- Sep 24, 2001
- Currently Nowhere
Here is the article:
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
With ZD, it's usually the other way around. It may appear more biased because the AMD processors are much more widely accepted in Europe. I just wish a major business machine mfr. would use them. I would push for our company to use them. AMD's kick butt on office applications and offer better price/performance.NeoMoses said:Did anyone else think that article sounded biased towards AMD, though? Sure AthlonXPs are good, but that article sounded more like an advertisement than a comparison. (at least to me.)
1.7 MHz -- That's slower than the original IBM PC 8086 running at 4.77 MHz!AXIA said:LOL!!!!
"LONDON--The performance of Intel's new 2.4GHz Pentium 4 desktop processor merely edges ahead of AMD's latest Athlon XP 2100+, running at 1.733MHz, despite the Intel processor's 667MHz lead over the Athlon, according to new ZDNet UKbenchmark tests."
Ok, am I seeing things or is that 1.7MHz? I think AMDs XP2100 runs alot faster than 1.73MHz, ZD should be ashamed!
I find this interesting not all gamming benchs P4 wins, P4 just do well in Quake3 because its optimized but i find it stu*** because pentiums never needed optimized software to run fast.However, on many other tests the Rambus-equipped Pentium 4 system shines. It beats the Athlon XP 2100+ on about half of the Internet performance tests, and on high-end application performance. It scores higher on all gaming tests. The chip will gain a further advantage as more applications arrive optimized for Pentium 4.