When will Intel regain the CPU performance crown? Conroe?

[hovz]

Yakyakyak. Come back kid when you learned the basics.
You can't answer ANYTHING.

Old slogan: don't mess with pros.

Yak yak yak, you don't know anything. Yeah, I can do that too. If anyone is clueless around here it's you.

No, I mean these prices:

AthlonXP 3200+: 199 EUR
Pentium 4 540 (3.2 GHz): 220 EUR

Athlon64 3400+: 209 EUR
Pentium4 550(3.4GHz): 269 EUR
Pentium4 EE 3.4: 1099 EUR

The P4 3.2 greatly outperforms the AXP 3200+ and like I posted, at least here in the states the 3500+ and 3400+ are both only priced $8-15 less then the P4 3.4.

Only recently has Intel lowered the prices in order to match AMD a bit, since pretty much noone bought Intel lately in retail. Until a few months ago, you could buy two AMD's for one comparable Intel CPU. And if you look at that P4EE price...

Yeah and got what you paid for. The P4s were quite a bit faster then Athlon XPs, generally ran cooler (in terms of the Northwood) and didn't burst into flames if they overheated. AMD only introduced throttling recently with the Opteron and A64.

I agree with you that the P4XEs are extremely overpriced, but then again so are the FX series with the FX-55 going for as much as $850, only ~$160 less then the P4XE 3.4 GHz. Most people that spend that much money on a processor don't care about the money.

doesnt matter how fast it is clocked or what features it has. thats how it is sold. thats like saying you should overclock the nv40 when comparing it to the r420 because the r420 has more fillrate and bandwidth.

My point was to show what kind of potential it has if it can come close to the FX55 in it's current state and blow it away (in gaming) at only a 300 MHz overclock while producing up to 20% less heat and drawing less power. That would be obvious to any normal person, obviously not fanboys.

the 3500+ pretty much matches or beats the fastest p4 in gaming and its 1/5th the price, runs much cooler, consumes far less power. youd have to spend nearly twice as much for a comparable pentium m.

lets here the praise for intel!!!!!!

In gaming, but not in anything else. And no the 3500+ is not faster then the 3.8 GHz even in gaming. I'll also add that if your running a Northwood, heat is not an issue as they run about the same as an Athlon 64 system. I have a P4 3.0C overclocked to 3.6 GHz which runs at 44* C load and 30* C idle with stock cooling.

the fx55 is also MUCH better than the EE. the 3500 does match or beat the 3.8 in gaming, it also matches or beats the EE. for like 1/5 the price??? we should all buy intels sorry ass garbage cpus.

and it was a 500 mhz overclock, not a 300 mhz one. why dont u overclock both cpus to their maximum while aircooled and see who wins.

generally a64 offers better performance than pentium at less then half the price. i rly see no reason for 95% of computer users to even consider buying a pentium.

 

[Snyder]

Whoa. After reading this thread I seriously wonder why you haven't been banned yet, T2k.

Stop this cheap, disgusting attempt to get me banned.

Sorry - that honestly wasn't my intent. I just have seen too many interesting arguments going down the drain. (This is not directed to you!)

Even if you may be right in the current argument (something I don't want to discuss),

That's the problem and that's what makes your attempt obvious: a sly attempt, nothing else.

Again - I just wanted to appeal to you to tone down a bit so that this discussion (which I'm interested in) won't derange in yet another flamewar

that doesn't give you the right to behave like an utter a**hole, insulting and ridiculing people, starting right with your first post here in this thread.

Stop lying.
If you have noticed, I never start anything like that. I just hate when people start spreading their own home-cooked BS as the Holy Truth.
Check my first post here: strictly technical. Then check his reply to that.

Stop lying.

Lying implies intent. I made a mistake - sorry about that. I wasn't meaning your first post, but your second.

To be clear, I meant these passages:

Stop being utterly ignorant. You are obviously dunno this field, unlike me. It'd be also good if you'd stop spreading your BS - apparently you don't even know what content creation means, pal.
It's a little bit bigger area than your average p0rn-divx projects or mp3 compression, hehe.

You are mre clueless than I thought...

Young Jedi: you don't know a lot of things, I'm telling you.

The difference between you and me I know many things about both you didn't even hear about yet. In terms of AMD, I often know lot of things earlier than you will even hear any rumour or daydream' about it.

Know what I mean? This is really not neccessary.

Please, turn it down a bit, for the sake of these forums.

Please, try to contribute something useful here.
You obviously have only one purpose here: instigate mod against me and you're apparently not afraid of lying to achieve this.
Disgusting.
If you can't comment on the topic, stop this OT crap here, post it in Feedback section.

