[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Intel or AMD (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 4/19/2005 11:16:13 PM EDT
|
I'm trying to decide on a motherboard CPU combo for my next pc and am having a real hard time deciding between the two this time around. I've been using AMD for years and wouldnt mind giving intel a try. But then again the intel is a little more expensive. I'm going with a Asus motherboard which ever direction I go. I'm not a big gamer. My main goal is to make DVD's. |
|
Go AMD unless you are doing hardcore video and/or sound editing. Making DVD's doesn't count as video editing, so go with an AMD. I have a 3500+ A64, and if I overclock my cpu to 2.4 Ghz (2.2 stock, can reach 2.4 easy) I outperform a P4 3.8 Ghz for MUCH less $$$. At stock speeds I run on par with a 3.6 Ghz P4 in 95% of applications. |
|
dvd's actually MIGHT be a little better with intel. what kind of movies? just ripping movies, or are you converting home made films to DVD? converting on the fly? intel is much better with hardcore production type stuff, since almost all the software out there is optimized for it. amd is more of a gamer/budget-oriented type system. granted, they've got some new equipment out that really gives intel a run for the money, but any major graphic software, 3d, or video editing software will generally have a big advantage with intel. i've been using amd for years now too, but my next WORKstation is going to be intel. hopefully dually xeons, but not sure if i'll do that or not. and, a seperate gaming/toy rig will remain amd. the a64 series is a lot of power for a little cash right now. the opteron series is more server-based (xeon competition). the fx series is basically an opteron repackaged for gamers (and i think it doesn't require the uhh... that one memory... i'm tired). the fx series is just as costly as intel. |
coughcoughprescottsarehotterthanamotherfuckercoughcough erm, excuse me, I seem to have a chip caught in my throat. AMD, and 64bit if possible (AthlonFX or Opteron for AWESOME POWA!!!11111oneoneone) |
Someone hasn't been paying attention to power consumption lately. Check what kind of power Intel chips burn nowadays. I think I know what you are referring too though. In the early days of the Athlon, there was no integrated thermal protection diode on-die. That meant a possibly fried chip if the fan was installed incorrectly. That is a thing of the past now. I have that on good authority. 
|
|
I will admit, it's been a while since i've built one from the ground up. glad to hear they finally solved some of their problems. |
All the time Google p4 overheat or something similar and see for yourself. AMD and intel both make great chips that work the same. I go with AMD cause I like underdogs and intel is so overpriced. |
If you want compatibility and ease of setup and long term reliability, go with Intel. The AMD boards with Nvidia and VIA chips just don't meet those requirements. |
|
Tom’s Hardware Guide: “Why Athlon 64?” (AMD-specific section of 939-pin mobo roundup) http://www20.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20050103/socket_939-01.html “The benefits of the Athlon 64 are such that if you ask well-informed users that question, they're likely to scoff at you.” “In terms of performance, AMD processors remain a step ahead of Intel models, despite the fact that AMD has only just now hit 2.6 GHz while Intel churns along at up to 3.8 GHz. This shows once again that clock speed alone isn't everything, and is the main rationale behind the "plus" some AMD processors sport after their names.” “The AMD processor's integrated memory controller works more efficiently than Intel's conventional architecture. For that reason, the use of DDR400 memory (in dual-channel mode for double the bandwidth) represents no handicap whatsoever in terms of performance, and has the practical advantage that it currently costs less than DDR2-533 RAM.” “From a technical standpoint, however, AMD has been offering customers more for their money for months now.” Maximum PC: Future technology, the promise of WinXP64 this year, and P4EE vs. FX revisited (spoiler: AMD still wins) (January 2005, pages 32, 43, 74) • Page 32: "Dual Core Processors" • Page 43: "Windows XP 64-bit Edition / 64-bit support from Microsoft could help make it an Athlon 64 year" • Page 74: "CPU Showdown Revisited" (enter the 3.8GHz P4 570J)... net result: "The Athlon 64-FX 55 is still the champ... it looks like the P4 will be eating Athlon 64 FX dust for the foreseeable future." AMD Gamer (Feb. 28, 2005): “AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 Processor