AMD X2 4400+ vs Phenom

Manny Calavera said:
Placebo effect is great isnt it ? :p
Click to expand...

actually I've read a few threads at various message boards all with the majority of people owning two systems, one intel one amd, say the x2s are alot snappier/more responsive for everyday use. they also say the intels kill in benchmarks like they are supposed to but for 9/10 people everyday use is what matters so in that sense the x2s are better. some people have attributed the x2s to having better memory management still or it could possible be the amd based motherboards have a little more kick but whatever it is I think it's more than a mere placebo effect.
 
j0j081 said:
actually I've read a few threads at various message boards all with the majority of people owning two systems, one intel one amd, say the x2s are alot snappier/more responsive for everyday use. they also say the intels kill in benchmarks like they are supposed to but for 9/10 people everyday use is what matters so in that sense the x2s are better. some people have attributed the x2s to having better memory management still or it could possible be the amd based motherboards have a little more kick but whatever it is I think it's more than a mere placebo effect.
Click to expand...

I think that's truly a placebo effect. Back in the day when the Athlon 64's were all the rage and even when the X2's came out everyone said the P4's were snappier and more responsive.
 
Dan_D said:
I think that's truly a placebo effect. Back in the day when the Athlon 64's were all the rage and even when the X2's came out everyone said the P4's were snappier and more responsive.
Click to expand...

Yep, and there are way to many variables to just say it's the CPU. You have different motherboards, different drivers, etc that play into the snappy feeling of a system.
 
vista_blista said:
Thought I'd present another opinion, being as the other side is so vociferous, better represented, and ever-present.

For me, the integrated memory controller, direct connect & hypertransport -- and yes -- native cores, are what make for a more responsive experience. I've seen these sentiments about AMD's superior responsiveness echoed on forums like Anandtech etc. Yes, I have owned both Intel and AMD systems. I have even tested this theory amongst friends (owners of both Intel and AMD systems) with almost unanimous agreement.

Eventually native core's responsiveness will also translate to greater scalability. Even though it has become fashionable to blithely say otherwise, native cores will become an extremely important future technology.

Maybe incremental leaps in responsiveness aren't a factor, and you'd rather have brute speed. AMD also supports hardware virtualization, which people like me find useful. Maybe you need fast memory access, or greater floating point calculation. Or yeah, maybe you just like calculating Pi 24/7 for it's own sake. Everyone has different criteria on what they need in a CPU. I just don't get the people who feel threatened or will begrudge having that choice.

To me, this is a theoretical work of art. :)
dchd4.jpg


It's the platform, stupid. :D
Click to expand...


I agree completely with this statement. The responsiveness is what made me do the initial switch.

The machine I am on now (at work) is running a Xeon 5140 with 2GB of memory and two 500GB HDDs. This machine is considerably less responsive than the machine in my sig. It should be superior to it in every way, yet it isn't. When running XP 32-bit on this machine (I have Vista 32-bit on mine), the windows open and close slowly, programs do not respond like they should, and when running winzip to compress large folders, it doesn't compare to my machine... and I'm running Vista for crying out loud! This computer should be light years ahead of the machine in my sig. After seeing how badly all of the Pentium 4, Pentium D, and Celerons were, I knew I had to switch. Seeing the C2D's release really suprised me, but when I work on one of them, even a high-end machine with one, they are unresponsive.

Pure speed was not enough to turn me back to Intel. There are other factors involved such as architecture and chipsets that may or may not break the deal. The suckiest thing about Intel, when a new CPU comes out, throw the old mobo away and get a new one. At least AMD will allow a BIOS flash to identify the mobo (depending on the processor and socket type).
 
While I can't comment on this particular dispute, I can say I have experience the 'snappier' feeling. Same processor, between two different brand boards. One always felt like it was just slightly delayed and the mouse wasn't as smooth. May have been placebo, may not have been. Anyway whether it's real or not, people perceive it.
 
kllrnohj said:
I've heard it both ways - that the current Phenoms using the Bios workaround have a 10% performance hit and thus the microcode update removes the Bios workaround and restores performance (eg, increases by 10%), and now people are saying the opposite, that this new workaround decreases performance by 10%.

