaper than cooling 2.

 

[dustybyrd]

cooling would be the same as the p4???

how can you say that?

cooling 1 processor is always cheaper than cooling 2.

oh yeah, oops

add another 30

 

[Maxvla]

p4 2.4c 186.00
abit IC7 - 143.00
slk900U - 39.99 (svc sale)
92mm fan approx 10 dollars.

379.00

2x slk900U 80.00
2x same fan 20.00
2x xp1700 120.00
motherboard - 180.00

400.00

xp1700's that will do what you are wanting are 59.99 at svc.

change to 2500+ bartons and you are up to 186 for processors making your total for the amd setup 466.00

neither of which are cheaper than the intel setup.

 

[AZN]

are u sure the xp1700 on dual will get 2.4ghz? it seems those chips on regular boards are hard enough to make 2.4ghz so is doing duall just as simple? or should i say hard.

 

[Maxvla]

are u sure the xp1700 on dual will get 2.4ghz? it seems those chips on regular boards are hard enough to make 2.4ghz so is doing duall just as simple? or should i say hard.

thats true. most duallies can't oc as well when locked together with 2 chips. individually those chips usually oc better.

 

[dustybyrd]

p4 2.4c 186.00
abit IC7 - 143.00
slk900U - 39.99 (svc sale)
92mm fan approx 10 dollars.

379.00

2x slk900U 80.00
2x same fan 20.00
2x xp1700 120.00
motherboard - 180.00

400.00

xp1700's that will do what you are wanting are 59.99 at svc.

change to 2500+ bartons and you are up to 186 for processors making your total for the amd setup 466.00

neither of which are cheaper than the intel setup.

well..you can get the 1700's at newegg for $44 a piece and that means substract $30 for a new total of $369 or 10 bucks cheaper

now it's true that the bartons will cost $80 more...

 

[dustybyrd]

thats true. most duallies can't oc as well when locked together with 2 chips. individually those chips usually oc better.

yeah...you're right....but they probably will hit 2.2 ghz...

that's still pretty good and again, this is a dual...

 

[Maxvla]

well..you can get the 1700's at newegg for $44 a piece and that means substract $30 for a new total of $369 or 10 bucks cheaper

now it's true that the bartons will cost $80 more...

sure you can go for the cheap ones but you said you wanted 2.4ghz 1700+'s.. which means you buy the good codes. which are 60 a piece. don't toy with the prices just to have them come out in your favor. you wouldn't buy those if you wanted to get the 2.4ghz now would you?

 

[Maxvla]

you run off?