Review” http://www.amdgamer.com/read.php?rid=67&type=2 “The Athlon 64 FX-55 is the undisputable performance leader.” “So would I recommend this processor? The answer is YES! Though it is not absolutely necessary to have a CPU of this range to be able to play your games with ease, it does offer security for future games and applications that will require more processing power and memory bandwith. Let's not forget, this is a 64 bit CPU ready for next generation operating systems and software. Power users will definately appreciate it.” Tech Report: "The Best Hardware of 2004" (Athlon 64 3500+ wins CPU category) http://www.techreport.com/etc/2005q1/bestof2004/index.x?pg=1 "AMD's Athlon 64 processor was undoubtedly the best CPU for enthusiasts in 2004. With a speedy on-die memory controller, future-proof 64-bit capabilities, and Cool'n'Quiet technology, there was a lot to love about the Athlon 64. Intel's newest Prescott Pentium 4 processors still had a few things going for them, including the creamy smoothness of Hyper-Threading and excellent video encoding performance, but those virtues weren't enough to overcome the chips' incredibly poor gaming performance, toasty temperatures, and gluttonous power consumption." Gamers Depot: "Gear of the Year: Best Tech of 2004" http://www.gamers-depot.com/guides/best2004/001.htm "Best CPU: AMD FX-55" "Pound for pound, this chip powers its way through games and makes mincemeat of them. Make no mistake about it - if you want today’s fastest CPU for games, the FX-55 is your ticket." OCModShop: “Best of 2004 Award” http://www.ocmodshop.com/default.aspx?a=235 “If there was ever any doubt that AMD could produce the hardest hitting processor on the market, that doubt should have died out in 2004. The FX55 hammered the competition at stock speeds and thanks to unlocked multipliers and solid overclocking ability it pounded the competition to pulp (and that is not fiction). If you wanted the best performing processor in 2004, it was the FX55.” ExtremeTech: “Free Advice for Intel” http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1706279,00.asp “But as I worked on ExtremeTech's Intel 925XE and Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.46GHz preview, I couldn't help wondering if we're seeing a great company begin a downhill slide. Every major business goes through bad patches, where product plans don't meet expectations. The great ones hold on and recover. But Intel's latest release seems to be another in an ongoing series of missteps: • Announcing it would revolutionize HDTV by getting into LCoS production, then announcing it was delaying, to shift to 1080p. Then ultimately dropping the LCoS idea completely. • Discovering well after the product had launched that ambitious plans for stepping up the frequency of the Pentium 4 to as high as 5GHz simply wasn't going to work -- leaving the company without a competitive answer to AMD. • Launching a much-awaited new desktop chipset, only to uncover bugs that forced some motherboard companies to issue recall notices. While we're on chipsets, why the heck doesn't the 925XE support ECC? • Along with the chipset launch, releasing Intel HD Audio (formerly Azalia) with poor driver support and with DVD-Audio support nowhere to be seen. • Putting billions of dollars into Itanium, which turned out to be a processor with a fairly niche market. A niche that's growing narrower, by the way, as workstation manufacturers move to either AMD's Opteron 64-bit architecture or Intel's copycat EM64T processors.” The Inquirer: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20098 Processor of the Year: AMD Athlon FX 55 (genuine award) Newfound smugness award: AMD Number of the year: 64 **PC Mag: “AMD’s Latest Special FX” (4 systems reviewed) Roundup includes Falcon NW, ABS, Velocity Micro and Polywell http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1679477,00.asp “Overall, we see the performance gains in the new chip, and it's certainly a worthy successor for the honor of AMD's top spot. Supplanting the FX-53, the FX-55 has the chops to be the next favorite ‘tweakers CPU.’ The systems using the new Athlon 64 FX-55 certainly outperform the comparison Millennia 940i [powered by Prescott at 3.6GHz]… The Polywell and ABS gaming boxes also outperform the comparison P4EE system, the Falcon Northwest Mach V 3.4 Extreme Edition, in our Winstone tests.” *Tom’s Hardware: “AMD's Athlon64 4000 and FX-55: Nails in the P4 EE's Coffin?” http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041019/index.html “When it comes to games and multimedia, the FX-55 gains even more lead over the P4 processor family, beating the Extreme Edition in 3DMark, Doom 3, Far Cry, Unreal Tournament 2004 and Wolfenstein ET. These are also precisely the applications for which the P4 EE and the Athlon FX are designed.” “…the bright winner of today's race is AMD's Athlon64 FX-55, as Intel's Extreme Edition loses more ground.” *Tom’s Hardware: (covers EVP, C&Q) http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041019/athlon64_4000-01.html “AMD has jumped ahead with power-saving features. While Intel has yet to implement Enhanced Speedstep Technology for its Pentium 4's, AMD has already offered Cool & Quiet since the very launch of the Athlon64.” “AMD supports the NX-bit security features DEP or Data Execution Prevention. After WindowsXP Service Pack 2 is installed DEP allows for memory areas to be marked as non-executable. Here, malicious code, written by buffer overflows, won't be executed any more.” AnandTech: “AMD Athlon 64 4000+ & FX-55: A Thorough Investigation” http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2249 “The release of the Athlon 64 4000+ and FX-55 further extend AMD's lead in Doom 3. Even the entry level Athlon 64 3200+ has no problems outperforming the 3.4EE and Pentium 4 560. Doom 3 does continue to show us the ~7% performance improvement we've been seeing thus far from going to a dual channel Socket-939 setup over Socket-754.” “What the cancelation of Intel's 4GHz Pentium 4 does say however is that Prescott was a waste.” *AnandTech: (on power consumption) http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2249&p=13 “At idle, the 130nm Athlon 64s all consume just about the same amount of power, with the 90nm Pentium 4s doing a little more. But what's truly impressive is the 90nm Athlon 64 3500+, drawing less power than any of the other chips at idle - by a significant margin… Under load the situation is no different; because of the fact that AMD didn't change anything architecturally (nothing major at least) with the 90nm shrink, the Athlon 64 got what the Pentium 4 should have received with the move down to 90nm - much lower power consumption.” *Tech Report: “…Rubbing it in” http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/athlon64-fx55/index.x?pg=1 “The Athlon 64 4000+ and FX-55 are easily the fastest x86-compatible PC processors available, and we haven't even gotten into testing 64-bit code that could widen the gap. The new Athlon 64 models are faster overall than anything Intel has to offer, and their gaming performance is particularly strong. As a wave of highly-anticipated new games has hit the market over the past few months, AMD's lead in gaming performance has grown even more pronounced. Right now, Intel is struggling to get to the next rung on the performance ladder, and AMD is stepping on Intel's fingers.” “For gamers, though, the choice is simple: get an Athlon 64, and don't look back.” Hot Hardware: “AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 & Athlon 64 4000+” http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?articleid=592 “Looking at the benchmark scores, we suspect that the majority of our audience will come to the same conclusion as we have: The Athlon 64 FX-55 is simply the fastest x86 processor currently available. Unless you spend half of your day encoding video (with heavy SSE optimizations in your encoder), the Athlon 64 FX-55 offers the best performance of any other desktop processor. The Athlon 64 4000+ is also an extremely fast processor, and with a little overclocking, it could reach the same performance levels as the FX-55.” “Regardless of what happens in the immediate future, AMD is in a good position today. The K8 architecture has scaled nicely in 2004, and now that AMD is using strained SOI, it appears the company still has some headroom to spare should it need to release one more speed grade before transitioning to its 0.09-micron process and taking the K8 past the 3GHz mark.” *Firing Squad: “AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 and Athlon 64 4000+ Review” http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/athlon_64_fx55_4000/default.asp “AMD is sitting on top of the world. It hasn’t relinquished a performance crown for more than a year and the Athlon 64 FX family is to thank. The Athlon 64 FX-55 furthers a lead that was already established by the Athlon 64 FX-53 over Intel’s Pentium 4 Extreme Edition.” “In a nutshell, the Athlon 64 FX-55 is another flagship chip with best-in-class performance selling for top dollar.” [H]ardOCP: “AMD Athlon 64 4000+ & FX-55” http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=Njc1LDE= “Comparing the heat put off by an Athlon 64 to