I'm not buying now, so I'm just going to wait for the BEs that have the issue fixed and re-evaluate cost/performance then.

As for overclocking, over at XS they have Phenoms hitting 3ghz, and running stable at 2.8-2.9ghz
Click to expand...

the microcode update is part of the bios update. a nyone who told you they got 10% back is full of it. They MAY add an option to disable the "fix" so you can get your performance back, but no guarantees.

The workaround takes performance away.

2.8-2.9 ain't that great when the Q6600 hits 3.2-3.6 without even breaking a sweat.
 
lopoetve said:
the microcode update is part of the bios update. a nyone who told you they got 10% back is full of it. They MAY add an option to disable the "fix" so you can get your performance back, but no guarantees.

The workaround takes performance away.

2.8-2.9 ain't that great when the Q6600 hits 3.2-3.6 without even breaking a sweat.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm currently spending some time overclocking the Phenom and it hasn't been easy. 2.8GHz takes some effort to reach and even more to stabalize it. I can do 3.0GHz on my B3 stepping Q6600 using default BIOS settings.
 
Those who are noticing greater responsiveness from AMD systems may be experiencing the benefits of a superior memory subsystem, providing it isn't a placebo effect or anything like that. It is one of the few areas where AMD retains a tenuous advantage. Unfortunately, it cannot translate into raw performance in most benchmarks (real world or synthetic) unless AMD can somehow ramp the clockspeeds by a large margin in the next quarter.
 
nobody_here said:
but only a fool would spend equal or more money for less performance....
Click to expand...

Don't underestimate the power of the f@nboy!! My cousin bought an AM2 just after the C2D price cut. I asked him with googly eyes: "ehh, why?"

He said he simply liked AMD, and was comfortable with it, and the price/perforamnce hit he took was a cost he was willing to absorb because of it.

I loved 939, but when it came time to build for my father and mother, I built them C2D rigs to maximize their dollar. When my 4800 x2 goes bye bye, whatever offers the best price/performance will get my buck as well.

Bottom line, just because this is the AMD forum doesn't mean people shouldn't reccomend what they think is the best option. They shouldn't get all bitchy about it, but if the Intel Quads are a better and cheaper option, why the hell shouldn't someone mention that? If I were a n00b, I'd want the full spectrum of opinions as well, and maybe, just maybe, a sprinkling of fact in there. ;)

Merry Christmas,
zer0
 
zero_vertical said:
Don't underestimate the power of the f@nboy!! My cousin bought an AM2 just after the C2D price cut. I asked him with googly eyes: "ehh, why?"

He said he simply liked AMD, and was comfortable with it, and the price/perforamnce hit he took was a cost he was willing to absorb because of it.
Click to expand...
What did your cousin purchase exactly?
 
Dan_D said:
Agreed. I'm currently spending some time overclocking the Phenom and it hasn't been easy. 2.8GHz takes some effort to reach and even more to stabalize it. I can do 3.0GHz on my B3 stepping Q6600 using default BIOS settings.
Click to expand...

I know this very well, and I have overclocked both my X2 4200 and my friends C2D - his C2D was a breeze and hit 3ghz like nothing. But for me it ultimately comes down to price. I can scrape together ~$250 for a CPU upgrade, but I just can't justify $350 knowing that I will have to buy a new motherboard if I want to upgrade the CPU in ~1-2 years. AMD has stated that AM3 CPUs will work in AM2 sockets - that is one of the reasons I bought an AM2 board (C2Ds weren't out yet) - I have to carefully budget my upgrades to get the most out of them, and this includes future-proofing my system as much as possible.

Also, I'm waiting at least until the BEs with the TLB problem fixed and more mature BIOS support - at the earliest I will be buying in mid to late January. From what I've seen in the C2D vs. X2 price war, AMD has no problems slashing prices while Intel tends not to, so I would guess that the Phenoms will be cheaper than the Q6600 by then. Time will tell though.
 
