king ati - Page 2

Seth · 09-24-2003, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ominub

well for gaming the AMD proccesors seem to be a little better but like intel kicks its ass in about everything else because they have high FSB but yeah intel over all is better but AMD is better for gaming and for the price is also better

You're joking right? AMD performs better than intel in office type tests.

The last few Athlon XP chips were slaughtered by intel. The 3200+ wasn't even close to te benchmarks of the P4 3.2

Earlier on the XP hardware was competing well with the P4,,,especially when intel was still using the wellington boards.

But ya, The P4 architecture has been able to go a lot farther than the AMD during this last stretch. I'm also not very impressed with AMD's marketing. Calling their chip 3200+ wasn't very truthful.

But, the performance for most users isn't noticable so AMD wins when it comes to pricing.

ominub · 09-24-2003, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bouncer_agb

You're joking right? AMD performs better than intel in office type tests.

The last few Athlon XP chips were slaughtered by intel. The 3200+ wasn't even close to te benchmarks of the P4 3.2

Earlier on the XP hardware was competing well with the P4,,,especially when intel was still using the wellington boards.

But ya, The P4 architecture has been able to go a lot farther than the AMD during this last stretch. I'm also not very impressed with AMD's marketing. Calling their chip 3200+ wasn't very truthful.

But, the performance for most users isn't noticable so AMD wins when it comes to pricing.

well i did not say they where the best i said that in the gaming they seem to run better and at higher FPS. Not only do i notice it but the benchmarks prove that they run better in games but thats about all they are running better at.
Now i dont want to argue with you any more.
And i was only talking about the last few chips not any of the older ones

WiseMan · 09-24-2003, 11:36 PM

I have to agree with ominub amd is better for gaming.

Null · 09-25-2003, 10:43 AM

AMD is not better for gaming.

Neither are the P4's

Only way to tell which is better is comparing each chip to chip. some chip models and speeds are better then others. Certain AMD chips do better. Certain P4 chips do better.
Last AMD chip i had ran hotter, and doesnt really run games as well. Neither brand is all out better then the other, And many other factors make a difference.

Yoda9864 · 09-25-2003, 12:44 PM

I always buy AMD. I think that you get more bang for you buck. I got a 2500+ barton for $85 retail from Newegg! Sure beats $150 or more for a 2.4 intel chip.

As far as performance, I think that AMD and intel were basically on the same level until these latest chips (3000+ and above), now I think intel is on top of the performance category.

But I will still probably buy AMD just becasue they are cheaper. Of course, I won't have to upgrade for a while since I have a 2500+.

Jonbo298 · 09-25-2003, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bouncer_agb

Calling their chip 3200+ wasn't very truthful.

I think they call it the 3200+ is because its comparable to Intel's 3.2 ghz. Even though the actual speed is "X ghz", because it has 9 pipelines instead of 6 like the P4's have, it can cram more through, thus making it comparable to P4's. But I may be partially wrong, but thats just the assumption I have had for a while.

Seth · 09-25-2003, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonbo298

I think they call it the 3200+ is because its comparable to Intel's 3.2 ghz. Even though the actual speed is "X ghz", because it has 9 pipelines instead of 6 like the P4's have, it can cram more through, thus making it comparable to P4's. But I may be partially wrong, but thats just the assumption I have had for a while.

That's what AMD's original marketing plan was. And at first the AMD chips that were compared to certain P4 chips by the 2200+ etc were actually comparable. Sometimes faster sometimes not. But since the 2800+ AMD has dropped off. It's a fact. The Barton core can't handle the speed anymore. What AMD has done for the last couple barton chips released is overclock them a tiny bit more and slop a new name on. It's not right. The 3200+ isn't anywhere near to comparable to the P4 3.2 from a techie point of view. The latest P4's have been stomping the latest AMD's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ominub

well i did not say they where the best i said that in the gaming they seem to run better and at higher FPS. Not only do i notice it but the benchmarks prove that they run better in games but thats about all they are running better at.

I know you didn't say that AMD is the best. I replied by saying that AMD has been known to score higher in this last generation of cpu's in the office area of performance. Current P4's are handling game's,,,higher FPS better than AMD's latest chips.

go to anandtech.com and look up the benchmarks for the 3200+ and the P4 3.2
You'll see that the benchmarks prove that P4 is currently running games better. If you have the cash then currently the P4 is the way to go for gamers.

If I went out and bought an XP chip right now, I wouldn't buy a 3200+
I'd save the money and get the 2800+ which really isn't much different in speed.

ominub · 09-26-2003, 09:55 AM

you can just get the 2500+ and oc it to the 3200+ anyways so it is the best buy for the $

Jason1 · 09-26-2003, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ominub

you can just get the 2500+ and oc it to the 3200+ anyways so it is the best buy for the $

Yeh but you could overclock the 3200 to whatevah, so thats the better buy for the money.....and then have your Processor overheat and be totally screwed! Yay for good deals!

Jonbo298 · 09-26-2003, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bouncer_agb

That's what AMD's original marketing plan was. And at first the AMD chips that were compared to certain P4 chips by the 2200+ etc were actually comparable. Sometimes faster sometimes not. But since the 2800+ AMD has dropped off. It's a fact. The Barton core can't handle the speed anymore. What AMD has done for the last couple barton chips released is overclock them a tiny bit more and slop a new name on. It's not right. The 3200+ isn't anywhere near to comparable to the P4 3.2 from a techie point of view. The latest P4's have been stomping the latest AMD's.

The Barton's have 512K of cache which from what I have seen first hand, helps alot. That's why my next processor purchase is the 2500+ because it has 512K of cache. Then I can just overclock it to 2600 or higher and I've saved money instead of getting a 2800+.

And I won't be getting a Pentium anytime soon. They are too expensive for me. As long as I can play a game at a good rate, I'm happy.

Seth · 09-27-2003, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason1

Yeh but you could overclock the 3200 to whatevah, so thats the better buy for the money.....and then have your Processor overheat and be totally screwed! Yay for good deals!

Actually you can't. It's really hard to squeeze anything else out of the 3200+

The chip is already hot and just can't handle anything more. If it could, AMD would've done it to tide us over until the AMD 64