the heat put off by a Prescott core Pentium 4 is like comparing summer in Alaska with summer in Zimbabwe. The two simply do not compare. That is not to say the Athlon 64s are cool, but they are not burning holes into our test bench stands like we have seen Pentium 4 CPUs do lately.” “Being that most of our readers are gamers or hardware enthusiasts, crowning the Athlon FX-55 the King of Speed is easy to do. If 3D gaming is what you primarily use your system for, then you are likely going to cheat yourself by not going with an AMD Athlon processor as your choice for powering the latest games.” [H]ardOCP: “nForce4 Ultra & SLI Preview” http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=Njc3LDE= *ExtremeTech: “AMD's New Athlon 64: Fast and Pricey” (scores a rating of 8 out of 10) http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1679409,00.asp “When it comes to digital media encoding, AMD's new CPU delivers excellent results. The clock speed of the FX-55 is 8% higher than the FX-53 or 4000+. Bearing in mind that a real-world performance increase that's 70% of the increase in clock speed would be considered good, this is absolutely fantastic. Better than that: It's what you could call "ideal." There's an 8% reduction in decoding times, which means that the change in clock speed delivers a 100%-efficient change in performance. You can't ask for more than that.” … on gaming performance: “The gap between the best Athlon 64 and the best Pentium 4 in games is huge.” “Ultimately, it's all about performance increases. In that respect, the Athlon 64 architecture continues to shine. All other things being equal, these chips have demonstrated nearly 100% clock scaling efficiency in many cases. Increase the clock speed 8%, performance goes up 8%. It sounds intuitive, but in the past it has not usually been the case.” “We're not big advocates of spending well over $500 for a CPU--that's just not where you get the most bang for your buck--but in that very high end, extreme, no-holds barred price range, AMD's Athlon 64 FX series continues to impress. If you're thinking about spending that much money on a CPU, this one comes highly recommended.” *Techware Labs: “AMD Socket 939 4000+ and FX55” http://www.techwarelabs.com/reviews/processors/amd4000_fx55/ “We tested against a 3.6Ghz P4 and ran SiSoft Benchmarks against a P4 4.0Ghz, neither of which stood a chance against the FX55 or 4000+. Given recent P4 performance and the cancellation of the 4Ghz Part from Intel it's this editors opinion that the AMD 64 is currently both the speed and performance winner. With results like these it is easy to award both processors the Techwarelabs Recommended Product Award.” Xbit Labs: “AMD Raises the Bar: AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 and AMD Athlon 64 4000+ CPUs Review” http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-fx55.html “Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.4 falls steadily behind not only Athlon 64 FX-55, but also Pentium 4 560. Note that its price is $999, which undoubtedly makes this CPU the “worst choice” you can make today. I have not the slightest doubt that enthusiasts will definitely decide on Athlon 64 FX-55, which is now priced at $827.” *Sudhian: “Once More Into the Breach: AMD’s FX-55 Stretches for 2.6 GHz” http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=614 “If you’re a gamer and you’re not running an Athlon 64, you should be. When compared against an equivalent P4 platform the Athlon 64 wins. In fact, it has an embarrassing (for Intel) tendency to trash P4 platforms that are significantly more expensive.” “AMD hasn’t dominated gaming this thoroughly since the initial launch of the P4, only this time Intel has no ‘Wait and see’ card to play.” “Believe it or not, the FX-55 isn’t a bad deal relative to the 4000+. An FX-55 part offers an 8.3% clock jump in exchange for a 13.4% higher price. Considering that the FX-55 is the highest-end part AMD currently manufactures, this is not a bad deal…if you’re buying in that price range.” “If you’ve got the cash, the Athlon 64 FX-55 is a hell of a chip. If you’re a gamer, the Athlon 64 should be a foregone conclusion. But which flavor? It’s all a matter of price.” *VR-Zone: “Athlon 64 4000+ Review” http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=1357 “With the K8 core and more specifically the Athlon 64 4000+, the so-called "MHz Myth" should by now be fully realized by anyone that has an interest in microprocessors. For years Intel's marketing department has touted clock speed (with less instructions per clock cycle) rather than AMD's approach of more instructions