Athlon (up to XP) vs Pentium 4 (up to Northwood)

[Fox5]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1937&p=5

Right now the athlon 64s can anywhere from tie with p4's in games, to totally crush them.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13187
Here the 3000+ beats the pentium 4 3.2ghz in nearly every test.

And AMD doesn't give the actual ghz number because it is not indicative of performance. For that matter, Intel is also switching over to a model number rating, but it won't have mhz comparisions like amd's(3000+) but instead just rank the processors like current video cards.(450, 475, stuff like that) It's probably so intel can differentiate between a 3.06 ghz 533 FSB p4 and a faster 3 ghz 800 FSB p4, and from their new mobile line of processors, the centrino, which is based on pentium 3 and will way outperform a pentium 4 at the same speed....things like that.

Anyhow, I wouldn't say it's worth waiting for the athlon 64's with dual channel memory unless you're planning on upgrading to windows 64. The current processors will get a very large performance boost with windows 64, but I imagine they'll finally become bandwidth limited with 64 bit, as right now the current athlon 64 motherboards only have half the possible internal bandwidth and a quarter of the external.

 

[Rugor]

Fox5,

where do you get a quarter the external bandwidth for the socket 754 A64s? They may be single channel, but it is a 64-bit memory bus. However I am sure they're going to get bandwidth limited and the 128-bit memory interface of the socket 939 models will be a big help as they get faster.

 

[Rugor]

Nuno Brito

All Athlon64s have HT (HyperTransport) as that's the only type of external link they support other than the memory interface. It's what they used to replace the FSB. However, no AMD processor supports HT (HyperThreading) which is what Intel uses to try and offset P4's tendency for pipeline stalls due to data starvation. Unfortunately both use the same acronym so it can be hard to tell which one someone means.

 

[Fox5]

Fox5,

where do you get a quarter the external bandwidth for the socket 754 A64s? They may be single channel, but it is a 64-bit memory bus. However I am sure they're going to get bandwidth limited and the 128-bit memory interface of the socket 939 models will be a big help as they get faster.

Current motherboards only support an 800 mhz Hyper Transport Bus, yet the cpus do 1600 mhz. And yeah, I guess it is half the external bandwidth too.(it would be 1/4 if it was sdr ram)

 

[00fil00]

ok well your right, im not sure if i can wait half a year without a pc just for some duelage action. if i were to get a 64 tomorrow.. what would you recommend? people say 3000+ is the best bang for buck but all the benchmarks are done on a 3200+ and egnore 3000+ like its obsolete. i take it the 3400+ isnt worth the extra heap of cash. what would be the exact differences between these 3? like 7fps? ill go for the 3000+ if there isnt a significant actual physical noticable difference in games, (not quoted statistic numbers and graphs i know there will be differences in memory and stuff, but im only interested in what i can see). so your verdict is.... ?

also ill be needing a motherboard. any list i should look out for? or any makes to avoid? or any requirements to look out for? like i say i just want a good chipset that goes with the 64 optimally and will give me the best performance in gaming, but cutting costs on useless things to me like firewire as i dont network. just good old fashioned speed, no trinkets. advice?

p.s. did anyone ever tell you guys that you were gods?

 

[rainz]

While the P4 3.2 and the A64 3200+ do have similar performance, the A64 is better for games. P4's real strength is in multimedia.

AMD and Intel have their processors optimized for very different things. Inte' is optimizing for pure clockspeed, while AMD is optimizing for performance. Essentially Intel is saying if you make the clockspeed high enough it will outperform the competitor, and AMD is saying if you make it run apps faster who cares about the clockspeed.

AMD's performance ratings are a direct result of what Intel did with the P4. When the Athlon was introduced its direct competitor was the PIII, and the two had broadly similar clock for clock performance. So people could directly compare the two at equal clockspeeds. When P4 was introduced it had much lower clock for clock performance, but much higher clock speeds, so the comparisons were harder. In many ways Intel (not AMD) tried to pull a fast one. P4, like PIII and the Athlon was being sold by the MHz, on the grounds more MHz was better. However, when P4 was introduced the value of each MHz dropped. It was like saying our CPU is worth more dollars than yours but without saying you were using Canadian dollars while the other was using US dollars.

If you're buying a new gaming system now, Athlon64 is your best choice. If you're going to wait, well we'll have to give you advice then based on what's on the market then.

yeh, i agree on everything.

