AMD Equivalent to my old P4?

[Sedgie!]

Hey guys. What would be the AMD processor that is closest in performance to my Intel Pentium 4 Northwood 2.4ghz? I'm looking to switch to AMD in the cheapest way possible, but still have the same performance.

Are there any other things you need to know about my system to answer this question?

Thanks in advance,
Sedgie

 

[E4g1e]

Hey guys. What would be the AMD processor that is closest in performance to my Intel Pentium 4 Northwood 2.4ghz? I'm looking to switch to AMD in the cheapest way possible, but still have the same performance.

The only current AMD CPU that's even close to your P4 Northwood 2.4GHz in overall performance is one of the Socket 754 Semprons (AMD's low-end line). The current Athlon64's - even the slowest-rated ones - are all speedier overall than any 2.4GHz P4.

 

[Sedgie!]

The only current AMD CPU that's even close to your P4 Northwood 2.4GHz in overall performance is one of the Socket 754 Semprons (AMD's low-end line). The current Athlon64's - even the slowest-rated ones - are all speedier overall than any 2.4GHz P4.

ouch. owned. thanks.

 

[(cf)Eclipse]

yup, just compare the pr rating. sempron 2400+ ~= celeron 2.4ghz (though in reality, the celeron blows and the sempron kills it)
likewise, an a64 3000+ = 3.0ghz p4. i have an opteron 144 running at 3ghz right now. for all practical purposes, that is an fx-59, which would be around a 4.6-4.9ghz p4

 

[NulloModo]

The only current AMD CPU that's even close to your P4 Northwood 2.4GHz in overall performance is one of the Socket 754 Semprons (AMD's low-end line). The current Athlon64's - even the slowest-rated ones - are all speedier overall than any 2.4GHz P4.

That's a lie. A P4 will kill a Sempron in anything worthwhile (maybe not gaming, but who gives a fuck). The AMD performance ratings were always a little bit ambitious... I'd wager to say an Athlon64 2800+ or so (eh, I don't know what speed ratings they come in, the only AMD processors worth a damn at the Opterons and the X2 series) would be close.

 

[ScYcS]

That's a lie. A P4 will kill a Sempron in anything worthwhile (maybe not gaming, but who gives a fuck). The AMD performance ratings were always a little bit ambitious... I'd wager to say an Athlon64 2800+ or so (eh, I don't know what speed ratings they come in, the only AMD processors worth a damn at the Opterons and the X2 series) would be close.

You so still live in 1998........The performance rating on the A64 chips are very close to reality, usually a little conservative. A64 chips (and not only Opterons) perform better than their Intel pendants.

 

[E4g1e]

That's a lie. A P4 will kill a Sempron in anything worthwhile (maybe not gaming, but who gives a fuck). The AMD performance ratings were always a little bit ambitious... I'd wager to say an Athlon64 2800+ or so (eh, I don't know what speed ratings they come in, the only AMD processors worth a damn at the Opterons and the X2 series) would be close.

I was talking only about overall performance, not just clock speeds. It's the current Pentiums and Celerons which underperform compared to their clockspeeds and heat output. C'mon, a 3.6GHz (Intel) CPU which performs no better than somebody else's 2.4GHz CPU?

(Sorry for the rant. But that's exactly how I feel about Intel these days since they came out with the Presflop, I mean Prescott, core.)

 

[NulloModo]

You so still live in 1998........The performance rating on the A64 chips are very close to reality, usually a little conservative. A64 chips (and not only Opterons) perform better than their Intel pendants.

In worthless crap like gaming. In real world tasks (video editing, audio production, file conversion, compiling, etc) the Intel chips still win, even if only by a bit and with a huge Mhz benefit...

I don't know, I think Intel is dumb to give up on Netburst, the architecture had/has lots of promise. The only thing keeping the AMD chips in the lead is Hypertransport. If Intel had had the forethought to come up with an integrated memory controller they'd still be king of the hill.

 

[ScYcS]

In worthless crap like gaming. In real world tasks (video editing, audio production, file conversion, compiling, etc) the Intel chips still win, even if only by a bit and with a huge Mhz benefit...

I'll leave this one up for discussion.