per clock cycle and therefore slower clock speeds. When AMD's general theory on CPU architecture was coupled with the integrated memory controller and increased L2 cache introduced in the K8 core and present in the Athlon 64 4000+, you could almost hear the trumpets start playing and the curtain fall on the current Pentium 4 processor as we know it today.” “Throughout the board in almost every benchmark we tested today, the Athlon 64 4000+ and even the Athlon 64 3800+ have outperformed Intel's 3.4GHz and 3.6GHz processors by very convincing margins. In every game tested the Athlon 64 remains supreme over the Intel Pentium 4, with the only benchmark the Pentium 4 actually did well in being ones that are multi-threaded and used with Intel's Hyper-Threading technology. Not much more can be said beyond that the Athlon 64 4000+ overall outperforms current Intel desktop CPU offerings, period.” *PC Perspective: “AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 and 4000+ Processor” http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=79&type=expert&pid=2 “The Athlon 64 FX-55 processor is a beast. It is able to out perform the competition quite handily in a majority of the benchmarks we saw, with the exceptions of the Sysmark test and the professional rendering applications. For gaming however, there is little discussion that needs to be made about which processor is going to give you the better frame rate and there by improve your gaming experience -- the Athlon 64's K8 core has become the gamer's choice of CPUs hands down.” “The AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 processor is the fastest gaming processor we have ever seen at PC Perspective -- there is simply no denying that… While I can't simply recommend that everyone go out and get the first FX-55 they can find simply because of its price point, if you are in the market for the absolute best when it comes to performance, you're money shouldn't be spent anywhere else.” SimHQ: “AMD Athlon™ 64 4000+ and FX-55 Review” http://www.simhq.com/_technology/technology_029a.html “SimHQ’s benchmark suite displayed a fairly uniform 5% performance gain across the board for AMD’s new processors over their slower parts, with the FX-55’s clock speed increase allowing the CPU to scale itself slightly better than the 4000+. The Athlon 64 family of processors has proven that they can dominate in a 32-bit gaming environment…” “for the simulation gaming fan who feels compelled to build the absolute fastest rig available today, they need look no further than the Athlon 64 FX-55.” Short Media: “AMD Athlon 64 4000+ Processor: At a glance” http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=266 “The AMD Socket 939 family provides an important upgrade path for consumers as new AMD processors enter the market. The ability to swap out only the processor and gain a performance increase is very attractive to buyers. Beyond the benchmarks is AMD's immediate benefit of Cool’n’Quiet technology. Enhance Virus Protection, beneficial on paper, has yet to become mainstream with the Windows operating system.” PC Stats: “AMD Athlon 64 4000+ socket 939 Processor Review” http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1666 “From the benchmarks PCstats has run in this review on the Athlon64 4000+, it is clear that this processor offers us excellent gaming and application performance compared to existing mainstream Intel processors like the Pentium 4 540.” “Cool ‘n’ Quiet is a noise and power saving technology which allows the CPU to dynamically throttle its speed along with a thermally controlled heatsink fan. These adjustments are made based on the current CPU load.” “Enhanced Virus Protection is a new technology unique to the Athlon 64 CPU. It is designed to halt certain virus and exploit attacks as they occur. EVP works hand-in-hand with Microsoft's DEP (Data Execution Prevention) code introduced in Service Pack 2 for Windows XP. When enabled (by using a compatible processor like the Athlon 64 4000+) the operating system watches for certain anomalies that often signify a virus or exploit attack, like code being executed in memory spaces where program code does not belong. In this way, buffer overflow attacks which overload a legitimate memory space allowing foreign code to be run in unprotected memory location, will be stopped short as soon as they occur.” *Linux Hardware.org: “AMD's Athlon 64 4000+ and Athlon 64 Chipsets Compared” http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/19/1654258&mode=thread “The results above are easy to decipher, as the results were quite consistent throughout testing. The AMD