*sigh* once again - It was not in my intent to get you banned (otherwise I wouldn't even have posted here, but contacted a mod). And I honestly made a mistake. But stuff like I quoted from you usually is the prime ingredient for deranging possibly interesting threads. Why insult someone when you have the arguments (which you apparently do)?

Just for the record: I'm a longtime AMD user and not a Intel fänboy trying to torpedo your argumentation.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Nice to see the real asshole residing in you - T2k.

 

[T2k]

*sigh* once again - It was not in my intent to get you banned (otherwise I wouldn't even have posted here, but contacted a mod). And I honestly made a mistake. But stuff like I quoted from you usually is the prime ingredient for deranging possibly interesting threads. Why insult someone when you have the arguments (which you apparently do)?

Apology accepted.

No insult was intended until he came back with utter BS, especially in blatant, loud style.

 

[T2k]

Nice to see the real asshole residing in you - T2k.

*shrug* These trolls are really eveyrwhere nowadays, seriously...

 

[ANova]

Yeah, that's why literally everybody luaghs at your retarded comments and deliberate disinformation.

Stupid, clueless troll, I have to say now.

No one's laughing but your dumbass. Stupid fucking f@nboy, I have to say now.

Whoa. After reading this thread I seriously wonder why you haven't been banned yet, T2k.

The problem with f@nboys is they don't know they are as such. As soon as you start 'insulting' their precious company they lundge at you with insults rather then valid arguments and proof, as is the case we see here. This is nothing new for me, of course T2k is the worst case I've seen yet in terms of being a complete and utter asshole from the very beginning. If AMD truely is that much better then it shouldn't be hard to prove as such.

and it was a 500 mhz overclock, not a 300 mhz one. why dont u overclock both cpus to their maximum while aircooled and see who wins.

I was referring to the 2.1 GHz PM being overclocked to 2.4 GHz. Don't you read? Or do you just have the nasty habit of ignoring what you don't like. You also completely ignored everything else I posted.

generally a64 offers better performance than pentium at less then half the price. i rly see no reason for 95% of computer users to even consider buying a pentium.

I posted the prices earlier and they are most certainly not half.

Jesus, what a bunch of f@nboys. :?

 

[hovz]

u posted the prices of slower pentium 4s. seeing as how there isnt a pentium 4 available thats as fast as the fastest a64s your point is ruined.

athlon 3500 - 259
pentium EE - almost 1k

those are pretty equivalent cpus with the athlon being faster in gaming and the p4 being faster in encoding.

the 2.1 pentium m retails for almost 700 bucks. the price of a 4000+. the 4000+ would mop the floor with it when at stock clocks. and would do the same when both are overclocked. thats in gaming. it gets much uglier in anything else.

i didnt read the rveiw with the 300 mhz overclock, only saw the two links in the other thread.

lol@you calling us f@nboys when your matching up amd processors based on how their rating number matches the intel clockspeeds as if intel cpus dont get blown away in everything except encoding and some rendering, and even then it takes insane ammounts of heat and power. yes we are the f@nboys alright!!!!!

what exactly is your argument?

oh yes a 3500+ does cost the same as a 3.4 ghz pentium. MUST BE PARITY!!!

 

[ANova]

u posted the prices of slower pentium 4s. seeing as how there isnt a pentium 4 available thats as fast as the fastest a64s your point is ruined.

You seem to be obsessed with gaming. Hmm, maybe that's because that is the only area that the A64s are typically alot better in then the P4?

The P4 keeps up with and (at times) beats the A64 in everything else.

athlon 3500 - 259
pentium EE - almost 1k

those are pretty equivalent cpus with the athlon being faster in gaming and the p4 being faster in encoding.

A 3500+ is not equivalent to a P4XE, the P4XE does beat it in most cases.

the 2.1 pentium m retails for almost 700 bucks. the price of a 4000+. the 4000+ would mop the floor with it when at stock clocks. and would do the same when both are overclocked. thats in gaming. it gets much uglier in anything else.

Again, do you not read?

A PM at 2.4 GHz outperforms an FX-55 in gaming by a bigger margin then the FX-55 outperforms a P4 3.6 GHz. The reason for PMs poor performance in content creation is largely due to the 855GME chipset which is getting dated. The PMs are currently memory bandwidth starved, with the A64s and P4s generally three times faster in that area. Like I said, the new Centrino 2 chipset which is set to debut this year will allievate most of that and increase the system bus speed.