 

[E4g1e]

In worthless crap like gaming. In real world tasks (video editing, audio production, file conversion, compiling, etc) the Intel chips still win, even if only by a bit and with a huge Mhz benefit...

I don't know, I think Intel is dumb to give up on Netburst, the architecture had/has lots of promise. The only thing keeping the AMD chips in the lead is Hypertransport. If Intel had had the forethought to come up with an integrated memory controller they'd still be king of the hill.

With so much GHz (on the Intel chips), they'd constantly operate at greater than 90°C (194°F), given their recent problems.

And nope I'm not an AMD f4nb0y. But I'm really p**sed off at both companies right now.

 

[NulloModo]

With so much GHz (on the Intel chips), they'd constantly operate at greater than 90°C (194°F), given their recent problems.

And nope I'm not an AMD f4nb0y. But I'm really p**sed off at both companies right now.

I'm in the camp who who the fuck cares how hot it runs, if the stock HSF and the chip can handle it, my chip can run at 500 degrees C for all I care.

 

[Sedgie!]

eh well I got my answer I'll let you guys argue about this

 

[HighwayAssassins]

I don't know, I think Intel is dumb to give up on Netburst, the architecture had/has lots of promise. The only thing keeping the AMD chips in the lead is Hypertransport. If Intel had had the forethought to come up with an integrated memory controller they'd still be king of the hill.

dude, think about what you are saying..."if intel came out first with an integrated memory controller, intel would have it..."

duh dude, but AMD did it, and thats what sets them apart...intel was so busy trying to increase MHz because dumb people are like, well 1.8GHz vs 3.0GHz? 3.0 MUST be better!, all the while, AMD came up with a new type of CPU that is better.

AMD can think out of the box, not just think "more is better" and thats why they are becoming the king of the hill.

 

[Project_2501]

The only thing(s) keeping AMD in the lead:

More instructions per clock
Better Pricing for the performance (vs. Intel)
Lower Temps

Oh, and I forgot to mention s775, I think we all love that a socket lasts less than a year.

 

[E4g1e]

I'm in the camp who who the fuck cares how hot it runs, if the stock HSF and the chip can handle it, my chip can run at 500 degrees C for all I care.

Well, I'm the exact opposite. I want my CPU to run as close to 30°C as possible. And in my experience Windows and other operating systems become extremely unstable at CPU temps above 60 degrees C no matter which CPU I use.

By the way, since this is the AMD forum, if you're dissing AMD and hyping Intel, you're crapping on the AMD threads. And I'm actually neutral - but I just don't tolerate thread crapping of any kind.

 

[NulloModo]

dude, think about what you are saying..."if intel came out first with an integrated memory controller, intel would have it..."

duh dude, but AMD did it, and thats what sets them apart...intel was so busy trying to increase MHz because dumb people are like, well 1.8GHz vs 3.0GHz? 3.0 MUST be better!, all the while, AMD came up with a new type of CPU that is better.

AMD can think out of the box, not just think "more is better" and thats why they are becoming the king of the hill.

True, Intel made a GM move and increased displacement instead of throwing on a turbo or inventing VVTI Still, they know now, and it will come... the next wave from Intel will put AMD back where it was two years ago: struggling to stay alive.

 

[ScYcS]

True, Intel made a GM move and increased displacement instead of throwing on a turbo or inventing VVTI Still, they know now, and it will come... the next wave from Intel will put AMD back where it was two years ago: struggling to stay alive.

ooooh boy.....you know....the intel fanclub is one section below this one. I think you should get real. AMD won't struggle. Intel doesn't struggle (mostly due to their oem sales). AMD can only gain (once their OEM sales go up).

 

[HighwayAssassins]

True, Intel made a GM move and increased displacement instead of throwing on a turbo or inventing VVTI Still, they know now, and it will come... the next wave from Intel will put AMD back where it was two years ago: struggling to stay alive.

well thats certainly possible, but its people like you who will always buy intel and not the better CPU for less money that will make that happen

i love the way you hate the little guy. mayby mcdonalds, starbucks and microsoft will destroy all mom and pop stores and you will ONLY be able to get their products, and for more money too! i cant wait!

 

[NulloModo]

ooooh boy.....you know....the intel fanclub is one section below this one. I think you should get real. AMD won't struggle. Intel doesn't struggle (mostly due to their oem sales). AMD can only gain (once their OEM sales go up).