platform is a huge winner here under Linux and we are more and more surprised as we evaluate these platforms at how far Intel is falling behind. Above you can see that Intel is really only competitive in the workstation graphics benchmark and that's most likely due to how tightly the benchmark is tied to the video card. In many of the benchmarks we see Intel trailing by as much as 35%.” Reviewboard: Athlon 64 4000+ Review http://www.reviewboard.com/articles/190/ “AMD has been bringing it.” “The games are smooth and liquid; the extra detail is immediately identifiable. Spreadsheets and Database queries are faster and multi-tasking has been cranked up several notches.” “The Athlon 64 series of processors have been out for about a year or so now. They are the way of the future, and every software manufacturer is developing new software to take advantage of this powerful new architecture. So when you think about buying a new system, make sure you go Athlon 64; it will end up saving you money in the long run because your system will be capable of doing 64 bit applications… even 3 years from now. Do you want to be stuck with an old 32 Bit processor when you need 64?” *Hexus: “AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 and Model 4000+” http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD04ODg= “It came as no surprise to us that both the Athlon 64 FX-55 and Model 4000+ processors are hugely fast processors. AMD hasn't really brought anything new to the table but, and here's the crucial thing, it hasn't had to. The incumbent Athlon 64 FX-53 was more than a match for Intel's Extreme Edition CPUs so Model 4000+, which is essentially a re-badged FX-53, was predictably speedy. The FX-55 is a recipient of another 200MHz clock speed, thus raising the performance bar yet again.” SharkyExtreme: “Athlon 64 FX-55 & 4000+ Processor Review” http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3424131 “This 2.6 GHz monster looks ready to eat Pentium 4 Extreme Edition processors for breakfast, and then start on the rest of the Intel menu.” “The high octane Athlon 64 FX-55 should be music to the enthusiast's ears… there should be no doubt that the Athlon 64 FX-55 is the fastest CPU in the desktop class.” “The Athlon 64 FX-55 is a serious product release that is geared specifically for the hardcore enthusiast, and while buyers will take a hit in the wallet, they will also be rewarded with the fastest desktop processor, bar none. No more debate about the performance of the Athlon 64 FX vs. the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition; this puppy puts that argument to rest.” AMDZone: “Athlon 64 4000+ and Athlon 64 FX55 Review” http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=70&page=1 “So where does this leave AMD? Well they certainly will increase performance across the board compared to Intel by a decent amount, but it does not change the situation tremendously.” Lost Circuits: “AMD Athlon64 4000+” http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/amd_a64-4000/ Motherboards.org: “AMD FX-55/4000+ CPU Review” http://www.motherboards.org/reviews/hardware/1461_1.html “AMD is no longer the underdog folks, they now hold both the low and high end CPU market as far as performance values are concerned, and even though Intel may still make the most sales, AMD now holds the speed crown.” “AMD has certainly proved they can make a fast processor, and one that can beat or compete with anything Intel can currently throw at them.” “AMD has the faster CPU and has some strong supporting partners that are strengthening their platform.” PC Magazine / Issue 21: Editor’s Choice award for Polywell’s FX-55 machine http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1679483,00.asp “When it comes to gaming PCs, providing good performance at a reasonable price is welcome. And though the Polywell Poly 939N-FX55's exterior won't attract the most ardent gamers, the power and features you get for such a low price ($2,995 direct, as tested)—for a gaming box—makes it an Editors' Choice in our book.” PC Magazine / Issue 21: Velocity Micro’s Athlon 64 3800+ review http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1721162,00.asp PC Magazine / Issue 21: ABS’s FX-55 review http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1724893,00.asp PC Magazine / Issue 21: Compaq’s FX-53 review http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1721030,00.asp “Perhaps having the latest Athlon 64 FX-55 processor like our top scorers would have helped its performance.” PC Magazine / Issue 21: Voodoo’s FX-53 review http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1721147,00.asp