APOLLO said:
What did your cousin purchase exactly?
Click to expand...

I forget. It was Thanksgiving and I was drunk on tryptophan and white wine. :D It doesn't matter though, the point of our (my cousin and my) discussion was that he knowingly got a lesser chip because he preferred to stay with AMD.
 
zero_vertical said:
I forget. I was drunk on tryptophan and white wine. :D It doesn't matter though, the point of our (my cousin and my) discussion was that he knowingly got a lesser chip because he preferred to stay with AMD.
Click to expand...
The reason I was curious was the possibility your cousin might have saved money by purchasing only a processor, if it was a drop-in replacement. Otherwise, yes I would concur with your assessment of the situation. Currently, a bare-bones investment favors Intel. Always purchase the best performing product for the same or similar overall cost.
 
kllrnohj said:
From what I've seen in the C2D vs. X2 price war, AMD has no problems slashing prices while Intel tends not to, so I would guess that the Phenoms will be cheaper than the Q6600 by then. Time will tell though.
Click to expand...

Maybe we were watching a different price war but the only reason why AMD was slashing prices from where I was standing was because Intel was making it public knowledge months in advance of their intended price cuts. AMD was just slashing prices in response to Intel's relentless assult.

EDIT: I was going to add to this debate but sadly my main point was shattered to bits on page 4. I was going to break out the fact that even, if god willing, the phenom could compete clock for clock against the core family that the core family still has higher overhead than the phenom family. Add to that the fact that penryn will be giving the core family an additional 5-10% ipc boost.

p.s. the myth that turkey makes you fall asleep is just that, a myth. just thought I'd through that fun little fact out there for all you people out there.
 
Dan_D said:
I think that's truly a placebo effect. Back in the day when the Athlon 64's were all the rage and even when the X2's came out everyone said the P4's were snappier and more responsive.
Click to expand...

Yea these types of statements are truely garbage. For a start we all know a OS like XP becomes bogged down with different software, seldom 2 systems are exactly the same, Anti Virus, 3rd party firewalls, spyware, HDD fragmentation, bal bla bla.

Comparing a machines "snappiness" base on processor is some what ridiculous.
 
APOLLO said:
The reason I was curious was the possibility your cousin might have saved money by purchasing only a processor, if it was a drop-in replacement. Otherwise, yes I would concur with your assessment of the situation. Currently, a bare-bones investment favors Intel. Always purchase the best performing product for the same or similar overall cost.
Click to expand...

naw, he bought all new. He was a 939 > AM2 guy.
 
kllrnohj said:
Brush up on your biology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-tryptophan#Turkey_meat_and_drowsiness
Click to expand...

" Tryptophan is a naturally-occurring substance that can be found in a variety of foods. This substance is a precursor to serotonin and can act as a mild sedative on the human body. Some of the better-known foods that contain tryptophan are turkey, bananas, milk, yogurt, eggs, meat, nuts, beans, fish and cheddar, gruyere and Swiss cheese."

Tell me whens the last time you felt sleepy after eating an omlete and washing it down with a tall glass of milk? And you didnt just seriously link to wikipedia as some kind of a viable source did you? Trying putting a link to a wiki page in a work cited report and see how quickly you get an F on that "research" report.:rolleyes:

The only way turkey is going to make you go to sleep because of tryptophan is if you were starving hungry and all you ate was turkey. Now tell me. How often do you eat only turkey during thanksgiving let alone on an empty stomach? Its a ridiculous myth. It's about as dumb as the myth that blood is actually blue inside of you but turns red when it becomes oxyginated in the outside air. Dont even get me started on that dumbass myth.

You got any other urban myths you need me to squash for you?

On the topic of responsivness, I used to think it was a load of crap until I built my p4c rig. Going from my axp to my p4c was a noticeable difference in snappiness in programs. So to the people that say an a64 is more snappier than a c2d I guess I'll take their word on it since as the last time I wrote such people off (Kyle Brennet for one, who used to publish the exact same claims) I was proven quite wrong when I tested it out for myself.