Prices will come down as they become more popular, currently they are only part of a niche market and haven't been selling well.

i didnt read the rveiw with the 300 mhz overclock, only saw the two links in the other thread.

Then you can't comment on that can you.

lol@you calling us f@nboys when your matching up amd processors based on how their rating number matches the intel clockspeeds as if intel cpus dont get blown away in everything except encoding and some rendering, and even then it takes insane ammounts of heat and power. yes we are the f@nboys alright!!!!!

Listen to yourself. "when your matching up amd processors based on how their rating number matches the intel clockspeeds as if intel cpus dont get blown away in everything except encoding and some rendering" This is something a f@nboy would say. No if ands or buts. There is some meaning behind AMD's naming convention, even if it is slightly flawed.

oh yes a 3500+ does cost the same as a 3.4 ghz pentium. MUST BE PARITY!!!

Yeah so a P4 loses in gaming by a typical 10-15 fps. Whoop dee damn doo, good for you. As for the heat argument, I already told you; the Northwoods run perfectly cool, if not more so then the A64s and are still available in large quantities. There are also motherboards available for socket 478 that feature PCIE, etc. A P4 3.0C overclocked to 3.8 GHz (which is quite common) rivals an FX-53 for one fourth the cost and does not have any heating problems. If you can get over it being 10 fps slower in some games.

 

[hovz]

and an overclocked 3000+ beats the best intel has to offer...wtf is ur point? stop comparing one processors overclock to anothers stock. do you have a brain?

and gaming is such an unimportant part of cpu performance.

the p4xe doesnt beat it in most cases. they break about even.

do you not read? im 100% correct.

an nv40 at 500 mhz will outperform any r420 but that doesnt mean shit now does it?

and 10 to 15 fps is sooooooooo trvial, especially when games are limited by the cpu.

what i said about matching up the amds is perfectly valid. its as bad as comparing the athlon 3200 xp to the pentium 4 when it hit 3200 and calling it parity. the 3200 clearly didnt perform on the level of the p4, even tho they were priced similarly.

 

[jvd]

I will just say this


athlon 64 systems are cheaper than an equal p4 system.

By system I mean ram , cpu , mobo .

My sister just updated her pc . Got a 3500 athlon 64 an nforce 3 250gb mobo nad 1.5 gigs of ddr 500. Which gave her 50 mhz overclock on the cpu with out having to overclock or stress the ram for the same price as a p4 ee which her pc will soundly beat with out overclocks

 

[Bjorn]

Yeah so a P4 loses in gaming by a typical 10-15 fps. Whoop dee damn doo, good for you. As for the heat argument, I already told you; the Northwoods run perfectly cool, if not more so then the A64s and are still available in large quantities.

I certainly don't see the Northwood P4's running cooler & drawing less power then the A64's. Take into consideration the 90 nm versions and you'll be very close to the Pentium M in power consumption. It draws about 31W at full load and 3W at idle for a 3500+. Pretty impressive for such a fast CPU imo. Compare that to Intel's latest & greatest, the Prescott and you'll see a very bleak image for the Prescott:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041115/pentium4_570-20.html

There are also motherboards available for socket 478 that feature PCIE, etc. A P4 3.0C overclocked to 3.8 GHz (which is quite common) rivals an FX-53 for one fourth the cost and does not have any heating problems. If you can get over it being 10 fps slower in some games.

The A64 (90nm) 3000+ overclocks to about 2.6 GHz in Anand's test.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2242&p=5

That's a 45% overclock. And it'll probably be faster then a 3.8 GHz P4. And, as you can see above, a lot cooler. But i don't really see the point in comparing overclocked CPU's.

The Pentium M is a lot more interesting but Tom's test didn't show any advantages at the same clockspeed.

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20041224/pentium_m_boards-09.html

Other's have shown different numbers but it definitely doesn't look anything like a landslide victory for the Pentium M at the same clockspeed. It might be more interesting if the price comes down and we'll see better motherboard support for it. Though i wonder how much it will gain with a faster FSB since it has such a large cache to compensate.

The other problem is that while the A64 is a decent competitor to the P4 in things other then gaming, the Pentium M is not:

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20041224/pentium_m_boards-14.html

And then you have the 64 bit capabilities of the A64 on top of this. So imo, a lot of things need to happen with the Pentium M before it'll be really interesting. A large price cut f.e. Though i would have been interested in it for my upcoming HTPC if it wasn't for the fact that the 90 nm A64 have such low power consumption.