Maximum PC: December 2004 “Gear of the Year” award / FX-55 wins “CPU of the Year” (December, 2004 Issue; page 24) “The FX is such a clear winner that it takes us back to the good old days, a simpler time when you could declare a CPU without having to qualify it...” “Overall, this was such a clear win for the Athlon 64 FX-55, that there is no arguing our decision. The Athlon 64 FX is the champ.” “Consider: In our lab two months ago, an Athlon 64 FX machine running at 2.6GHz actually beat a P4 box running at 4.28GHz. That pretty much sums it up.” Computer Power User (C.P.U.) Magazine: FX-55 featured in Holiday Hardware Gift Guide and gets cover mention (December, 2004 Issue; Gift Guide on page 49 / Processor review on page 17) “The FX-55 extends AMD's lead in the tests that matter most to enthusiasts.” “When you consider AMD's Enhanced Virus Protection and its 64-bit extensions, which are just pawing for a final version of Microsoft Windows XP x64 Edition, AMD's advantages spawn performance, features, longevity and price.” Tom's Hardware Guide: "3.8 GHz P4-570 and E0 Stepping To End Intel's Performance Crisis" Power Consumption: http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041115/pentium4_570-20.html GameSpot: Holiday Gift Guide press release http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/041115/156046_1.html VoodooPC recognized as the winner of the "Ultimate Desktop System" category for their FX-55 / SLI machine Falcon Northwest recognized as the winner of the "Performance Desktop System" category for their Athlon 64 machine AMD's Athlon 64 family recognized as the winner of the "Processor" category: "The AMD Athlon 64 processor has consistently outperformed the Intel Pentium 4 processor in today's most popular games, including Doom 3, Far Cry, and Counter-Strike: Source. So if you're looking for a prebuilt gaming system, or if you're building your own, we recommend starting with an Athlon 64 processor. The AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 is currently the fastest desktop processor for gaming. It's also "unlocked," which means you can adjust the processor bus speed and multiplier settings to overclock at will. Budget conscious gamers should check out the lower speed Athlon 64 processors since they still offer excellent performance." Note: There are no Intel processors, motherboards or systems recommended in this holiday buying guide Ace’s Hardware: “Performance Capital: The Athlon 64 FX-55” http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=65000326 “Indeed, with the Athlon 64 FX-55, AMD commands a respectable lead in performance in nearly all of our tests. Its closest competitor, in fact, is not the Prescott, but rather the older and bolder Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. You might say AMD's won some "performance capital" with the FX-55, and judging from the pricing, they aim to spend it.” |
|
The socket 478 Northwood and Prescott Pentium 4s burned when overclocked (overvolt above 1.68v). The LGA 778 Pentium 4s are overclocking monsters and do not have heat issues. The 630 3GHz chips are running stable @ 4GHz+ on air, have 64bit support, and 2MB of L2 cache. Add to that a fantastic chipset support from 925 Express, and it is superior to the AMD platform. The P4 630 is a $250 chip; it's closest competition on AMD is the FX-55 (listed in the long post above) and will cost you $800+; and then the platform is unstable. Hey. here's something pretty cool: www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/charts/index.html Thats a benchmark results tool. Lists all the benchmarks Toms has done on CPU's. Just choose the benchmarks that look like what you will be using it for, and then compare prices of whats in your budget. No brainer. Since you said you are not a gamer, and more interested in making DVDs (authoring DVDs? Like home movies from a camcorder I guess?), then this will interest you; the CPUs on top are best for this purpose:  Awful lot of blue at the top. But, as you can see, the CPU doesn't really matter THAT much. Stability matters; and the latest chipsets that support cool stuff like PCIe and SATA2 for the AMD (mainly the Nvidia NForce chipsets) are notoriously buggy. Also, the biggest gotcha in content creation and video editing is not the CPU or even the chipset; it's the disk drive. I can't tell you how many systems I've worked on where the guy bought the fastest CPU and motherboard on the market but can't edit video because he bought some bargain-basement monster 250GB disk drive. The disk system is KEY. not the CPU. If it were me, and I do this every day for people that make a living doing video editing, 3D studio rendering, animation and graphics, I would go with a decent Intel 630 on an Abit or Asus motherboard using the Intel 925E chipset (Asus P5AD2-E Premium), good DDR2 RAM (like from Komusa) and a Maxtor 300GB MaxlineIII drive. |
