AMD Equivalent to my old P4?

amd64's are great little processors. yes there faster than a p4 in gaming but they do have there downfalls.

if you wanna play the windows64 game you better learn, intel 8xx , 7xx ,6xx, 5xxj all support 64bit

now before i get flamed for this rember i do own 2 amd64's.

the pentium m is faster than a amd 64 at the same clockspeeds. this is also done by using a single channel memory controler, and low fsb. intel is definatly on the right track.

also rember the socket 939 is dead next year with the release of m2 so go ahead and laugh about the 1 year socket.

is your old 2.4 a a,b, or c processor? generally it is about as fast as a 2800+ barton socket a. rember a barton generally gives up about 500mhz to a amd64.
 
NulloModo said:
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).
Click to expand...
Well if you had a problem with an RMA or something along those lines it's not really nvidia's fault that you had a bad experience. That is solely the card manufacturer's fault. If you didnt get the performance you were expecting out of your card then that's your fault for not doing enough research. If you had driver problems then that you can blame on nvidia.
 
NulloModo said:
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.
Click to expand...
uhhhh.... you do realize that the problems with the early AMD cpus were the crappy chipsets available at the time with lousy AGP implementation????? If there had been a good chipset the things would have been great.... but now much has changed, every AMD64 system I have built or used has been 100% rock-stable (used 4 different chipsets so far)......
 
mrbigshot said:
if you wanna play the windows64 game you better learn, intel 8xx , 7xx ,6xx, 5xxj all support 64bit
Click to expand...
Yes, but the 64-bit support on the p4's is much slower than on an A64. It's just a crappy implementation in my opinion.
mrbigshot said:
the pentium m is faster than a amd 64 at the same clockspeeds. this is also done by using a single channel memory controler, and low fsb. intel is definatly on the right track.
Click to expand...
The P-M is a great processor but it has many drawbacks. It has an extremely weak FPU and performs very poor in most tasks (gaming not included). Also, much of the performance is due to the lightning fast L2 cache.
mrbigshot said:
also rember the socket 939 is dead next year with the release of m2 so go ahead and laugh about the 1 year socket.
Click to expand...
Yes, but 939 has been out for a while and you didnt need to get a new motherboard every time you want to get a processor with a different FSB or is dual core.
 
NulloModo said:
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).
Click to expand...

You don't like VIA, but you like S3?

The Savage 2000, which I also happen to own, had the most "unusual" drivers I've ever seen. They were great for UT and QIII, but sucked at almost everything else. D3D support was pathetic, as was compatibility.

I am not really happy with VIA either, but it seems odd that you like S3, but despise VIA. ;)
 
Flak Monkey said:
Well if you had a problem with an RMA or something along those lines it's not really nvidia's fault that you had a bad experience. That is solely the card manufacturer's fault. If you didnt get the performance you were expecting out of your card then that's your fault for not doing enough research. If you had driver problems then that you can blame on nvidia.
Click to expand...
QFT
 
Flak Monkey said:
Well if you had a problem with an RMA or something along those lines it's not really nvidia's fault that you had a bad experience. That is solely the card manufacturer's fault. If you didnt get the performance you were expecting out of your card then that's your fault for not doing enough research. If you had driver problems then that you can blame on nvidia.
Click to expand...

Eh, I don't do RMAs, too much trouble. The card was by umm... well, fuck if I know, Creative maybe? or maybe not. I called nVidia for Driver support and they blew me off. On the other hand, 3DFX, S3 and ATI have always been great about that, they don't care who made the card, the just want to help.
 
Josh_B said:
You don't like VIA, but you like S3?

The Savage 2000, which I also happen to own, had the most "unusual" drivers I've ever seen. They were great for UT and QIII, but sucked at almost everything else. D3D support was pathetic, as was compatibility.

I am not really happy with VIA either, but it seems odd that you like S3, but despise VIA. ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I like S3, so, I like certain underdogs.... that card rocked in UT and Q3 (all I played on the comp at the time).
 
Who honestly gives a fuck? Im sure about 90% of you are thinking to yourself "not me". Whoever posted here, and argued about it, is a lieing bastard. You had to care enough to go to this thread, hit reply, and type, then hit submit reply.

my video card hits 65C sometimes and I dont give a shit, it is nowhere near what its danger zone is. My celeron laptop hits about 70ish sometimes, dont give a shit. it works fine, whoop dee doo. My younger brothers amd rig with the stock cooler that is plugged full of cat hair hits 40C sometimes. Like the poster a few pages back said, I dont care. If the cpu runs at 500C, and works fine, good. Whatever. End of story for me.

