Athlon XP 3.0 Ghz or Pentium IV 3.0 Ghz - GoFuckYourself.com

Silent_Thunder · 12-17-2005, 04:20 PM

Which processor would you chose and why?

Yngwie · 12-17-2005, 04:22 PM

I've never used an AMD CPU, but I do have a P4 3.0ghz

Jarmusch · 12-17-2005, 04:22 PM

Would depend on the core/series. Care to be more specific?

And an athlon xp3000 is not 3.0ghz. ;)

Silent_Thunder · 12-17-2005, 04:24 PM

I own P4 3.0ghz for about 12hours now

Ran a benchmark. Compared my stats. And it seems that AMD 64 are much more better for games than Pentium is. Of course, one test doesn't mean a lot.

Silent_Thunder · 12-17-2005, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarmusch

Would depend on the core/series. Care to be more specific?

And an athlon xp3000 is not 3.0ghz. ;)

damn it, why did I write XP?

I'm talking about athlon 64

flashfire · 12-17-2005, 04:25 PM

AMD but not by much

tony286 · 12-17-2005, 04:25 PM

im a amd man but between those two i would go with the pentium its newer and more powerful.

Jarmusch · 12-17-2005, 04:26 PM

At this stage I would go for a dual core cpu for a work machine, no point going single core, unless it's also a gaming machine, for wich single core is still better.

Silent_Thunder · 12-17-2005, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarmusch

Would depend on the core/series. Care to be more specific?

And an athlon xp3000 is not 3.0ghz. ;)

I ran 3dmark benchmark. Then I compared my stats with other stats. I filtered results so that only PCs with Geforce 6600 GT card would be shown, and AMD Athlon 64 was on top for a few pages. Looks, like it's more gamer PC than Pentium.

Jarmusch · 12-17-2005, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent_Thunder

damn it, why did I write XP?

I'm talking about athlon 64

Ok my bad, but it's still not 3.0ghz.

ssp · 12-17-2005, 04:29 PM

AMD is a poor man's P4.

flashfire · 12-17-2005, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssp

AMD is a poor man's P4.

a poor man with a faster computer

Jarmusch · 12-17-2005, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent_Thunder

I ran 3dmark benchmark. Then I compared my stats with other stats. I filtered results so that only PCs with Geforce 6600 GT card would be shown, and AMD Athlon 64 was on top for a few pages. Looks, like it's more gamer PC than Pentium.

It's true, amd has the edge on games. But don't go trusting the 3dmark comparisons, most guys there are overclocked to death.

potter · 12-17-2005, 04:46 PM

You're joking right? You can't compare a P4 and an AMD 64 by Ghz. That is like comparing cars by how big the gas tank is.

And second, AMD doesn't make a 3.0Ghz chip. The 64 and X2 goes as high as 2.40, and the FX range from 2.40-2.80.

potter · 12-17-2005, 04:47 PM

And for the record AMD > Intel and day of the week.

E Guru · 12-17-2005, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssp

AMD is a poor man's P4.

uh...yeah..

TheSenator · 12-17-2005, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by potter

And for the record AMD > Intel and day of the week.

AMD has always performed better.

Sosa · 12-17-2005, 05:04 PM

Most people aren't going to see a difference. Can't go wrong either way.

Project-Shadow · 12-17-2005, 05:17 PM

AMD = Gaming
Intel = Work/Video processing

I'm enjoying my 3.8ghz P4

NickPapageorgio · 12-17-2005, 05:27 PM

Which processor would be better for doing graphic design work? I know alot will depend on the graphics card, but on shear processor power alone, what would you go with?

Project-Shadow · 12-17-2005, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickPapageorgio

Which processor would be better for doing graphic design work? I know alot will depend on the graphics card, but on shear processor power alone, what would you go with?

For design work i'd go with the Pentiums.

woj · 12-17-2005, 08:11 PM

For the same price AMD CPU will outperform Intel CPU, and that's for any application, not just games like some have suggested here...

Doctor Dre · 12-17-2005, 08:12 PM

It all depends what you want to do with it.

If I wanted a gaming station, I'd use an AMD cpu...

but for a video edition / workstation, I'l go toward P4s ;)

split_joel · 12-17-2005, 08:25 PM

Doesnt matter how you look at it AMD may not have 3.0 ghz systems but they are far better then the p4 if your going for a desktop Athlon 64 bit 3000+ very nice and is way faster then the p4 3.0 on a server duel opteron smokes a duel xeon any day

seven · 12-17-2005, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj

For the same price AMD CPU will outperform Intel CPU, and that's for any application, not just games like some have suggested here...

My desktop is P4 3.2ghz my laptop is AMD 3000+ 64 1.8ghz. Ofcourse P4 3.2 is faster but I find 1.8 ghz AMD is faster than my old desktop P4 1.8 ghz.. it's more like it'd be P4's 2.4 ghz equivalent. Obviously AMD's 64 beats P4's 32 with equi speed anytime

devnull · 12-17-2005, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarmusch

And an athlon xp3000 is not 3.0ghz. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarmusch

Ok my bad, but it's still not 3.0ghz.