 

[ANova]

I certainly don't see the Northwood P4's running cooler & drawing less power then the A64's. Take into consideration the 90 nm versions and you'll be very close to the Pentium M in power consumption. It draws about 31W at full load and 3W at idle for a 3500+. Pretty impressive for such a fast CPU imo. Compare that to Intel's latest & greatest, the Prescott and you'll see a very bleak image for the Prescott:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041115/pentium4_570-20.html

Watch out, T2k might call you an ignorant dumbass for using third party benchmarks.

Well, Northwoods are most certainly equal to that of the 130nm A64s in terms of power consumption and heat production. Yes the 90nm varients are another story, though still not on par with the Pentium M. The 3W idle consumption is due to clock throttling (cool and quiet) which the PMs also have (speedstep).

Prescott does indeed have a bleak future, theres no arguing with you there. I still maintain that they aren't bad performers but they most certainly are power hogs and heaters.

The A64 (90nm) 3000+ overclocks to about 2.6 GHz in Anand's test.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2242&p=5

That's a 45% overclock. And it'll probably be faster then a 3.8 GHz P4. And, as you can see above, a lot cooler. But i don't really see the point in comparing overclocked CPU's.

It would not be cooler then a Northwood at load, nor that much faster if at all, except in gaming. Yes, it's a good alternative.

The Pentium M is a lot more interesting but Tom's test didn't show any advantages at the same clockspeed.

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20041224/pentium_m_boards-09.html

It'll get alot more interesting with the new chipset. That's what I've been trying to say. Right now yes, it's obviously not quite on par as it was initially designed strictly for laptops.

Other's have shown different numbers but it definitely doesn't look anything like a landslide victory for the Pentium M at the same clockspeed. It might be more interesting if the price comes down and we'll see better motherboard support for it. Though i wonder how much it will gain with a faster FSB since it has such a large cache to compensate.

The other problem is that while the A64 is a decent competitor to the P4 in things other then gaming, the Pentium M is not:

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20041224/pentium_m_boards-14.html

I've seen two different benchmarks that compared the PM 2.0 to the P4XE and the FX-55, at stock the PM was a little behind, when overclocked 300 and 400 MHz respectively (which isn't a huge overclock imo) it was quite a bit faster then everything (in gaming). That's not too bad if you take into consideration each procs specs.

I've already explained many times one of the primary reasons why it fares so badly in content creation. It could also stand to use some other optimizations.

And then you have the 64 bit capabilities of the A64 on top of this. So imo, a lot of things need to happen with the Pentium M before it'll be really interesting. A large price cut f.e. Though i would have been interested in it for my upcoming HTPC if it wasn't for the fact that the 90 nm A64 have such low power consumption.

You won't be seeing very large performance increases because of x86-64. It's mostly an extension to x86 that enables the system to address more then 4 GB of memory, which is also why Intel named it IA-32e, the e stands for extension. At any rate Intel will be adding the same to their processors very soon. Some P4s have already started showing up with it.

 

[London Geezer]

Where's the IBM option?

 

[T2k]

Yeah, that's why literally everybody luaghs at your retarded comments and deliberate disinformation.

Stupid, clueless troll, I have to say now.

No one's laughing but your dumbass. Stupid fucking f@nboy, I have to say now.

Whoa. After reading this thread I seriously wonder why you haven't been banned yet, T2k.

The problem with f@nboys is they don't know they are as such. As soon as you start 'insulting' their precious company they lundge at you with insults rather then valid arguments and proof, as is the case we see here. This is nothing new for me, of course T2k is the worst case I've seen yet in terms of being a complete and utter asshole from the very beginning. If AMD truely is that much better then it shouldn't be hard to prove as such.

The problem is when retarded kids like you come into the picture and start spreading their BS.

What kind of a retarded mindset start comparing an OCed CPU to a stock one and says there's no problem here?

You never been strong from math in school, right?

 

[T2k]

I certainly don't see the Northwood P4's running cooler & drawing less power then the A64's. Take into consideration the 90 nm versions and you'll be very close to the Pentium M in power consumption. It draws about 31W at full load and 3W at idle for a 3500+. Pretty impressive for such a fast CPU imo. Compare that to Intel's latest & greatest, the Prescott and you'll see a very bleak image for the Prescott:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041115/pentium4_570-20.html

Watch out, T2k might call you an ignorant dumbass for using third party benchmarks.

Being ignorant dumbass has nothing to do with that. Talking out of your bottom part, that's another story. Mom's basement doesn't really relevant in content creation comparison - I suggest you stick with the games, that's your class and magnituide.