Buy what works best for what you are doing on your computer. I wanted to play games for cheap and not burn the paint off my wall near my pc from heat. $154.00 for a 1.8Ghz winnie in february. Couldnt say the same for intel. they didnt have any cheapass but good performing junk in my budget range.

Honestly, some of you intel vs amd people seem as bad as the microsoft vs linux group.

At least there were some good arguments, that had actual facts in them. Some forums just scream "dood joo are a fag dood lolz INTEL is uber 1337...". I hope this never happens here.
 
yea, it was really just a friendly argument...im not going to go to the guys house and beat him up over all this; no one really cares...
 
Josh_B said:
You don't like VIA, but you like S3?

The Savage 2000, which I also happen to own, had the most "unusual" drivers I've ever seen. They were great for UT and QIII, but sucked at almost everything else. D3D support was pathetic, as was compatibility.

I am not really happy with VIA either, but it seems odd that you like S3, but despise VIA. ;)
Click to expand...

S3 was the loveable underdog, the card was sorta dissapointing when you didn't use MeTaL (how however the fuck they capatalized it) drivers, but when you did, wow...

Plus, my first graphics card ever was from S3, and it rocked back in the pre-win95 days

EDIT:

And I dont _really_ hate VIA, I've always sorta wanted a transmeta CPU (VIA owns transmeta now don't they?) but I like collected odd old chips, the catch is I actually like to run them, I have a virtual old CPU farm in the corner of my room. Plus the biblical code-names, if odd, were at at least unique.
 
E4g1e said:
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.
Click to expand...

My 3Ghz HT presflop runs 60C @ load, in the 40's @ Idle,

I hated the K6-2+ days, still have a 550mhz as a spare computer with a apollo chipset, yay!

I then moved on to a K7 750mhz pre-thunderbird core, when it ran it ran great, it seemed faster than my P3 1Ghz Taulatin, except the MSI motherboard for the K7 had gotten Badcap disease and when to the farm! From then i have stuck with Intel, If i fully do another upgrade soon i would probably go to AMD and fancy the M2.

This is just like the Nvidia vs. ATI threads, people just like to proclaim what is best at the time, One day its ATI is top with the 9xxx series, then its the Geforce 7800 series, and now its the X1800xl thats supposed to be the best.
 
NulloModo said:
Yeah, I like S3, so, I like certain underdogs.... that card rocked in UT and Q3 (all I played on the comp at the time).
Click to expand...

The point was that AMD is much more reliable than any S3 products I've used before. The Savage 2000 was a broken card. They released an expensive video card with a broken T&L unit, for chists' sake!

Everyone has the right to my opinion! :D
 
NulloModo said:
S3 was the loveable underdog, the card was sorta dissapointing when you didn't use MeTaL (how however the fuck they capatalized it) drivers, but when you did, wow...
Click to expand...

...must...resists...urge....to........continue.......................posting.

GAH!

That's because their MeTaL drivers must've used OpenGL and I believe they heavily made use of bump mapping.
 
RogueTrip said:
This is just like the Nvidia vs. ATI threads, people just like to proclaim what is best at the time, One day its ATI is top with the 9xxx series, then its the Geforce 7800 series, and now its the X1800xl thats supposed to be the best.
Click to expand...

Actually the x1800xl gets beat by the 7800gt in most test and 7800gtx in virtually all (including Fear). The x1800xt is supposed to be better, but we'll see. As of now, Nvidia still holds the crown.
 
bob said:
Who honestly gives a fuck? Im sure about 90% of you are thinking to yourself "not me". Whoever posted here, and argued about it, is a lieing bastard. You had to care enough to go to this thread, hit reply, and type, then hit submit reply.

my video card hits 65C sometimes and I dont give a shit, it is nowhere near what its danger zone is. My celeron laptop hits about 70ish sometimes, dont give a shit. it works fine, whoop dee doo. My younger brothers amd rig with the stock cooler that is plugged full of cat hair hits 40C sometimes. Like the poster a few pages back said, I dont care. If the cpu runs at 500C, and works fine, good. Whatever. End of story for me.

Buy what works best for what you are doing on your computer. I wanted to play games for cheap and not burn the paint off my wall near my pc from heat. $154.00 for a 1.8Ghz winnie in february. Couldnt say the same for intel. they didnt have any cheapass but good performing junk in my budget range.

Honestly, some of you intel vs amd people seem as bad as the microsoft vs linux group.

At least there were some good arguments, that had actual facts in them. Some forums just scream "dood joo are a fag dood lolz INTEL is uber 1337...". I hope this never happens here.
Click to expand...