Tip: Go read the basics of CPU architecture before you make comments about things you obviously don't know anything about.

Vitasoy · 12-17-2005, 08:54 PM

Best bang for the buck.. AMD

KRL · 12-17-2005, 08:56 PM

I've been using AMD's in most of my PC's. Very pleased with Athlon performance.

12-17-2005, 09:42 PM

personally, I've always been an Intel guy. I've had AMD before, didn't like the "feel" of it, if you can grasp what I'm trying to say.

dunefield · 12-17-2005, 09:53 PM

i have a p4 3ghz works fine for me...

seven · 12-18-2005, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Equinox

personally, I've always been an Intel guy. I've had AMD before, didn't like the "feel" of it, if you can grasp what I'm trying to say.

I can't.. you tried to "feel" up a fucking processor too? human flesh doesn't do it for you anymore huh?

donross · 12-18-2005, 09:19 AM

athlon is good but if you compare the processor AMD64 3000 vs. pentium 4 3Ghz.
i dont know why its called 3000... its only 2Ghz(cause im using it right now) compare to P4 who is 3Ghz. P4.3 is still superior...

gecko · 12-18-2005, 10:00 AM

I'm more partial to Intel..

Jarmusch · 12-18-2005, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by devnull

Tip: Go read the basics of CPU architecture before you make comments about things you obviously don't know anything about.

I was saying it's wrong to call the athlon 3000 a 3.0GHz chip.

The clock speed of the xp3000+ is 2.16GHz.

The clock speed of the 64 3000+ is 2.0GHz.

So STFU n00b.

Barefootsies · 12-18-2005, 10:19 AM

Athlon any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

I've had them both at one point between work (when I wasn't doing this fulltime), and home. Even when work would have a faster chipset, the Pentiums simply did not perform as well.

As for home, I do a lot of things on the different computers from gaming, video processing, and about anything you can imagine. For all home PC's I prefer, and have had AMD's for all computers for past 8 years. Most recent CPU's a Athlon 64, and it's blazing compared to older AMD 3200.

I say AMD is just a better all around chip IMHO.

Marshal · 12-18-2005, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Project-Shadow

AMD = Gaming
Intel = Work/Video processing

I'm enjoying my 3.8ghz P4

i couldn't agree more! intel = any CPU consuming work, excluding gaming...

Project-Shadow · 12-18-2005, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj

For the same price AMD CPU will outperform Intel CPU, and that's for any application, not just games like some have suggested here...

The reason Intel's outperform AMD's when is comes to work is the higher processor L1/L2/L3 cache's, but AMD's excel in FSB speed hence the better gaming. It's bang for buck when you're <$200 but when you go into the higher priced processors Intel is better bang for buck.

I prefer using AMD for gaming, but work I will use Intel and always will... until AMD bring up their cache's.

MrJackMeHoff · 12-18-2005, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Project-Shadow

The reason Intel's outperform AMD's when is comes to work is the higher processor L1/L2/L3 cache's, but AMD's excel in FSB speed hence the better gaming. It's bang for buck when you're <$200 but when you go into the higher priced processors Intel is better bang for buck.

I prefer using AMD for gaming, but work I will use Intel and always will... until AMD bring up their cache's.

intel has faster fsb always has

devnull · 12-18-2005, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarmusch

I was saying it's wrong to call the athlon 3000 a 3.0GHz chip.

The clock speed of the xp3000+ is 2.16GHz.

The clock speed of the 64 3000+ is 2.0GHz.

So STFU n00b.

And everytime a person brings this up, it's because he doesn't understand WHY it is like that.

wedouglas · 12-18-2005, 12:12 PM

AMD is my choice of CPU.

I have the 64 3000+ and it was totally worth the money.

BadBrad · 12-18-2005, 12:59 PM

The question noone seems to have asked here is, what OS? If it is Windows either should be ok. Even tho the AMD 64 has better memory management and is better for server's. If it is Linux I would only go with a AMD64. That way you can run full 64bit linux. You will notice a difference there. Especially if it is hosting.

And for those that compare Mhz stick with cropping your TGP images.

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...1215033811.htm

12-17-2005, 04:20 PM	#1
Silent_Thunder Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 5,258	Athlon XP 3.0 Ghz or Pentium IV 3.0 Ghz Which processor would you chose and why?