They won't. AMD is beating Intel in sales right now because they are kicking Intel's ass in performance per buck as far as what most users are concerned in. Hell, if I were looking for a dual proc rig right now, I'd be dumb as shit not to go AMD. Still, Intel will learn the lesson, they have egg on their face right now, they won't stand for that for long.

 

[NulloModo]

well thats certainly possible, but its people like you who will always buy intel and not the better CPU for less money that will make that happen

i love the way you hate the little guy. mayby mcdonalds, starbucks and microsoft will destroy all mom and pop stores and you will ONLY be able to get their products, and for more money too! i cant wait!

I don't hate AMD, in fact, I respect them for being able to best Intel this round. However, the next round, and the several after that, Intel will come back. Competition is good for all of us. I'd prefer not to have to buy another AMD chip (eh, hard to forget the hell I went through with a K6 and two K6-2s), but right now, like I said above, it would be the smart move. Luckily, I am more than happy with the performance of my P4 2.4 northwood for the time being.

 

[E4g1e]

They won't. AMD is beating Intel in sales right now because they are kicking Intel's ass in performance per buck as far as what most users are concerned in. Hell, if I were looking for a dual proc rig right now, I'd be dumb as shit not to go AMD. Still, Intel will learn the lesson, they have egg on their face right now, they won't stand for that for long.

Maybe for the time being. But in the long run, computing will have pulled a 180-degree turnaround: Intel's forthcoming new chips will use the old Pentium III architecture, which means no SSE3 support and fewer features than the current Pentium 4 CPUs. (What that means is that programs which require SSE3 support which ran on Pentium 4 systems will not run at all on the next-gen Intel CPUs. But then again, such programs are few in number.) And who knows what the next move from Intel will be after that? Back to the 286 days (but at a far higher clock speed rate than 8MHz)?

 

[Josh_B]

True, Intel made a GM move and increased displacement instead of throwing on a turbo or inventing VVTI Still, they know now, and it will come... the next wave from Intel will put AMD back where it was two years ago: struggling to stay alive.

While AMD may not be changing their architecture much, they already have a lead, and they intend to provide evolutionary technology for the coming year.

Intel will not have a Pentium M that can do IA-32e until 2007. The Pentium M-based desktop and server chips will need this feature before they can be taken seriously. (My opinion.)

 

[ScYcS]

I don't know man....don't get me wrong, i had an intel 2.53 and a 2.6 until recently. Both were good chips for the time being, but simply said, Intel had MORE than enough time to beat AMD and yet, they still haven't made a chip comparable in price and performance. I doubt seriously that this will change anytime soon, considering that AMD is not quite sitting on their laurels not developing anything either.

 

[NulloModo]

While AMD may not be changing their architecture much, they already have a lead, and they intend to provide evolutionary technology for the coming year.

Intel will not have a Pentium M that can do IA-32e until 2007. The Pentium M-based desktop and server chips will need this feature before they can be taken seriously. (My opinion.)

That is a fundamental point on which we disagree. Intel rules 80%+ of the overall computing world. Developers will be afraid to touch 64 bit apps as primary platforms when the majority of users are still using 32 bit machines.

 

[HighwayAssassins]

I don't hate AMD, in fact, I respect them for being able to best Intel this round. However, the next round, and the several after that, Intel will come back. Competition is good for all of us. I'd prefer not to have to buy another AMD chip (eh, hard to forget the hell I went through with a K6 and two K6-2s), but right now, like I said above, it would be the smart move. Luckily, I am more than happy with the performance of my P4 2.4 northwood for the time being.

well as long as you respect AMD, and are not bashing them, and realize the performance benefits, that thats fine and i respect you and your opinion...its people who are like "well AMD isnt intel, therefore they suck" that get under my skin.

but then again, you cant base a current product off of old ones, if i had used the bad experience of my first nVidia card, i wouldnt have had my 6800GT that suited my needs at the time and i love oh so much...