One of the best replies ever...people trip out when I say my 2.6ghz X2 hits 59c....whoppee shit, it is rated for 67c max...I am well under that....people get too fucking anal about temps, if the bitch is stable, forget about it....
 
As quoted by the Rapture...

One of the best replies ever...people trip out when I say my 2.6ghz X2 hits 59c....whoppee shit, it is rated for 67c max...I am well under that....people get too fucking anal about temps, if the bitch is stable, forget about it....
Click to expand...

I'll trade you my S754 [email protected] (idles 30 deg C, loads at about 45 deg C) for your X2! :) I need a heater up here in the great white north, winter's getting close! :D

You're correct though. Too many people get overly concerned about temperatures above 60 degrees celcius. During the summer heatwave here (temps in the 100 deg F and above) for over 2 weeks, my system ran at about 65 deg C load and I never had a single problem.
 
i could care less if i had intel or amd. i buy what fits my needs best, when i got my rig i looked at both and picked what better suited me, this time i went with amd.

i use my rig for gaming and making movies and im more then happy with my x2 4400+
personaly i dont think i would be as happy with my rig had i gone with intel, amd's dual core just blew me away. this time amd was the right buy for me. to each his own.
 
Nidhogg said:
i could care less if i had intel or amd. i buy what fits my needs best, when i got my rig i looked at both and picked what better suited me, this time i went with amd.
Click to expand...
werd...
 
Just admit it now, both companies have done something shitty in their history, and yes older VIA chipsets really sucked, but I think both Intel and AMD can thank nvidia for their chipset development. I honestly am glad their are so many options, I would hate it if Intel or AMD bought out Nvidia or ATI for their chipsets. It's the options and choices and competition that keep people like us in the game. If we had no choices we would all be running Dells or something. It would be like everyone driving the same dull gray car. Use what best works for you, your budget, and your needs. You don't have to convice anyone to use what you are using, and you don't have to justify what you are using to anyone else.
 
Oh, and to actually answer the thread poster's question, since you have an AGP video card, your best solution would be to go with a socket 939 cpu (3000+ venice) and either a nforce3 ultra motherboard, or maybe this board from asrock, that way you can still use your video card, but won't have to get a new motherboard when you want to go pci-x, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813157081
 
E4g1e said:
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)?
Click to expand...

Wow. :eek: I don't know where some people get their information.

Intel's next processor architecture is not the P3's at all. More to the point, they will be Dothan based, which takes some of the best parts of the Pentium III's core design, (which actually came from the Pentium Pro if you want to get technical) and combines that with Netbursts strength. (Cache design mainly). All current instruction sets, and likely new ones will be added to the new design. Which will first show up in the upcomming Yonah processor.

Here is an article to get educated about Intel's future plans.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2329

Here is an article to educate you on the Pentium M processor architecture.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050525/

This article contains a small amount of information on the upcomming Conroe processor from Intel.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040222123818.html

In short, Intels replacement for Netburst is neither a P6 core (PPro/PII/PIII) or a Banias/Dothan (Pentium-M) or even Yonah, although it will have features found in many of their existing processor families. :cool:
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
Wow. :eek: I don't know where some people get their information.

Intel's next processor architecture is not the P3's at all. More to the point, they will be Dothan based, which takes some of the best parts of the Pentium III's core design, (which actually came from the Pentium Pro if you want to get technical) and combines that with Netbursts strength. (Cache design mainly). All current instruction sets, and likely new ones will be added to the new design. Which will first show up in the upcomming Yonah processor.

Here is an article to get educated about Intel's future plans.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2329

Here is an article to educate you on the Pentium M processor architecture.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050525/

This article contains a small amount of information on the upcomming Conroe processor from Intel.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040222123818.html

In short, Intels replacement for Netburst is neither a P6 core (PPro/PII/PIII) or a Banias/Dothan (Pentium-M) or even Yonah, although it will have features found in many of their existing processor families. :cool:
Click to expand...

Thanks. I was quite sarcastic when I made that previous post. ;)
 
Nidhogg said:
i could care less if i had intel or amd. i buy what fits my needs best, when i got my rig i looked at both and picked what better suited me, this time i went with amd.

i use my rig for gaming and making movies and im more then happy with my x2 4400+
personaly i dont think i would be as happy with my rig had i gone with intel, amd's dual core just blew me away. this time amd was the right buy for me. to each his own.
Click to expand...

Thats why i have AMD right now, but also switch between nVidia and ATI whenever new card comes out...it comes down to performance
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
Wow. :eek: I don't know where some people get their information.

Intel's next processor architecture is not the P3's at all. More to the point, they will be Dothan based, which takes some of the best parts of the Pentium III's core design, (which actually came from the Pentium Pro if you want to get technical) and combines that with Netbursts strength. (Cache design mainly). All current instruction sets, and likely new ones will be added to the new design. Which will first show up in the upcomming Yonah processor.

