Ok, I am in the midst of buying a mid-range system. I believe Athlon 64 is better for the long run because A. It performs in games better B. It will be compatible with XP 64 and other 64 bit apps further enhancing performance.
My question is. What is it about the 64 bit extensions that makes the A64 out perform the high clocked Northwoods? And which is better in the long run?
My question is. What is it about the 64 bit extensions that makes the A64 out perform the high clocked Northwoods? And which is better in the long run?
), the Athlon64's outperforming the higher-clocked P4's has absolutely nothing to do with them being 64-bit-enabled. All of the AMD chips perform more functions per clock cycle, meaning they are much more efficient at any frequency. This isn't a new thing. It's the reason AMD started using the naming system they use now, instead of just using the chip's actual frequency. An An Athlon XP2000 is as fast as a 2.0ghz P4B, even though the Athlon 2000+ runs at 1.6ghz. And your question about which is better in the long run is really dependent on what your plans are for the system. If gaming is pretty much all you plan on doing with it, then an A64 is what you should buy. If you're planning on ripping and encoding 3 DVD's a day, while multitasking with other high cpu-usage applications (like gaming, for instance), then you should build yourself a P4C-based system.
Facebook
Twitter