• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Anand's P4 and XP 2000+ review is up!

All the reviews so far seem to point to one thing.. Athlon XP2000 and P4 2.2 NW is neck to neck.

Funny how not one review compares the overclocked Athlon XP and P4 NW. Would be nice to know how they compare after they've reached their highest OC.

Wonder how much it will cost in Aus... probably another cool $1K+ cpu... argh.. 🙁
 
athlon xp is the true #1. can't wait for the true 2ghz athlon cpus. for now, it is clear that the hammer structure whoops a$s.😉
 

I wouldn't say either one is far superior. I think the P4 will go further than the athlon core. I think the p4 is geared toward the future of computing as Intel states, and I felt before reading it that it was the case. SSE2 wouldn't do a thing for me at this point, Athlon systems are much cheaper to build, and if Intel has something faster... it's negligibly faster right now. How many people actually buy the fastest cpu on the market when building anyway? You can save a few hundered by buying something only slightly slower. Furthermore you could probably OC as high as the fastest one would OC. Also for the price difference, you could afford to upgrade a lot more often. AMD has always been the winner to me since I had a k6 cpu. They always had the best bang for the buck.
 
Toss Up can be sway left and right with different motherboard and memory type and the weight you put on the type of software(including OS) you use frequently.

Here's the fun part:

Of course, the two companies both have their own take on their product's performance.
"Unequivocally, it is the fastest thing on the planet," said Louis Burns, vice president and general manager of the desktop products group at Intel, of the new Pentium 4 chips.
Mark Bode, division marketing manager for AMD, responded, "We've got a product that is hands down the proven performance leader."

 
It's so close reviewers can't recommend Intel to some and AMD to others -- just pick one and be happy. Of course no one here will accept that as it's way too easy and isn't conducive to unnecessary argumentation!

AMD's chip is cheaper and you get tons of chipset options. Intel's chip can be cooled more effectively and silently and can be overclocked well. I do wish the 2.0A could make 2.6 easily, though, that way the PCI bus would be in spec.
 


<< So close now that either will do for a nice fast PC. >>



Yep, close in performance and close in price. $335 for the Athlon XP 2000 and $364 for the Pentium 4 2.0a.
 


<< I can't find a 2.0A anywhere...much less at that price. >>



I'd expect to wait up to 1 week until all the stores have it. And it will take that long until the price settles down. It seems to be listed at $470-$490 range so far. Of course the AMD XP 2000 will also settle a bit in price over the next week.
 
So long as Intel keeps introducing new chips, the PIII's will keep coming down. I don't mind running a bit slower system if I can get chips at a good price. I truly hope to build a killer Athlon system someday. Just no flow right now.
 
I don't consider any performance difference under 10% to be worth much of anything. Once that barrier is broken is when a difference can really be noticed. The differences between the flagship Northwood and XPs is usually less than that number. Both options are viable, especially with the recent jump in DDR SDRAM prices. I will wait and see what prices the CPUs drop to later down the line. Then it will be more clear as to which processor is the choice of enthusiasts. As it stands, I would go either way.
 
That $364 figure is in 1,000+ unit quantities to resellers, wholesalers, and distributors. You aren't going to purchase a 2.0A for $364.

$470 is the current price range. Should drop down to around $400-ish after the 27th -- about where the 2GHz Willamette is.

The 2.2GHz part is around $680 and should drop to just under $600 after the 27th.
 
That $364 figure is in 1,000+ unit quantities to resellers, wholesalers, and distributors. You aren't going to purchase a 2.0A for $364.

Lol, I just gave that same argument to someone else and they bashed me as if I were Satan or something.

Whatever, I'm going to go dual in a few months anyway once Thoroughbred and enough good dual Thoroughbred boards are out. 😀
 
Please give me a break on gramer can't be perfect in ever thing.

One question what is a clock cycle per instructions.If intel selling CPU,s rated at 2.2 ghz and can only produce so many instructions per clocks cycle,and AMD does more per cycle is that false information?,or missleading the public.It sounds alot better to me If AMD would report Their chip at 1600 mhz and beats the 2.2 ghz Intel chip.If that is the case.But only used in some cases,what does that mean?.I think it is getting all screwed up,unless the new hardware and memory and new video cards prove the new chip will work.PS Is AMD still useing the old pre 1995 apha math core with their chips??.If so this will hurt AMD in my view in the next stepup,I think that old core is what is holding back the mhz cycle count.I hate to say it but something blowing in the wind stinks in the GHZ war.Why all the GHZ and no use for it,How stupid can you get.Graphic,s cards only push so much and memory and hard drives are slow as hell.The only good thing I pruchased was getting Win Xp and to remove paging in virtual memory,that gave me more speed than going from a 933mhz to a 1700 mhz.Big ass PR war going on and makeing suckers of ever one.
 


