Right processor?

[burningrave101]

Originally posted by ZigZagZeppelin
Dream the fuck on, knob (knob, noob)



http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1946&p=4

Everyone can see your the noob just from your ignorant unsupported UNREALISTIC posts buddy lol.

http://www.hardtecs4u.com/reviews/2...3400/index4.php

Pentium 4 3.2Ghz wins 9 times. A64 3200+ wins 8 times.

http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=478

Pentium 4 3.2Ghz wins 20 times. A64 3200+ wins 13 times. 1 tie.

*I excluded the thorough Unreal Tournament 2003 bench cause it was so extensive. You'll have to just look over it. I'm sure the A64 was ahead through most of it.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cp...lon64-3400.html

3.2Ghz P4 wins 18 times. A64 3200+ wins 21 times. 1 tie.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040106/index.html

3.2Ghz Pentium 4 wins 32 times. A64 3200+ wins 9 times.

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2...00/index.x?pg=1

The Pentium 4 3.2Ghz wins 31 times. The A64 3200+ wins 19 times.

http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/CCAM/amd_a64_3400+(2).shtml

The Pentium 4 3.2Ghz wins 18 times and the A64 3200+ wins 3 times.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware...64_3400_review/

The Pentium 4 3.2Ghz wins 18 times. The A64 3200+ wins 10 times.

http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID=277

Pentium 4 3.2Ghz wins 20 times. A64 3200+ wins 24 times.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2...,1426423,00.asp

Pentium 4 3.2Ghz wins 12 times. A64 3200+ wins 9 times. 1 tie.

Only nooobies say something as stupid as "The A64 blows away the Pentium 4". Even the educated AMD lovers are smarter then that lol.

Just because it can score a few more FPS in games because of its low latency on-die controller doesn't declare it any kind of supreme winner. Especially since in all reality you'll never notice those extra 2-10 fps. If your worried about fps go buy yourself a new video card or better RAM. I get more then a 10 fps increase from lowering RAM timings from 3-4-4-8 to 2-3-2-5 lol. And my 3.0c that i've gotten over 3.7Ghz will outperform an A64 3400+ in even gaming.

And you might want to pick like about 5 or 6 reviews from different sites and some that dont use a measly 15 or so benchmark results that are almost all the A64's strong suits to try and prove a point lmao. I dont put much emphasis on sites like Anandtech because ever since the A64 was released they been going on and on and on about how its the king of everything and they only post a tiny amount of benchmarks that are all part of the A64's strongest performance areas so it looks like its something thats its not lol.

But who wouldn't if your getting these expensive processors handed to you for free and getting payed money for having their advertisements on your website. You sure wouldn't want to piss them off cause they might just take the business elsewhere .

In case anyone is wondering, AMD hands out a far greater number of free processors for review than Intel.

 

[EnderW]

Originally posted by ZigZagZeppelin
A64 blows away the P4. Faster & runs cooler.

It doesn't 'blow away' anything. It's faster in certain situations, just like the P4.

Originally posted by ZigZagZeppelin
Faster & runs cooler.

Faster? 3.4GHz > 2.4GHz. I know the AMD does more work per cycle, blah blah, but it's not FASTER, more efficient maybe.

That's like saying a school bus is faster than a Ferrari because it can transport 20 people across town in less time.

 

[ZigZagZeppelin]

Originally posted by burningrave101
Everyone can see your the noob just from your ignorant unsupported UNREALISTIC posts buddy lol.



Only nooobies say something as stupid as "The A64 blows away the Pentium 4". Even the educated AMD lovers are smarter then that lol.

Just because it can score a few more FPS in games because of its low latency on-die controller doesn't declare it any kind of supreme winner. Especially since in all reality you'll never notice those extra 2-10 fps. If your worried about fps go buy yourself a new video card or better RAM. I get more then a 10 fps increase from lowering RAM timings from 3-4-4-8 to 2-3-2-5 lol. And my 3.0c that i've gotten over 3.7Ghz will outperform an A64 3400+ in even gaming.

And you might want to pick like about 5 or 6 reviews from different sites and some that dont use a measly 15 or so benchmark results that are almost all the A64's strong suits to try and prove a point lmao. I dont put much emphasis on sites like Anandtech because ever since the A64 was released they been going on and on and on about how its the king of everything and they only post a tiny amount of benchmarks that are all part of the A64's strongest performance areas so it looks like its something thats its not lol.

But who wouldn't if your getting these expensive processors handed to you for free and getting payed money for having their advertisements on your website. You sure wouldn't want to piss them off cause they might just take the business elsewhere .

In case anyone is wondering, AMD hands out a far greater number of free processors for review than Intel.

You are truly are an Intel fanboy. Any INTELLIGENT ADULT knows Intel has been outadvertising, giving out product & BUYING REVIEW SITES (TOMS HARDWARE for an example) for YEARS!!!!!

The P4 architecture was FLAWED from day one with OUTRAGEOUS high latency.

