Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD FX-53 vs P4 3.4GHz

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Thebos
    replied
    Using the an AMD 64bit x86 processor with 64bit OS having a complete set of mature 64bit drivers runinng a 64bit program will unlock the full potential of the processor.

    However, as stated above, it works on 32 bit systems by design. Does quite well too, holding its own against comparable Intel proceesors. Although the price difference is not what it used to be, AMD is still comparably cheaper.

    Hoping to upgrade to socket 939 myself before years end.

    Leave a comment:


  • furunculus
    replied
    nope, but if you want 64bittyness then SUSE and Mandrake Linux offer such versions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hannu
    replied
    Does the 64 bit processor need WinXP-64bit version of windows to use its full potential? I hear its still in beta, but should be released soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • furunculus
    replied
    if you get an AMD64 rig make sure it has an nForce2 250GB chipset, whether it is s754, s940, or even s939 when they arrive.

    at the moment the 25GB chipset is only available to buy for s754, but no doubt the other two will follow shortly.

    one thing to consider is that Opteron chips are dirt cheap, e.g. the 142 (1600MHz) costs less than the slowest Athlon64 (2800+), and being workstation chips the motherboards are consequently better made. so it might cost a little extra to get ECC memory over the ordinary variety but you get a better system for it.

    look at it this way:

    Athlon64 2800+ = 1,800MHz + 64bit memory + PC3200 + 512kb cache (£135)
    Opteron 142 = 1,600MHz + 128bit memory + PC3200 + 1024kb cache (£135)
    i think the Opteron is a sure winner every time.

    also the s940 Opteron has a lot more life left in it than s754 Athlon64.
    fastest chip for:

    s754 = Athlon64 3700+ = 2,400Mhz - and thats it.
    s940 = Opteron 250 = 2,400MHz - Opterons will continue after this speed.

    just my thoughts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Predator
    replied
    I'm getting an Athlon 64 rig probably before the end of the month, so I'll let you know, though being a mac user I really don't have anything to compare it to, besides my dad's Dell pentium 1/2 with it's GeForce negative 4, so the results will likely come out positive

    Leave a comment:


  • Thebos
    replied
    You are right- there is a 64bit version of UT2004 around, even a 64bit Linux OS to play it on. The necessary drivers however are not seem to be ready for primetime.

    Leave a comment:


  • Antero90
    replied
    I hear that Unreal Tournament 2004 already suports 64-bit CPUs

    Leave a comment:


  • Ghostly apparition
    replied
    I read an article in maxpc, that stated that the real advantage of the 64 bit
    is in math computation programs that most people don't use in which the 64
    will crush the p4. Most programs and games are not made yet too utilize
    the advantage of 64 bit computing. But its coming! As far as gaming and such
    goes the 64 will perform well in games that require cpu power, but the video
    card is still one of the most important components. As such the P4 still is
    a worthy choice.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thebos
    replied
    In general, AMD has an advantage in games while the P4 has the advantage with video encoding (especially SMT optimized).

    AMD still wins the price/performance ratio, though not by as wide a gap as it used to.

    Leave a comment:


  • LeatherMan
    replied
    Originally posted by Hannu
    however my one complaint is that they only used a 512K L2 cache on the P4, and a 1G L2 cache on the AMD, kind of leaves a little open hole in the results, but the P4 still competes pretty well.
    That is what the respective CPUs have, nothing unusual in their test setup. If you'll notice, the P4 also has a huge L3 cache, something necessary to keep it competitive with the FX.

    512kB on chip, Full Speed L2 Cache
    2MB on chip, Full Speed L3 Cache
    FX53 has 128k + 1MB total cache
    P4 XE has 8kb + 512k + 2MB total cache

    Leave a comment:


  • DarkBill
    replied
    Originally posted by Hannu
    especially since they are only running at 2.4GHz.
    Clockspeed is only a measure of performance between identical cores.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hannu
    started a topic AMD FX-53 vs P4 3.4GHz

    AMD FX-53 vs P4 3.4GHz

    For those of you in the market for new PCs, I was curious about the performance of these Athlon 64 chips, especially since they are only running at 2.4GHz. This link shows a pretty good comparison study, however my one complaint is that they only used a 512K L2 cache on the P4, and a 1G L2 cache on the AMD, kind of leaves a little open hole in the results, but the P4 still competes pretty well. Check it out here:

    http://www.motherboards.org/articles...ws/1359_4.html
Working...
X