<< All the reviews so far seem to point to one thing.. Athlon XP2000 and P4 2.2 NW is neck to neck.

Funny how not one review compares the overclocked Athlon XP and P4 NW. Would be nice to know how they compare after they've reached their highest OC >>




Thats just Tom being Tom, the most biased big name in hardware reviews.

He consitstanly never overclocks Intel processors but does for AMD.

And when the 2.2 won a benchmark, it "barely squeaked by" where as if the Xp won, it "dominates"

He's a pathetic AMD zealot and is displaying it just like he did against Swiftech for their water cooling system.

 
Texmaster:

I don't buy that ... I recall him reviewing the 2GHz P4 (Willamette) against the 1800+ XP ... when the P4 was able to finish a task a mere one or two seconds faster, it "wiped the floor" with the XP. But when the XP clearly destroyed Willy (nearly every category, particularly FPU intensive areas and most games) it was a "squeak by" win.

Dr. Pabst seems to be accused from all sides when their favorite product doesn't look so well.
 


<< Texmaster:

I don't buy that ... I recall him reviewing the 2GHz P4 (Willamette) against the 1800+ XP ... when the P4 was able to finish a task a mere one or two seconds faster, it "wiped the floor" with the XP. But when the XP clearly destroyed Willy (nearly every category, particularly FPU intensive areas and most games) it was a "squeak by" win. >>



I'd love to see that quote.




<< Dr. Pabst seems to be accused from all sides when their favorite product doesn't look so well. >>




Give me a break Pabster. That guys has been an AMD zealot every since the Athlon was introduced. But I dont expect you to see it. LOL

You want more examples? Explain why he overclocks the XP and not the P4? Find me one article where he pits an overclocked P4 vs an AMD product. Just one.

How about another example.

In any case, one thing is visible: in the majority of performance tests, the new Pentium 4/2200 is ahead.

Now here comes the excuse and praise for the XP:

After all, the top AMD processor has to make do with 1666 MHz, while its archenemy steps in with 2200 MHz. A closer look at the comprehensive benchmarks reveals that in Office performance as well as Linux Kernel compiling, the Athlon XP still takes the lead, despite its 32% clock speed disadvantage!

I'd say thats pretty big bias; especially considering his holy quest of getting users to look past the mhz LOL
 


<< And it will take that long until the price settles down. It seems to be listed at $470-$490 range so far. >>





<< That $364 figure is in 1,000+ unit quantities to resellers, wholesalers, and distributors. You aren't going to purchase a 2.0A for $364. >>



I realize that the price is in bulk quantities. That is why I stated that you won't find it for $364 for a while. However, look at the other Intel prices last week. Intel had its 2.0 GHz (non-Northwood) priced at $401 until today. Pricewatch had the same part priced at $380 to $397 last week. The price always starts higher than the 1000 quantity price. However, after a little time the final price that you can purchase a single processor is often a little lower than Intel's bulk price.

Want another example? Intels 1.7 GHz model is priced at $193 each for 1000 processors. It has remained at that price for over a month. Pricewatch has the 1.7 GHz model at $177 for just a single processor.

Intels 1.13 GHz PIII is listed as $173 in bulk quantities. Pricewatch is $133.

I could go on and on. The final street price will be very close to Intel's bulk price. However, you must wait until prices settle.

 
Isn't it funny how the reviews come out the same day for Tom's and Anand's site? The last few reviews have come out almost on the same day. Spys everywhere I guess. 😉
For the money I'll still stick with the AMD chip for now. But in the future, who knows?
 


<< Intel's chip can be cooled more effectively and silently and can be overclocked well >>



At the same time? (Sorry, haven't owned one so I don't know)

My Athlon is cooled with a 16Db fan (silent) at stock speed. When I wanted to overclock, I used the stock fan, and was able to get a 40% overclock.
 
GrumpyMan: The companies tell the reviewers (Anand & Tom) the earliest date they can release their reviews. Until then, they are under NDA (nondisclosure agreement). Of course, they want to release them the first day so as to not loose readership 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top