BTW, A64 has scored 30K on 3dmark2k1se.

I'd take an overclocked Barton over a P4, lol.

 

[ZigZagZeppelin]

Go to any site and see people that HAD p4's BUYING A64's & their jaws hang out when they see the performance differential.

Try amdmb.com 64 bit forum & you will see P4 owners bowin down........

 

[EnderW]

Originally posted by ZigZagZeppelin
I'd take an overclocked Barton over a P4, lol.

OMG

 

[ZigZagZeppelin]

Originally posted by burningrave101
Everyone can see your the noob just from your ignorant unsupported UNREALISTIC posts buddy lol.



Only nooobies say something as stupid as "The A64 blows away the Pentium 4". Even the educated AMD lovers are smarter then that lol.

Just because it can score a few more FPS in games because of its low latency on-die controller doesn't declare it any kind of supreme winner. Especially since in all reality you'll never notice those extra 2-10 fps. If your worried about fps go buy yourself a new video card or better RAM. I get more then a 10 fps increase from lowering RAM timings from 3-4-4-8 to 2-3-2-5 lol. And my 3.0c that i've gotten over 3.7Ghz will outperform an A64 3400+ in even gaming.

And you might want to pick like about 5 or 6 reviews from different sites and some that dont use a measly 15 or so benchmark results that are almost all the A64's strong suits to try and prove a point lmao. I dont put much emphasis on sites like Anandtech because ever since the A64 was released they been going on and on and on about how its the king of everything and they only post a tiny amount of benchmarks that are all part of the A64's strongest performance areas so it looks like its something thats its not lol.

But who wouldn't if your getting these expensive processors handed to you for free and getting payed money for having their advertisements on your website. You sure wouldn't want to piss them off cause they might just take the business elsewhere .

In case anyone is wondering, AMD hands out a far greater number of free processors for review than Intel.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7603966

 

[burningrave101]

Originally posted by ZigZagZeppelin
You are truly are an Intel fanboy. Any INTELLIGENT ADULT knows Intel has been outadvertising, giving out product & BUYING REVIEW SITES (TOMS HARDWARE for an example) for YEARS!!!!!

The P4 architecture was FLAWED from day one with OUTRAGEOUS high latency.

You have just been officiailly declared NOOB OF THE MONTH lol.

Why dont you go ask some admins here at HardOCP or another site who gives out processors more readily AMD or Intel.

And as far as Tomshardware being bought out, i've been watching the tomshardware reviews lately like the new FX-53 one and it showed the FX-53 ahead of the P4 3.4EE in all the same areas that were on other sites. This bullshit that tomshardware sways the benchmarks towards Intel is stupid. Have you not seen all the AMD advertisements on their site? They have WAY more then they do any Intel advertisements.

If the P4 architecture is flawed then you better think about what your saying here lol. The A64 uses MMX, SSE, SSE2, soon to be SSE3, and is built around the x86 architecture. ALLLLL of that is made by Intel completely. AMD for the most part uses Intel technology and technology they got from other companies they bought out.

BTW, A64 has scored 30K on 3dmark2k1se.

OMG lol. Only noobs start basing processor performance off of 3dmark 01 or 03. We ALL know that the A64 is the best gaming processor and thats all 3dmark is is a gaming benchmark suit. It doesn't measure a processor's true abilities like actual hard tasks such as encodeing large files, compiling whole databases, rendering huge projects, and multitasking a workload of shit on your desktop.

I'd take an overclocked Barton over a P4, lol.

Yea, YOU would lol. A barton mobile at 2.4Ghz can't even outpace a 3.0c stock.

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q1/athlonxp-m-2500/index.x?pg=1

Get a grip dude. Its one thing to be a strong supporter for the processor you prefer but your full of it cause there is nothing to support what your saying.

Try amdmb.com 64 bit forum & you will see P4 owners bowin down........

Yea thats where i go for all my completely unbias information, AMDMB.com .

 

[Mcseiam]

Originally posted by chockomonkey
omg... there are so many different opinions are this stuff... when i first posted this thread, i was convinced that i would get an a64... then more people wrote in the contrary, and i figured i would get a p4... and now, jesus... i don't know one way or the other again...

That is exactly why it is a good idea to avoid AMD vs Intel threads, the sides are more devided than the middle east and just about as extreme

This thread has run its course. If some members here could avoid flaming then perhaps you would have gotten the answer you were looking for.

To contribute I am currently using a P4 (2.4C) but have used AMD procs since before the magical 1.0GHz barrier. It is really more a matter of what you can afford. Intel and AMD are both quite competitive in terms of cost so I would recommend looking at the available motherboards and chipsets rather than the processors themselves. See what features you like and make a list of what you want onboard, etc and see if that is better handled by an nForce2 or nForce3 chipset or an i875, etc....

Locked for flaming you are welcome to create another thread but if problems arise it too will get locked. Sorry for the trouble.....