Athlon 64 3500+ vs P4 3.2 GHz Northwood vs P4 3.2 GHz Prescott

[jSuvius]

I have been flip flopping back and forth between these 3 processors. The computer is for audio/video editing, dvd authoring/burning and other desktop type stuff. I'm not playing any games on it or doing any overclocking. The P4 is appealing with the hyperthreading and what not, but:

- How much of a difference does hyperthreading really make versus the general speed of the A64? Does hypertyhreading only benefit multi-threaded aps or does it also help the running of several single-threaded aps?

- Is AMD's Hypertransport similar to Hyperthreading?

- The A64s seem to be much cooler and quieter than the pentiums, especially the prescott - is this enough of a benefit for the A64 over the pentiums to sacrifice a bit of multitasking power?

- Lastly, Is a 3.2 GHz Northwood, if available, always preferable to a 3.2 GHz Prescott?

 

[MDE]

1) Not much, and yes it only benefits multithreaded programs, or running more than one program at once
2) No
3) Yes, but I'd go A64 simply for the speed
4) Pretty much yes.

I'd go Athlon64, and in your choices, the 3500+ is a no brainer.

 

[bcoupland]

Originally posted by: MDE
1) Not much, and yes it only benefits multithreaded programs, or running more than one program at once
2) No
3) Yes, but I'd go A64 simply for the speed
4) Pretty much yes.

I'd go Athlon64, and in your choices, the 3500+ is a no brainer.

:thumbsup:

 

[Corsairpro]

Originally posted by: bcoupland

Originally posted by: MDE
1) Not much, and yes it only benefits multithreaded programs, or running more than one program at once
2) No
3) Yes, but I'd go A64 simply for the speed
4) Pretty much yes.

I'd go Athlon64, and in your choices, the 3500+ is a no brainer.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[MetalMusicMan]

Originally posted by: Corsairpro

Originally posted by: bcoupland

Originally posted by: MDE
1) Not much, and yes it only benefits multithreaded programs, or running more than one program at once
2) No
3) Yes, but I'd go A64 simply for the speed
4) Pretty much yes.

I'd go Athlon64, and in your choices, the 3500+ is a no brainer.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[bigal40]

Originally posted by: MetalMusicMan

Originally posted by: Corsairpro

Originally posted by: bcoupland

Originally posted by: MDE
1) Not much, and yes it only benefits multithreaded programs, or running more than one program at once
2) No
3) Yes, but I'd go A64 simply for the speed
4) Pretty much yes.

I'd go Athlon64, and in your choices, the 3500+ is a no brainer.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[jSuvius]

If I go with the 3500+, would a 9800 Pro All-In-Wonder be a good high-end choice for a multimedia video card? The All-In-Wonder has 128 MB DDR but there is also a 9800 Pro with 256 MB. Is it a big difference? Is the amount of DDR mainly a gaming issue?

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: bigal40

Originally posted by: MetalMusicMan

Originally posted by: Corsairpro

Originally posted by: bcoupland

Originally posted by: MDE
1) Not much, and yes it only benefits multithreaded programs, or running more than one program at once
2) No
3) Yes, but I'd go A64 simply for the speed
4) Pretty much yes.

I'd go Athlon64, and in your choices, the 3500+ is a no brainer.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[Mik3y]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: bigal40

Originally posted by: MetalMusicMan

Originally posted by: Corsairpro

Originally posted by: bcoupland

Originally posted by: MDE
1) Not much, and yes it only benefits multithreaded programs, or running more than one program at once
2) No
3) Yes, but I'd go A64 simply for the speed
4) Pretty much yes.

I'd go Athlon64, and in your choices, the 3500+ is a no brainer.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[jSuvius]

thanks for the comments guys but can someone give there thumbs up AND answer my video question?

 

[amdguy]

3500 will rape all of them

 

[footbal07]

as for the video card, that depends on how much you game, i would get a 9800pro (128meg 256bit) or 6800gt, and a 250pvr.

 

[Mik3y]

Originally posted by: amdguy
3500 will rape all of them

such beautiful words...

 

[thegimp03]

haha

 

[Adul]

I'd go for the 3500+, you will also have the option to upgrade to a faster cpu later on : )

 

[User5]

3500+ or 3200+ even. Damn you people with money as no issue

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: jSuvius
thanks for the comments guys but can someone give there thumbs up AND answer my video question?

I guess I missed the video question, but the 3500+ will beat the 3.2 and probably the 3.4 on any benchmark. When you say price is no issue, go the 3800+, it WILL rape the 3.4 P4's at anything.