Quoted:
Your comment about the FX55 being unstable is a crock_of_shit. What data are you using to base this on? The FX55 is the same processor core as Opteron. Do you think the US Govt would be using unstable computers to run nuclear tests? Opteron Supercomputer Cluster Will Run Linux Los Alamos Labs chooses Linux Networx to build massive cluster. Tom Krazit, IDG News Service Thursday, August 14, 2003 Another Linux supercomputer cluster with Advanced Micro Devices's Opteron chip is in the works, this time for Los Alamos National Laboratory's nuclear weapons testing program. Linux Networx has been selected to build the cluster of 1408 dual-processor Opteron servers, the company has announced. The system, known as Lightning, will deliver theoretical peak performance of 11.26 trillion floating-point operations per second (FLOPS), the company says. The deal is worth $10 million, and Linux Networx expects to complete the system in September, says Dean Hutchings, chief operating officer. When completed, Lightning will rank slightly ahead of the MCR system the company built for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories using Intel's Xeon processors and Linux, according to the Top 500 list of the world's fastest supercomputers. |
I said the PLATFORM. Thats the CHIPSET and the CPU. Namely the NVidia NForce4 chipset that supports all the stuff the Intel chipset supports (like PCIe and SATA2). It SUCKS. And if you asked me, comparing a supercomputer to a desktop is like comparing a S&W J-Frame to the HARP Supergun |
Quoted:
A CPU can't run all by itself. It needs a platform. Los Alamos chose a CPU and platform, not a CPU. Again, do you have any data to backup your claim? |
Noshit. That was my point. Los Alamos isn't doing multimedia editing either; I doubt they need PCIe support or SATA2 or firewire or 7.1 surround sound or onboard RAID either. Think they have a DVD burner hooked up to that puppy? Hope you have a few hours. www.google.com/search?q=nForce4+problems&hl=en&lr=&safe=off |
Oh please! You can type "[any product] problems" into Google and get a bunch of hits. Google on Pentium 4 Problems |
I really hope things have changed with AMD and the motherboards/chipsets that support them. When I built computers, when you bought AMD it was "Pay less, get more . . . more time sitting around trying to troubleshoot software/driver and hardware conflict problems." Time is money, that's why I switched to using Intel cpu's/platforms exclusively. My labor time went way down and that made me more money overall. |
So 2 years ago… Intel chips now are the hotter chips and have cooling problems... It is Intel chips that require “thermally advantaged” cases… Get AMD and ASUS motherboard. |
Yeah, that was the old days... AMD sold enough chips and raised enough capital to turn out some good stuff finally. I have had no problems at all with the Athlon and Athlon 64 CPUs. I never tried anything before, but I had friends that did and ended up cussing out AMD 
|
Youve missed my point. Sure you can type "[any product] problems" into Google and get a bunch of hits. Then you need to do the research. I'm not obligated to "prove" anything to you, unless you want to pay me $50 an hour, in which case IM me and we'll talk. I build high performance systems for a living. I am very good at it; big companies and small, and inidividuals, pay me well to do this. I tailor my systems to a need. A server is not a workstation, a workstation is not a gaming machine, and none are super computers. They are all different. Had the original poster stated he wanted a machine for gaming I would say go with an AMD A64; but he didn't, he asked about a machine to "make DVDs". The fact that the chipset for the AMD that supports the same functions of the intel platform is buggy is not news. It's widely known; I have personal experience with this and read about it and talk with peers about it every day. It's always been that way with AMD chipsets (SIS,VIA, NVIDIA, blah blah) for as long as I remember. That said, if you want the most bad-ass gaming PC, it will have an AMD inside, running two 6800s in SLI. Thats the way it is. Like a Ferrari; it will be bad ass but tempermental. Different tools for different jobs. For this job, Intel is the way to go, IMO. Your O appears to be different; so be it. You are entitled to your O, same as me. Rock on. |