That being said, its hardly a selling point. Its like betting on a horse b/c its the quickest out of the gate, not because its the fastest/more enduranced overall in comparison to the other horses.

EDIT: oh yea and that link you posted...it didnt disprove my point...it actually backed up my point...If I were to have gone further into my disscussion I would have pointed out that the reason why most people truly fall asleep or feel tired after a thanksgiving meal is because of one of three, if not all, things.

1. Ingestion of that much food, regardless of what you're eating, will make you hungry
2. Most thanksgiving foods are high on carbohydrates and low on proteins, which creates a high level of drowsiness
3. Most people tend to wash their thanksgiving meals down with some kind of alcoholic brevage. And if you do any drinking you would know thats anti-productive to keeping you from falling asleep.

But once again your link points a bit of that out. So I really dont know how you were trying to disprove me by showing that link...
 
DemonDiablo said:
" Tryptophan is a naturally-occurring substance that can be found in a variety of foods. This substance is a precursor to serotonin and can act as a mild sedative on the human body. Some of the better-known foods that contain tryptophan are turkey, bananas, milk, yogurt, eggs, meat, nuts, beans, fish and cheddar, gruyere and Swiss cheese."

Tell me whens the last time you felt sleepy after eating an omlete and washing it down with a tall glass of milk? And you didnt just seriously link to wikipedia as some kind of a viable source did you? Trying putting a link to a wiki page in a work cited report and see how quickly you get an F on that "research" report.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

i dont give a damn what you say, eating turkey makes everybody lazy....there's something about the amount of it in turkey or the way it combines with the other things in turkey that has a different affect than say eggs...
 
nobody_here said:
i dont give a damn what you say, eating turkey makes everybody lazy....there's something about the amount of it in turkey or the way it combines with the other things in turkey that has a different affect than say eggs...
Click to expand...

Im not telling you to give two shits what I say, Im telling you to give two shits about what experts say. You know the people who make a living to know this shit, not you nor I. And people are lazy in general, give them an excuse not to do work and they'll jump all over it.

It's ironic though how a moment ago you were fighting so diligently to cut through all the pr bs of amd to get straight to the facts, yet when confronted with a different topic with the same situation, pr vs fact, you quickly jump ship to the pr and fight valiantly against the facts.

Just thought I'd point out that bit of irony.
 
nobody_here said:
i dont give a damn what you say, eating turkey makes everybody lazy....there's something about the amount of it in turkey or the way it combines with the other things in turkey that has a different affect than say eggs...
Click to expand...

no, it's because of the amount of food you eat, not the tryptophan.

You over eat, work hard cooking and getting ready, and then just sit around after overindulging. Anyone would get sleepy.

http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/turkey.asp
http://www.openscience.org/blog/?p=124

http://www.physorg.com/news8453.html
He said consuming tryptophan-rich foods may cause blood levels of the amino acid to rise, but not enough tryptophan will reach one's brain to have a sedative affect.

And, scientists told NGN, turkey isn't even unusually high in tryptophan. Many other foods, such as beef or soybeans, have higher concentrations.
Click to expand...
 
DemonDiablo said:
Im not telling you to give two shits what I say, Im telling you to give two shits about what experts say. You know the people who make a living to know this shit, not you nor I. And people are lazy in general, give them an excuse not to do work and they'll jump all over it.

It's ironic though how a moment ago you were fighting so diligently to cut through all the pr bs of amd to get straight to the facts, yet when confronted with a different topic with the same situation, pr vs fact, you quickly jump ship to the pr and fight valiantly against the facts.

Just thought I'd point out that bit of irony.
Click to expand...

i just know my turkey man....i dont need anyone else to tell me what it does, i know what it does
 
lopoetve said:
no, it's because of the amount of food you eat, not the tryptophan.

You over eat, work hard cooking and getting ready, and then just sit around after overindulging. Anyone would get sleepy.

http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/turkey.asp
http://www.openscience.org/blog/?p=124

http://www.physorg.com/news8453.html
Click to expand...