 

[mauiblue]

I've been down the same road as you, jSuvius.

I decided to go with a P4 3.2 Northwood on a Soyo mobo. It never runs more than 43C and every since I've built my new system (July 2004) it has been working out very well. I've been doing video editing (Premier Pro), imaging (PhotoShop 7), and gaming (Far Cry, Doom3). No problems. I decided to go with the CPU I've got because I'm used to the Intel brand, the temp factor, and because the CPU was the recommend for that board (P4I875P Dragon II v1.0 - highly rated by motherboard.org). I open a lot of large files (photos) at one time and the system doesn't even flinches (2 GB of RAM).

I got out my May 2004 Computer Shopper magazine it says that Intel measured the performance of a 3.2E (Prescott) at about 6 percent faster than a similarly equipped 3.2 (Northwood) system "but expect less of a difference in the real world". That article went on to say after further evaluation by Computer Shopper (with BAPCo'sSYSmark 2002) that both 3.2 CPU (Prescott and Northwood) were "in a dead heat" as far as performance.

In any case, good luck with your search for your next computer build and have fun.

 

[Xernex]

If your getting a 3500+ (which is the best of the 3), forgot a 9800PRO unless you dont game much. If you are a gamer then get a GPU more worthy of such a good processor, namely a 6800GT or something.

 

[manko]

As MDE pointed out, Hyperthreading will improve performance multi-tasking with standard applications, in addition to benefiting multi-threaded software.

From all the reviews I've seen, video/audio encoding on the 3500+ generally falls between the 2.8GHz and 3.4GHz P4, depending on the specific application. With some codecs and applications it will be slower than either 3.2GHz P4, in others it will be faster and some will be too close to call.

In most other areas and especially gaming, there's no question that the 3500+ will outperform either P4.

If you do go with Intel, the Northwood is the way to go.

I'm not sure what type of editing you'll be doing, but if you're using a dedicated capture card, you should check on compatibility issues with the specific motherboard chipset and the capture hardware and editing/authoring software you plan to use. Often, the motherboard chipset will be the root of most issues, as opposed to the CPU.

The 128MB All-In-Wonder is more that enough for video editing (you wouldn't see any difference with 256MB). If you planned to get a dedicated capture card or do DV editing with firewire, you could even go with an Radeon 9600. I'm not sure if there is 9600 All-In-Wonder, but if there is, you might consider that too. That would probably be fine for video editing (unless the 9800 version has a higher quality video input chip).

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: manko
As MDE pointed out, Hyperthreading will improve performance multi-tasking with standard applications, in addition to benefiting multi-threaded software.

From all the reviews I've seen, video/audio encoding on the 3500+ generally falls between the 2.8GHz and 3.4GHz P4, depending on the specific application. With some codecs and applications it will be slower than either 3.2GHz P4, in others it will be faster and some will be to close to call.

In most other areas and especially gaming, there's no question that the 3500+ will outperform either P4.

If you do go with Intel, the Northwood is the way to go.

I'm not sure what type of editing you'll be doing, but if you're using a dedicated capture card, you should check on compatibility issues with the specific motherboard chipset and the capture hardware and editing/authoring software you plan to use. Often, the motherboard chipset will be the root of most issues, as opposed to the CPU.

The 128MB All-In-Wonder is more that enough for video editing (you wouldn't see any difference with 256MB). If you planned to get a dedicated capture card or do DV editing with firewire, you could even go with an Radeon 9600. I'm not sure if there is 9600 All-In-Wonder, but if there is, you might consider that too. That would probably be fine for video editing (unless the 9800 version has a higher quality video input chip).

Well said... :thumbsup:

 

[randumb]

Definitely the 3500+.

 

[jSuvius]

Originally posted by: manko
The 128MB All-In-Wonder is more that enough for video editing (you wouldn't see any difference with 256MB).

So, in general, 256MB of on board DDR is no better than 128 MB? What's the reason for doubling it?

 

[0roo0roo]

a64 with its temp/fan speed controls... silentpcreview.com has info

 

[bamacre]

The AMD is probably a little faster than those Intel cpu's, but it is quit a bit more expensive. I picked up a retail 3.2Ghz Northwood for $240, and I don't see an AMD 64 3500 for less than $330. Pentiums are usually a little faster than AMD's when it comes to video editing and encoding.


HERE are some benchmarks including both P4's and the AMD 64 3500.