EDIT: Dont forget my 1.8GHz $150 CPU purchase...and look what its doing now

 

[HighwayAssassins]

That is a fundamental point on which we disagree. Intel rules 80%+ of the overall computing world. Developers will be afraid to touch 64 bit apps as primary platforms when the majority of users are still using 32 bit machines.

not true. intel is also selling 64 bit machines now...infact i dont think you can buy a non-64 bit Pentium 4 dell machine anymore. (admitadly i could be wrong on that one)

when vista comes out, i bet over 50% of the USA, and likely more of the business world will be able to run and use x64 vista and software.

The world isnt as scared of change as you want it to be...we moved up to 32 bit didnt we?

 

[NulloModo]

well as long as you respect AMD, and are not bashing them, and realize the performance benefits, that thats fine and i respect you and your opinion...its people who are like "well AMD isnt intel, therefore they suck" that get under my skin.

but then again, you cant base a current product off of old ones, if i had used the bad experience of my first nVidia card, i wouldnt have had my 6800GT that suited my needs at the time and i love oh so much...

EDIT: Dont forget my 1.8GHz $150 CPU purchase...and look what its doing now

I agree. And hell, I am at a dead-end upgrade point anyway, I have a socket 478 mobo, so whatever company I pick, I will need a new one. I realize that AMD has come a long way, but so has Intel since then... I know that there is more than Mhz, and that memory bandwidth can mean major things, but still... it is far from cut and dry. The top end Intel chips still beat AMD chips in the things I do most (encoding, ripping, editing, etc). Then again, a new Quad-Core Powermac would beat both (at 2x the cost... but oooh, it so pretty...). I would honestly be much more apt to go with AMD if they would release their own chipset to go with the new M2 socket.

 

[NulloModo]

not true. intel is also selling 64 bit machines now...infact i dont think you can buy a non-64 bit Pentium 4 dell machine anymore. (admitadly i could be wrong on that one)

when vista comes out, i bet over 50% of the USA, and likely more of the business world will be able to run and use x64 vista and software.

The world isnt as scared of change as you want it to be...we moved up to 32 bit didnt we?

You can, any P-M laptop . And a lot of people are perfectly happy with the 32 bit P4 machines. Comp gamers represent a very small percentage of the market, and they are the major ones who upgrade chronically. For the rest of us, any chip, Athlon, or P4, truly 2 Ghz or just rated such does everything more that fine. There needs to be a new killer-app that drives the upgrade market before everyone jumps on the 64-bit bandwagon.

 

[HighwayAssassins]

I agree. And hell, I am at a dead-end upgrade point anyway, I have a socket 478 mobo, so whatever company I pick, I will need a new one. I realize that AMD has come a long way, but so has Intel since then... I know that there is more than Mhz, and that memory bandwidth can mean major things, but still... it is far from cut and dry. The top end Intel chips still beat AMD chips in the things I do most (encoding, ripping, editing, etc). Then again, a new Quad-Core Powermac would beat both (at 2x the cost... but oooh, it so pretty...). I would honestly be much more apt to go with AMD if they would release their own chipset to go with the new M2 socket.

i agree, AMD should make a 1st party chipset, i think that will make them be alot more attractive to OEM companies like dell etc...

But as far as 64 bit and Dual core go, AMD is the clear winner. I think intel even said that the pentium D's were a rush to get a product out there to compete, forgive me for not having a link.

And i bet the FX-57 is faster than a comparable Intel chip (especially overclocked, but thats just the way i think, CPUs are made for overclocking )...but only benchies can tell us that.

 

[ScYcS]

I agree on the chipset idea. A smart move from AMD would be to buy a chipset maker like Uli and brand them AMD.

 

[HighwayAssassins]

I agree on the chipset idea. A smart move from AMD would be to buy a chipset maker like Uli and brand them AMD.

haha, first party only by name.

 

[NulloModo]

i agree, AMD should make a 1st party chipset, i think that will make them be alot more attractive to OEM companies like dell etc...

But as far as 64 bit and Dual core go, AMD is the clear winner. I think intel even said that the pentium D's were a rush to get a product out there to compete, forgive me for not having a link.

And i bet the FX-57 is faster than a comparable Intel chip (especially overclocked, but thats just the way i think, CPUs are made for overclocking )...but only benchies can tell us that.