PS: Oh yes, and Tom's Garbage is illegal here.

 

[hovz]

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20041224/pentium_m_boards-09.html

thanks bjorn..

and with that anovas arguement is finished.

a 3.8 northwould definitly would be slower than a similarly overclocked a64. lets not let our bias blind us. and it would not have the same power and heat as a 90 nm a64.

prescotts arent bad performers when you look at them on their own, its when u compare them to athlons that cost 1/3rd to 1/4th the price and realize that they even out in performance that you realize how bad they are.

why dont you give the a64 a "not that big 300 to 400 mhz" overclock to even it up and see whats what

edit - oops

 

[Bjorn]

Well, Northwoods are most certainly equal to that of the 130nm A64s in terms of power consumption and heat production. Yes the 90nm varients are another story, though still not on par with the Pentium M. The 3W idle consumption is due to clock throttling (cool and quiet) which the PMs also have (speedstep).

Who cares if it's done through clock throttling ? the end result is what matters imo.

Prescott does indeed have a bleak future, theres no arguing with you there. I still maintain that they aren't bad performers but they most certainly are power hogs and heaters.

Nobody has said that they're bad performers. It's just that currently, the A64 is the better buy.

It would not be cooler then a Northwood at load, nor that much faster if at all, except in gaming. Yes, it's a good alternative.

A 3.4 GHz Northwood uses 60W at full load compared to the 3500+ A64 that uses 31W. That's half the power. So i don't know where you get the "not be cooler then a Northwood". Besides, that CPU is afaik not manufactured anymore so i don't see the relevance of bringing it up all the time.

It'll get alot more interesting with the new chipset. That's what I've been trying to say. Right now yes, it's obviously not quite on par as it was initially designed strictly for laptops.

Sure, it'll be interesting if they add a bit of performance in some areas, and lower the price a lot. But let's wait for that to happen first.

I've seen two different benchmarks that compared the PM 2.0 to the P4XE and the FX-55, at stock the PM was a little behind, when overclocked 300 and 400 MHz respectively (which isn't a huge overclock imo) it was quite a bit faster then everything (in gaming). That's not too bad if you take into consideration each procs specs.

You keep coming back to these overclocks. And i don't really know why. Especially since you can overclock the A64 3000+ to 4000+ levels, and it'll cost you 1/3 of the Pentium M.

You won't be seeing very large performance increases because of x86-64. It's mostly an extension to x86 that enables the system to address more then 4 GB of memory, which is also why Intel named it IA-32e, the e stands for extension. At any rate Intel will be adding the same to their processors very soon. Some P4s have already started showing up with it.

I don't really expect a large performance increase either. But the difference between today's cpu's are rather small so 10-15% (assuming these are the gains that you can get, might be nothing in some cases and more in others) can make a huge difference in comparisions.

 

[XxStratoMasterXx]

I think AMD is now doing surprisingly well, and I feel that they will dominate-- in terms of performance and price for quite a while. Intel, I don't believe will catch up to AMD in these regards anytime soon. They're slipping.

 

[hovz]

intel is in the same position nvidia was when they released the nv30. tiem will tell if they pull an nv40 or a vodoo 5500 or whatever number it was.

 

[ANova]

The problem is when retarded kids like you come into the picture and start spreading their BS.

What kind of a retarded mindset start comparing an OCed CPU to a stock one and says there's no problem here?

You never been strong from math in school, right?

Hey dumbass, lets compare here shall we? PM - 2.4 GHz, FX55 - 2.6 GHz. My whole point was that the PM outperforms the FX55 in gaming while running 200 MHz slower and drawing quite a bit less power. So the fuck what if it's overclocked. It's to show the PM's capabilities. Who can't do math?

Who cares if it's done through clock throttling ? the end result is what matters imo.

The point is that the PM can do the same, they're just throttling the clock, no big deal there. Intel has added throttling features to the Prescotts now as well.

Nobody has said that they're bad performers. It's just that currently, the A64 is the better buy.

On the contrary, T2k and hovs have it set in their mind that the Athlon 64 kills the P4 in everything, which is simply not true. Yes, the A64s are currently better.

A 3.4 GHz Northwood uses 60W at full load compared to the 3500+ A64 that uses 31W. That's half the power. So i don't know where you get the "not be cooler then a Northwood". Besides, that CPU is afaik not manufactured anymore so i don't see the relevance of bringing it up all the time.

That 60w claim is a bit of an exaduration just as the 31w claim.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-90nm_5.html

Like I said, I have a P4C that only reaches around 46C at load at 3.6 GHz.