Pentium4 650 (3.4gig) a good choice??

Yeah I was thinking of the Tualatin but the 6xx is based on the Prescott, I know that for a fact.

 

I have an athlon 64 3000+ and it runs at >2ghz easily.

My board has no adjustments whatsover except for FSB, no voltage, no multpiliers, and I am using a cheap fan that I got with it for 8 bucks. It will run faster, but I am not really sure where the limits are and without having the ability to tweak voltage on anything I don't see the reason to fiddle since I won't maximize it anyway.

 

Why'd you go cheap

 

thanks. i wondered about that.

 

If video encoding is important then you should consider a dual core processor, both a Pentium D and A64 X2 should beat a P4 650 by a good margin. Even the cheap P4D 820 shoud be better at encoding than a P4 650 - the problem with 820 is the low single threaded performance. Personally I would go for an A64 X2 3800+, only problem is that it is a bit more expensive than a P4 650.

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2484&p=9

 

Isn't the answer always self evident

Actually the answer is Too many hobbies.

 

AMD owns Intel when it comes to performance and pricing...

I don't know why Intel's CPUs are so much more expensive when compared to AMD's when AMD CPUs perform @ the same level.......

 

because it's intel.. brand recognition is everything.
And amd doesn't "own" intel in every performance test.
single core A64s generally speaking are quite a bit slower in a number of tasks vs HT equipped P4s.
The only real place single core A64s are indubitable the leader is gaming.

 

Well, I think they're also probably quite a bit better for scientific apps, mostly because it is rare for scientific apps to be optimized much and the Athlon 64 is a beast at straight FP code.