Here is an article to get educated about Intel's future plans.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2329

Here is an article to educate you on the Pentium M processor architecture.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050525/

This article contains a small amount of information on the upcomming Conroe processor from Intel.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040222123818.html

In short, Intels replacement for Netburst is neither a P6 core (PPro/PII/PIII) or a Banias/Dothan (Pentium-M) or even Yonah, although it will have features found in many of their existing processor families. :cool:
Click to expand...

Very interesting articles...especially the one on the Pentium M stufff....



I CANT believe a Pentium M beats an FX-55 in Farcry 1024x768.

Amazing, and with a socket adapter too!
 
HighwayAssassins said:
I CANT believe a Pentium M beats an FX-55 in Farcry 1024x768.

Amazing, and with a socket adapter too!
Click to expand...
Only and overclocked Pentium M, none of the other processors are overclocked in that benchmark, not really a level playing field. And what does the socket adapter have anything to do with performance, all it does is reroute pins.
 
Well the one directly under the FX-55 is stock and comes prety close...

and i wasnt aware that the adapter just rerouts pins. :rolleyes:
 
ScYcS said:
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.
Click to expand...


yea i used both p4 3.0ghz and AMD64 3000+ and all i have noticed is AMD is better at gaming by 5 - 10fps. everything else it useless compared to the p4 3.0ghz unless i overclock the AMD64 3000+ venice

freeloader1969 said:
Who the hell can believe anything that Tom's Hardware tests. He's a total tool.
Click to expand...


you should think before you type. Tom doesnt write articles at his site anymore. Heck i am not sure if is stillworking on Toms hardware site.
 
I don't need to think about it. As far as I'm concerned, that site has to be one of the most Intel bias sites in the history of the internet. I don't care if Tom is there or not. Nothing has changed over the years.

They should call it www.toms-intel-hardware-site.com

Practically everytime AMD released a faster/better processor than Intel, Toms site was the only one to have something bad to say about it, until they were forced to admit AMD currently has a better processor due to AMD beating Intel at Intel favoured benchmarks.
 
swatX said:
yea i used both p4 3.0ghz and AMD64 3000+ and all i have noticed is AMD is better at gaming by 5 - 10fps. everything else it useless compared to the p4 3.0ghz unless i overclock the AMD64 3000+ venice
Click to expand...

I concur, somewhat, I wouldn't say the 3000+ is useless, but my prescott is definitely snappier and "seems" faster. But then again, I built the AMD system specifically for gaming.
 
intel wins the single core battle mostly because of Hyperthreading. That is it, really...

Game performance measures FPU and general bandwidth... and AMD wins here...

Dothan is as fast as it is because of the superfast 2mb cache.
 
My $.02.

Switching to AMD and going for a processor that performs the same as the Intel chip makes no sense. That's just a brand switch, and when that costs money, it doesn't make any sense.

Really, any Athlon 64 will absolutely kill a Pentium 4 Northwood 2.4 at stock speeds. So even, the A64 2800+, 3000+ or 3200+, which can all be had very cheaply at this point will blow your P4 out of the water.
 
Sedgie! said:
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.
Click to expand...
A fast way is to knock about 30% off of the P4 clockrate to get a more realistic performance. A full meg cache should be worth a 10% bonus over one with a half-meg cache. Round up for Hyperthreading, round down for an antique memory controller. This should be somewhere around a 1.6-1.8GHz AMD chip.

But don't waste money upgrading sideways. Upgrade to something faster, even if it's just a faster P4 (3.4GHz).
 
[F8] said:
Oh, and to actually answer the thread poster's question, since you have an AGP video card, your best solution would be to go with a socket 939 cpu (3000+ venice) and either a nforce3 ultra motherboard, or maybe this board from asrock, that way you can still use your video card, but won't have to get a new motherboard when you want to go pci-x, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813157081
Click to expand...
i disagree...i think he would be better off with a skt 754 set up with a 3700+ ;)
 
In the last year i have had both and Intel and AMD CPU. I have a P4 550 or 3.4 and an AMD 64 3200+ Venice and after using both in the same setup ( i switched my video card between the two both with 1gig of corsair ram DDR2 for the intel and ddr for the amd) I will say I find my self using the AMD box more I built it as a budget gamer and kept my intel system for every day use. I dont know why people say AMD's cant multitask i have never had a problem with it. The only thing that the intel is slightly better at is incoding and only by a few seconds so i find my intel box collecting dust and my AMD box doing the work.

my .02
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top