• 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 system would be better?

S

SocceRich20

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 4, 2003
Messages
2,512
3.4Ghz P4
IC7 Max3
6800GT
1GB HyperX PC4000

OR

3500+
MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum
6800GT
1GB HyperX PC4000

I do multitask a lot, which is why I have four monitors. I also like to game a lot. By multitasking I mean burning a CD, unzipping files, playing music, bittorrent, AIM, and games. Both systems look very nice. I can't quite decide on which would be a better buy.

Thanks for any input!
 
I'm sure the AMD fan boys will come out in full force here, but my vote goes towards the P4 system. I still think the 875 and 9xx chipsets from Intel are the best things out there.
 
your basically asking if the intel chip will outdo the amd chip right ?


I can't advise any sentient being to buy either of those chips since both are so incredibly expensive.
 
djnes said:
I'm sure the AMD fan boys will come out in full force here, but my vote goes towards the P4 system. I still think the 975 and 9xx chipsets from Intel are the best things out there.
Click to expand...

Umm...I do believe that the IC7 max3 is still a socket 478 875p chipset.

I would still say the AMD 939 pin setup, PCIe/ 775 haven't matured enough yet to jump on the bandwagon. a64 chipsets have had some devolopment time, yes I will agree the 875 is a great chipset also, but 939 is more "future proof," and once 64 bit becomes "mainstream" it will be hard to follor on the intel side.

and for an amd board take a look at This , It's loaded with features/ i've read a few good reviews

just my $0.02use
 
I would go with the Athlon64, but then again, I'm an AMD fan. Nothing wrong with the Pentium4, but the Athlon64 is the more efficient architecture. The Pentium4, however, does have bright spots, including Hyper-threading, and it is really good and running tasks like video encoding, etc, because of it's long pipeline. However, that long pipeline is also what makes it not as good as an Athlon64 at everyday use, so it has to run faster to make up the performance deficit.

Truth is, most people would like either system, and Intel does have a history of a more stable overall system when you consider their chipsets, whereas with AMD it has been more hit and miss as far as chipsets, but they've been better these days.
 
TekieB said:
Umm...I do believe that the IC7 max3 is still a socket 478 875p chipset.

I would still say the AMD 939 pin setup, PCIe/ 775 haven't matured enough yet to jump on the bandwagon. a64 chipsets have had some devolopment time, yes I will agree the 875 is a great chipset also, but 939 is more "future proof," and once 64 bit becomes "mainstream" it will be hard to follor on the intel side.

and for an amd board take a look at This , It's loaded with features/ i've read a few good reviews

just my $0.02use
Click to expand...

Pardon my typo...it's been fixed. You say once 64 bit becomes mainstream, it will be hard to follow. Who do you think is working directly with Microsoft in creating the irst 64 bit desktop version of Windows? Intel isn't releasing a 64 bit processor right now because there's absolutely zero need for one. When MS decides it will release a full final version of Windows 64, that WILL be available for purchase without a system, Intel will have it's 64 bit procs out and ready for sale.
 
djnes said:
Pardon my typo...it's been fixed. You say once 64 bit becomes mainstream, it will be hard to follow. Who do you think is working directly with Microsoft in creating the irst 64 bit desktop version of Windows? Intel isn't releasing a 64 bit processor right now because there's absolutely zero need for one. When MS decides it will release a full final version of Windows 64, that WILL be available for purchase without a system, Intel will have it's 64 bit procs out and ready for sale.
Click to expand...

Didn't intel just release a 64 bit xeon?
 
djnes said:
Pardon my typo...it's been fixed. You say once 64 bit becomes mainstream, it will be hard to follow. Who do you think is working directly with Microsoft in creating the irst 64 bit desktop version of Windows? Intel isn't releasing a 64 bit processor right now because there's absolutely zero need for one. When MS decides it will release a full final version of Windows 64, that WILL be available for purchase without a system, Intel will have it's 64 bit procs out and ready for sale.
Click to expand...
yeah Intel is maybe working with Microsoft to stall the implementation of a 64bit os, we've all seen intels 64 bit implementations and their 32bit support there of (lots of people will still be running 32bit apps long asfter 64 bit is normal). got nothing against intel but since the Lga775 packaged cpus arent touching 4 ghz yet there architecture doesnt beneift from the longer pipeline/instruction set and are also way way way too hot. that and i dont see the reason of paying for the prioviedge of having next generation hardware that does nothing for you, when with a lil patience you can have it at a relatively normal price.

to the thread starter: both procs will do fine with multi-tasking, the intel has the benefit of Hyperthreading, and the AMD has the Integrated memory controller. the intel will beat the amd in encoding/decoding operation and certain other operations the amd will beat it in everthing else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top