12-17-2005, 04:22 PM	#2
Yngwie I am an Alien from space Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 11,118	I've never used an AMD CPU, but I do have a P4 3.0ghz __________________ ICQ: 16544251 - Skype: gator37 @ eastlink.ca - email: yngwie @ isys.ca

12-17-2005, 04:46 PM	#14
potter Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Denver Posts: 6,559	You're joking right? You can't compare a P4 and an AMD 64 by Ghz. That is like comparing cars by how big the gas tank is. And second, AMD doesn't make a 3.0Ghz chip. The 64 and X2 goes as high as 2.40, and the FX range from 2.40-2.80. __________________

12-17-2005, 04:47 PM	#15
potter Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Denver Posts: 6,559	And for the record AMD > Intel and day of the week. __________________

12-17-2005, 05:27 PM	#20
NickPapageorgio Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: NC Posts: 8,323	Which processor would be better for doing graphic design work? I know alot will depend on the graphics card, but on shear processor power alone, what would you go with? __________________

12-17-2005, 04:22 PM	#3
Jarmusch Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 12,464	Would depend on the core/series. Care to be more specific? And an athlon xp3000 is not 3.0ghz. ;)

12-17-2005, 04:24 PM	#4
Silent_Thunder Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 5,258	I own P4 3.0ghz for about 12hours now Ran a benchmark. Compared my stats. And it seems that AMD 64 are much more better for games than Pentium is. Of course, one test doesn't mean a lot.

12-17-2005, 04:25 PM	#6
flashfire ICQ 1 6 7 8 5 3 4 9 2 Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 13,098	AMD but not by much

12-17-2005, 04:25 PM	#7
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	im a amd man but between those two i would go with the pentium its newer and more powerful.

12-17-2005, 04:26 PM	#8
Jarmusch Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 12,464	At this stage I would go for a dual core cpu for a work machine, no point going single core, unless it's also a gaming machine, for wich single core is still better.

12-17-2005, 04:29 PM	#11
ssp Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 7,990	AMD is a poor man's P4.

12-17-2005, 05:04 PM	#18
Sosa In Tushy Land Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Nebraska Posts: 40,149	Most people aren't going to see a difference. Can't go wrong either way.

12-17-2005, 05:17 PM	#19
Project-Shadow Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 7,340	AMD = Gaming Intel = Work/Video processing I'm enjoying my 3.8ghz P4

12-17-2005, 08:11 PM	#22
woj <&(©¿©)&> Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 47,882	For the same price AMD CPU will outperform Intel CPU, and that's for any application, not just games like some have suggested here... __________________ Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000 Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip Manager

12-17-2005, 08:25 PM	#24
split_joel Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 2,270	Doesnt matter how you look at it AMD may not have 3.0 ghz systems but they are far better then the p4 if your going for a desktop Athlon 64 bit 3000+ very nice and is way faster then the p4 3.0 on a server duel opteron smokes a duel xeon any day __________________ E-mail marketing - Automation Scripting - IP Space AIM: splitjoelp ICQ: 254759453 skype - splitjoelp 702-941-6465

12-17-2005, 08:54 PM	#27
Vitasoy GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!! Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 58,202	Best bang for the buck.. AMD __________________ [email protected]

12-17-2005, 08:56 PM	#28
KRL Entrepreneur Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: USA Posts: 31,429	I've been using AMD's in most of my PC's. Very pleased with Athlon performance. __________________ If you would like to develop your domains, you can lease inexpensive foreign labor from the leaders in the field at iWebmasters.com TO LOWER YOUR COSTS AND INCREASE YOUR PRODUCTION! * * * * * * * * * * * * Domains Adult News KRL's Newsletter Biz Tips Just Listed Domains

12-17-2005, 09:42 PM	#29
X37375787 Guest Posts: n/a	personally, I've always been an Intel guy. I've had AMD before, didn't like the "feel" of it, if you can grasp what I'm trying to say.

12-17-2005, 09:53 PM	#30
dunefield www.barely18movies.com Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 10,920	i have a p4 3ghz works fine for me... __________________

12-18-2005, 09:19 AM	#32
donross Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,295	athlon is good but if you compare the processor AMD64 3000 vs. pentium 4 3Ghz. i dont know why its called 3000... its only 2Ghz(cause im using it right now) compare to P4 who is 3Ghz. P4.3 is still superior...

12-18-2005, 10:00 AM	#33
gecko ****** Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 21,846	I'm more partial to Intel.. __________________ [email protected]

12-18-2005, 10:19 AM	#35
Barefootsies Choice is an Illusion Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Land of Obama Posts: 42,635	Athlon any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. I've had them both at one point between work (when I wasn't doing this fulltime), and home. Even when work would have a faster chipset, the Pentiums simply did not perform as well. As for home, I do a lot of things on the different computers from gaming, video processing, and about anything you can imagine. For all home PC's I prefer, and have had AMD's for all computers for past 8 years. Most recent CPU's a Athlon 64, and it's blazing compared to older AMD 3200. I say AMD is just a better all around chip IMHO. __________________ Should You Email Your Members? Link1 \| Link2 \| Link3 Enough Said. "Would you rather live like a king for a year or like a prince forever?"

12-18-2005, 12:12 PM	#40
wedouglas So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Dearborn, MI Posts: 5,921	AMD is my choice of CPU. I have the 64 3000+ and it was totally worth the money.

12-18-2005, 12:59 PM	#41
BadBrad Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 618	The question noone seems to have asked here is, what OS? If it is Windows either should be ok. Even tho the AMD 64 has better memory management and is better for server's. If it is Linux I would only go with a AMD64. That way you can run full 64bit linux. You will notice a difference there. Especially if it is hosting. And for those that compare Mhz stick with cropping your TGP images. http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...1215033811.htm __________________ Your sig chose me!