Hmm, that is a toughie. Most AMD chips run much cooler than Intel, but the FX-57 is a balls to the wall no holds barred top of the line product... If AMD could release something faster consistently, I'm sure they would. Plus the damn thing is over $1000 (ick, I can remember when people balked at chips costing $500). Being single core I'm sure it has some potential if you do water cooling or phase-change, but that is beyong the means/desfire for most of us. Hell, I will overclock to the limits of my stock HSF, but not more than that (i'd end up breaking something if I tried to exchange HSFs, I am a klutz).

 

[ScYcS]

haha, first party only by name.

True. And much more cost effective than spending money on R&D to make a brand new chipset. ULi is by far not the worst chipset maker and i can only assume that it would open up quite some possibilities for pure AMD brand OEM machines.

 

[NulloModo]

True. And much more cost effective than spending money on R&D to make a brand new chipset. ULi is by far not the worst chipset maker and i can only assume that it would open up quite some possibilities for pure AMD brand OEM machines.

But the proof is in the pudding, when it comes to first party chipsets stability is key. That is the main reason I went intel/intel with my last machine. Of course, now this damn box is lucky if it runs for three days without needing a reboot (running for three years without a reformat will do that), while my Dell Latitude has been running constantly for over two months without one.

 

[ScYcS]

Again, I think you still have the K6 mindset. AMD chipsets are not unstable. Heck, even VIA (and let me tell you i had my fair share of VIA chipsets; mostly hated them) learned and makes a stable chipset. We have one (!) AMD server at work and i honestly can't remember when we rebooted it last. I think it was due to a power outage.

 

[NulloModo]

Again, I think you still have the K6 mindset. AMD chipsets are not unstable. Heck, even VIA (and let me tell you i had my fair share of VIA chipsets; mostly hated them) learned and makes a stable chipset. We have one (!) AMD server at work and i honestly can't remember when we rebooted it last. I think it was due to a power outage.

Eh, Maybe I will try again, last I checked ATI makes AMD chipsets now, right? That is another company I trust... I dunno, living for four+ years with a K6 tends to give one second thoughts

EDIT:

It was better than those damn Cyrix chips I used at least.

 

[ScYcS]

Eh, Maybe I will try again, last I checked ATI makes AMD chipsets now, right? That is another company I trust... I dunno, living for four+ years with a K6 tends to give one second thoughts

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. K6 was not the best chip and the chipsets for it were abysmal.

ATI makes a chipset for AMD, yes, but honestly, i trust their videocards more than their chipsets. I guess we gotta see how they turn out, but i had good experience with the newest Uli chipset and the nforce4 chipset stability wise. VIA i simply can't buy anymore. If i see one more 4in1 driver download in my life, i think i hit the can.

 

[NulloModo]

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. K6 was not the best chip and the chipsets for it were abysmal.

ATI makes a chipset for AMD, yes, but honestly, i trust their videocards more than their chipsets. I guess we gotta see how they turn out, but i had good experience with the newest Uli chipset and the nforce4 chipset stability wise. VIA i simply can't buy anymore. If i see one more 4in1 driver download in my life, i think i hit the can.

Heh, 4in1s... those bring back (bad) memories. Well, I figure I will have to go ATI if I want Crossfire. Sure SLI is out right now, but after nVidia fucked me over a bench so hard on support with the first (and only) card I bought from them, I am not touching them again (if you can't tell, I hold a grudge).

 

[HighwayAssassins]

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. K6 was not the best chip and the chipsets for it were abysmal.

ATI makes a chipset for AMD, yes, but honestly, i trust their videocards more than their chipsets. I guess we gotta see how they turn out, but i had good experience with the newest Uli chipset and the nforce4 chipset stability wise. VIA i simply can't buy anymore. If i see one more 4in1 driver download in my life, i think i hit the can.

dude, i HATED via and even more so the 4 in 1 drivers.

 

[NulloModo]

dude, i HATED via and even more so the 4 in 1 drivers.

Yeah, VIA for the fucking Death penalty... it is such a shame they bought out S3... I loved those cards.... My Savage2000 using the MeTaL drivers ran the original Unreal Tournament like nothing else... I still have that box somewhere (i.e. buried in a closet back in my old house in my sister's room). I'd still buy S3 cards now if they were their own company (hey, my first graphics card was an S3 - Diamond Viper 4MB VRAM, gotta have some loyalty).