It's pointless. You could link to a dozen, scientifically backed and researched, links and they would still be ignorant distrustful to the facts laid out before them. Unlike a child being told that Santa's not real or that Tooth Fairy is really just your mom, adults are quite incapable of the same level of breaking away from a change of thought and belief that a child is.

It's the same reason why its pointless to try and drive a point across to a fanboy.
 
DemonDiablo said:
It's pointless. You could link to a dozen, scientifically backed and researched, links and they would still be ignorant distrustful to the facts laid out before them. Unlike a child being told that Santa's not real or that Tooth Fairy is really just your mom, adults are quite incapable of the same level of breaking away from a change of thought and belief that a child is.

It's the same reason why its pointless to try and drive a point across to a fanboy.
Click to expand...

masta has spoken....blasphemy!!!!
 
Turkey does not make me sleepy at all... Infact, several years ago my cousin asked me a "trivia question" and asked me if I knew what the chemical was in turkey that makes you sleepy... My reaction was, "turkey makes you sleepy???"

Over eating however does make me sleepy, I heard its because of all the blood going to your stomach for digestion. I'm no doctor so I'm not sure if that's the reason, but it sounds logical enough for me.
 
I love how amd's pr team is about as clueless as all of us on this issue. Never a smart business move to publically correct a co-worker.
 
DemonDiablo said:
" Tryptophan is a naturally-occurring substance that can be found in a variety of foods. This substance is a precursor to serotonin and can act as a mild sedative on the human body. Some of the better-known foods that contain tryptophan are turkey, bananas, milk, yogurt, eggs, meat, nuts, beans, fish and cheddar, gruyere and Swiss cheese."

Tell me whens the last time you felt sleepy after eating an omlete and washing it down with a tall glass of milk? And you didnt just seriously link to wikipedia as some kind of a viable source did you? Trying putting a link to a wiki page in a work cited report and see how quickly you get an F on that "research" report.:rolleyes:

The only way turkey is going to make you go to sleep because of tryptophan is if you were starving hungry and all you ate was turkey. Now tell me. How often do you eat only turkey during thanksgiving let alone on an empty stomach? Its a ridiculous myth. It's about as dumb as the myth that blood is actually blue inside of you but turns red when it becomes oxyginated in the outside air. Dont even get me started on that dumbass myth.

You got any other urban myths you need me to squash for you?

On the topic of responsivness, I used to think it was a load of crap until I built my p4c rig. Going from my axp to my p4c was a noticeable difference in snappiness in programs. So to the people that say an a64 is more snappier than a c2d I guess I'll take their word on it since as the last time I wrote such people off (Kyle Brennet for one, who used to publish the exact same claims) I was proven quite wrong when I tested it out for myself.

That being said, its hardly a selling point. Its like betting on a horse b/c its the quickest out of the gate, not because its the fastest/more enduranced overall in comparison to the other horses.

EDIT: oh yea and that link you posted...it didnt disprove my point...it actually backed up my point...If I were to have gone further into my disscussion I would have pointed out that the reason why most people truly fall asleep or feel tired after a thanksgiving meal is because of one of three, if not all, things.

1. Ingestion of that much food, regardless of what you're eating, will make you hungry
2. Most thanksgiving foods are high on carbohydrates and low on proteins, which creates a high level of drowsiness
3. Most people tend to wash their thanksgiving meals down with some kind of alcoholic brevage. And if you do any drinking you would know thats anti-productive to keeping you from falling asleep.

But once again your link points a bit of that out. So I really dont know how you were trying to disprove me by showing that link...
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't realize this was a research paper :rolleyes: Besides, if you don't believe the Wiki article, just check the 17 sources cited for the 9 sentences.

You still fail at reading comprehension. The carbs are the enabler, the tryptophan is the cause. If all you ate was turkey you *wouldn't* get sleepy because you don't have the carbs to increase the tryptophan to protein ratio that allows the tryptophan to get to the central nervous system. So ultimately no turkey (or really any meat high in tryptophan) == no sleepy.
 
kllrnohj said:
Sorry, I didn't realize this was a research paper :rolleyes: Besides, if you don't believe the Wiki article, just check the 17 sources cited for the 9 sentences.

