• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Which one out of two?

H

HaxEJxuK

Gawd
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
696
So, I've got some old parts and interested in playing CS:S in living room. It's just 37" LCD that goes up to 13xx somthing. I've got option of taking my brother's old pc which I gave to him long time ago but he has much better pc now or stick with what I have now. Which one should get more fps and lower power usage?

My Brother's:
AMD 64 754 3200+ Newcastle, I forgot model number but it's Asus that I was able to OC to 2.5Ghz and put in 1.5GB RAM(only have 512mb sticks)

Mine that I use for browsing:

Intel P4 478 3.06Ghz with HT, Asus P4S800-MX and 1GB RAM.

I'll be using BFG 6800GT for graphics(To think I spent $400+for this when it came out :()

AMD is in my brother's house somewhere and tough to do side by side comparison. Which one would be better for gaming(not my main rig but something to play with in living room) and use less watt?

TIA
 
Yep, I agree with the above posters. The AMD system would definitely be faster than that Intel one.
 
Wow, I thought at least 1 vote for Intel. This kinda makes me wanna run test. ha ha some cutting edge test here. 3200+ single core vs P4 3.06 HT lol result is kinda obvious though. Only if I could find time. :(
 
HaxEJxuK said:
Wow, I thought at least 1 vote for Intel. This kinda makes me wanna run test. ha ha some cutting edge test here. 3200+ single core vs P4 3.06 HT lol result is kinda obvious though. Only if I could find time. :(
Click to expand...

back then, i believe i read somewhere that intel focused on clock speeds, but not something else, and even though the AMD processor's were clocked lower, they were still faster than the 3.0ghz p4's of that time.

im sure that's why when conroe released, that's why their clock speeds were reduced to around 2.0ghz and such as they learned from that and didnt focus on having 4ghz processors....

though having a 4ghz processor from factory is like having an e-penis the length of a football field.

ill see if i can dig up some articles explaining this better than what ive said above.

The good is quite easy to spot. The Athlon 64 3200+ and Athlon 64 FX 51 should be considered AMD engineering marvels. Kudos to the engineers at AMD for their hard work on the K8 core; they certainly deserve it. Without a doubt, AMD R&D did their homework and has delivered an architecture that is simply superior to Intel's when you consider clock-for-clock computing.
Click to expand...

that's taken from the conclusion of this article on the [H].
Link
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top