RainZ

 

[Fox5]

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTc1LDQ=

Well, it appears the athlon 4 3000 performs as well as or better than a pentium 4 3.2 ghz, and the difference between it and the 3200 seems to be about as much as the number differences suggest.
The 3400 seems to have a substantial advantage though. The 3000 and 3200 are the same speed, but the 3200 has more cache, the 3400 is actually clocked higher than the 3200. You could possibly overclock a 3200 to 3400 levels, I'm not sure how well the a64s overclock,
From a quick look on www.pricewatch.com, there is an almost $60 difference between the 3000 and 3200, however the price for the 3200 isn't what I'd consider unreasonable. Decide how badly you need that 6% of performancee, though if you're overclocking I would spend the extra money and get the 3200.(just because it'd probably overclock about the same as the 3000, but have the extra cache)

For the fastest motherboard, the VIA K8T800 are the best, at least until nvidia gets their 250 board out.(which may have a different socket anyhow)
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTM4LDU=
The albatron motherboard using the K8T800 chipset seems to be a good performer. However, any board based on the K8T800 is likely to give similar performance, so it may be wise just to go for the cheapest one if you don't care about overclocking or anything.

 

[Tahir2]

..

Let me complicate matters further with the following warning:
Socket 939 will make Socket 754 redundant.
LGA 775 will make Socket 478 redundant.

Both new socket types will be released this year if roadmaps are correct.

 

[rainz]

Re: ..

Let me complicate matters further with the following warning:
Socket 939 will make Socket 754 redundant.
LGA 775 will make Socket 478 redundant.

Both new socket types will be released this year if roadmaps are correct.

This is simple ... upgrade each 6 months.

RainZ

 

[Fox5]

AMD will continue to support socket 754 at least until 4000+, and possibly beyond.
And I think 754 and 939 will have almost identical performance until the clock speeds start ramping up or the switch to 64 bit occurs.
And the release of new sockets doesn't make the old ones perform any worse.

BTW, what about socket T?

 

[Rugor]

Socket T ( I think it stands for Topsy-Turvy) is the official name of Intel's LGA 775 pin interface for the upcoming Prescotts.

The biggest difference is that the pins have moved to the socket (IE ON the motherboard) and the processor just has pads. The additional pins are much needed for addtional power delivery and should help with stability at higher clockspeeds. Unfortunately it has its own host of problems-- namely insane fragility.

Reports from CeBit indicate that there wasn't a Socket T motherboard on display where at least some of the pins in the socket weren't bent. With that fragility, and the expense of the upcoming BTX transition Intel's not exactly sending the Taiwanese board vendors into paroxysms of joy.

 

[00fil00]

a question tho...
think i should go for an athlon XP instead of a 64 until 64 goes more mainstream? itd be a shame to buy a, to us right now - a cutting-edge brand new 64 chip, but in future, a lower end market 64 chip that doesnt have much features or memory. maybe a higher end XP and then upgrade when 64 technology is ripe and they know what there doing with the chips? i dont want to have to upgrade a 64 chip and mobo to one with duel memory in a few months, i dont wanna be a beta tester but i also cant wait a year till they get thier fingers out, this 1.4duron already doesnt accept alot of todays applications. whatta ya think? xp or 64? relitively comparable performance on 32bit apps? keep in mind i dont tinker about with OS or DOS or BIOS anything, just want to play DOOM3 and the future with full detail, AA and all features turned on. im so on the fence. who will win me over?

 

[Fox5]

Athlon XPs are more comparable to the 533 mhz bus pentium 4's than the 800 mhz p4s.
You may be able to call an athlon xp 3200 about equivalent to a 3.0 ghz 800 FSB though, and you could overclock a mobile athlon xp and get close to athlon 64 performance.

If you go the overclocking route, you could probably get a mobile athlon xp and an nforce 2 motherboard for about $140, then you'd have to buy the stuff you would with any new system. A heatsink/fan for like $20-$40, possibly a new power supply and case($40-really expensive), and good memory. If you actually wanted to get close to athlon 64 performance, you'd need really good ram, probably something like http://www.hardcorecooling.us/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=598 this. Not the best timings in the world, but pretty good. If you actually went for a fast athlon xp chip that you didn't overclock, you'd probably be paying close to athlon 64 prices anyhow.

Look at the links I posted and see how the athlon xp compares to the 64 and p4.
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTM4LDU=
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTc1LDQ=

Athlon XP doesn't come close to the performance of athlon 64, it's like asking "Should I go with a Pentium 3, or a Coppermine based Celeron?"

And if you want to play Doom3 in full detail, there is probably no better choice than a next gen nvidia card and an nforce 3 250(athlon 64) motherboard. The 250 isn't out yet(but should be soon, and same for their next card), but it gives a boost to the video card's performance somehow. It'll run good with an ati card too, but no better than on anyone else's athlon motherboards.