You still fail at reading comprehension. The carbs are the enabler, the tryptophan is the cause. If all you ate was turkey you *wouldn't* get sleepy because you don't have the carbs to increase the tryptophan to protein ratio that allows the tryptophan to get to the central nervous system. So ultimately no turkey (or really any meat high in tryptophan) == no sleepy.
Click to expand...

Oh boy. You read one article on this, while I read a few dozen, wiki at that, and you think you got it all figured out.

the tryptotphan harldy plays any role in your drowsiness to begin with. Most of it is broken down by digestive jucies and chemicals in your blood stream. And you're the one who needs to comprehend what you're reading. If you ate nothing but tryptophan induced foods, turkey for instance, on an empty stomach you would actually create enough serotonin to induce drowsiness.

I love how you read a couple of lines on a wiki page and all of a sudden feel overly "enlightened" on this subject. Good for you ;)

And with that said I'm really done with this turkey chemical science debate. At the very least comment about the point I made about responsiveness in my post. Try not to completely derail this thread on your righteous wiki crusade their chief
 
This thread is supposed to be about X2's and Phenom processors, not Turkey.
 
Dan_D said:
This thread is supposed to be about X2's and Phenom processors, not Turkey.
Click to expand...

Meh, are they really so different? :D

At the very least comment about the point I made about responsiveness in my post.
Click to expand...

What is there to comment about? Its BS. I have two Core 2 Duo powered laptops (one XP @ 2.33ghz, one Vista 32-bit @ 2.2ghz), an X2 4200 powered desktop (Vista 64-bit and Gentoo 64-bit), and I use my friends Core 2 Duo powered desktop (Vista 32-bit) - they all feel identical (they all have 2gb of RAM). Of all of those systems the one that is the most responsive hands down is the X2 4200 [if you are a fanboy just stop reading here ;)], but only because it is usually running 64-bit Linux :p (Vista has an awesome habit now of freezing completely for ~15-45 seconds and then resuming like nothing happened - no idea why. I really need to get around to reinstalling it, but I was just going to wait until SP1). Heck, I even run 64-bit Ubuntu on the one C2D laptop using the Intel VT (64-bit guest in 32-bit host, w00t) and it is still snappy and responsive...
 
DemonDiablo said:
At the very least comment about the point I made about responsiveness in my post.
Click to expand...

What is there to comment on responsiveness? Responsiveness/snappiness is a useless method of testing CPU power (if the other components are more or less the same). It's not empirical, its results cannot be reliably reproduced, and it is almost all subjective. It's nothing but fanboi drivel to try and make the company you're rooting for appear better when all other modes of objective analysis prove otherwise.

For me personally, I've had a Dual P3-Tualatin, P4-HT, X2, Core2 system running a primary 15K SCSI drive (Atlas II and MAU), and I can't tell the difference under Windows between those aforementioned systems.
 
You know, I did list several reasons regarding my preference for AMD besides just responsiveness. Obviously responsiveness was the most subjective call, making it easy to pick apart. Similarly there are lots of people who find high-resolution audio unnecessary. I'd hope those commenting re:responsiveness have actually owned both systems. Otherwise, to each his/her own. I'm always glad as a consumer when many different choices exist.
 
vista_blista said:
You know, I did list several reasons regarding my preference for AMD besides just responsiveness. Obviously responsiveness was the most subjective call, making it easy to pick apart. Similarly there are lots of people who find high-resolution audio unnecessary. I'd hope those commenting re:responsiveness have actually owned both systems. Otherwise, to each his/her own. I'm always glad as a consumer when many different choices exist.
Click to expand...

other than hardware virtualization, from which I've seen no tangible benefit yet, all of your preferences were virtually meaningless. There is no honest reason, other than possibly having the best AM2 mobo out already, to get Phenom. Especially since the new boards (790) suck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top