Athlon XP 2000+ or P4 2.0A?

[Smileymcsmiles]

Hey everyone,

I am building a PC for my chick. She is going to school for graphic design.

I am deciding between a:

Pentium 4 2.0A or athlon XP 2000+. Which one should I go for.

Mobo AthlonXP MSI KT3 Ultra ARU
P4 MSI 845E max2.

Which one will be the better performer long term?

 

[Pabster]

That's easy. P4 2.0A. But forget the MSI board. They suck.

 

[Athlon4all]

Why not compare to a 2100+? It costs around $190 which is where the 2.0A is. Also I would have to lean towards the XP 2100+. In 3DS MAX and Maya (which isn't that what she would be doing right?) the XP 2100+ is ahead of the 2.0A by 14 and 10% respectively. And to top it off, the XP 2100+ is 11 and 8% faster than the 2.0A in Unreal 2003, and in JN2, and they are equal in performance in Comanche 4. Really the only benchmarks where the 2.0A holds a significant advantage over the 2100+ is in SYSMark 2002 ICC and in SSE2 3D rendering (will she be using Lightwave 7.5? If she is than it might be wise to get the 2.0A.)

 

[imgod2u]

Well, the real question is, are you willing to overclock? Because that P4 would have a lot of overclocking headroom and would easily give you 2.4-2.6 GHz and possibly (probably) even beyond. If you're in it for stock speeds however, it's a little tougher. On the one hand, the P4 is a lot easier to assemble however, the Athlon does offer better performance. There's also the heat management you would need to include with the Athlon. There are many cases in which just a CPU fan/heatsink and the PSU fan (and even with 1 intake fan) just isn't enough to cool it. However, that's all speculation. Since you are getting a Palomino and not a t-bred, finding a matching heatsink shouldn't be too much of a problem, so I guess Athlon.

 

[Pabster]

The real question is stability and heat. No comparison. P4 2.0A.

 

[Athlon4all]

Heat IMHO is not as big of a problem as people make it out to be. XP's don't need $30 loud cooling systems like most think they do. And Athlon systems can be just as stable as P4's. Yes ocing is a factor but remmeber this isnt a person system buyt for somebody else and I personally wouldmn't give anybody an oc'ed system.

 

[Rectalfier]

If you are planning on overclocking, then the 2.0A. If not, the XP is cheaper and performs better in most apps.

 

[RC7]

My xp2000+ is rock stable on my msi 745ultra. Sis socket a chipsets are great when it comes to stability. Haven't installed any sort of drivers/patches/bios updates. It's running like a champ out of the box.

 

[MisterBombastic]

My XP 2000+ is running great with a £5 fan, and my brothers XP 1800+ is too. Heat is no issue.

 

[ALstonLoong]

xp is the way to go !!! performe faster then intel processor.! cheaper ! stable !

 

[Zugzwang152]

Well, an XP running solid at 50 degrees and at 40 degrees are two entirely different things. You need the massive cooling to reach respectable temps, but they will run higher, if you're willing to put that kind of pressure on your cpu and lower its lifespan.

 

[BD231]

Go for the 2.0A. You *WILL* run a higher chance of your "chick" having problems, and the computer will make a good deal more heat, and I doubt she wants/needs a space heater for a computer. I never build VIA/AMD combo systems for anyone because the simple truth is that the Combo is far more problematic than any other combo I have ever touched in my history with computers. The choice is simple. Go with an Intel chip, and an Intel chipset.

 

[Speedy3D!]

Originally posted by: Pabster
The real question is stability and heat. No comparison. P4 2.0A.

Stability? You've got to be kidding me... AMD left those problems behind almost 2 years ago.

 

[mchammer187]

worked with a dozen or so amd/via setups and 1 intel/intel

my fav is the intel/intel

amd/amd setup is just as good but that is not really an option unless you go dual cpu

 

[ToBeMe]

Get the 2.0a, you and her will be happier and you won't have the excess heat in a small area. I like the XP's but, honestly if you want them cooled sufficiently, you've got to spend extra on a H/S Fan combo and then the heat still disapates into the room. The XP's may "feel" quicker in some instances, but, come on, at 2Ghz plus, she's really going to notice that right.....

 

[AnAndAustin]

Putting personal preference and opinions aside, both are very fine and capable CPUs. P4 do tend to offer cheaper and less problematic mobos though. P4s do run much cooler and o/c much better.

Speed-wise, an AthlonXP2000+ will equal a P4 256k 2.0ghz 400FSB (ie Williamette) in apps, and equal a P4 256k 2.2ghz 400FSB in games. However big factors for me are, firstly that any of the new 0.13mu P4 512k CPUs (ie Northwood) will easily attain a 533FSB with stock cooling and no voltage increase giving the 400FSB NW CPUs (P4A) a huge boost in both perf and speed (eg P4A 1.8ghz 400FSB o/c easily to 2.4ghz 533FSB). The AthlonXP2000+, 2100+ and 2200+ however DON'T o/c at all, they simply run far to hot at default settings! If o/c is in any way a factor definitely go P4. Secondly P4s have recently changed to Skt478 which looks to have a much longer life, whereas SktA has been around since 600mhz CPUs and seems to be showing its age and its bottlenecks. With even the new 0.13mu T.bred AthlonXP2200+ running way too hot (it looks problematic for AMD to even release a XP2400+) it seems the SktA days are numbered, esp if I hear correctly that AMD have already developed a new Skt archy. With a Skt478 mobo you are pretty much guaranteed a cheap and easy CPU upgrade in the future whereas SktA CPUs are much more likely to be both rare and pricey in 12 months time (Just like original Athlons using a 200FSB are now, and a lot of people have SktA mobos which can't use a 266FSB).

IMHO. If you want a very fast CPU, both AthlonXP and P4 deliver. If you aren't concerned about o/c then the AthlonXP makes more sense unless you plan to add a faster CPU in the future then the P4 Skt478 would be better. However don't consider running a NW P4A at 533FSB as o/c, it is of course, but it is more like running the CPU at its capable speed than actually surpassing it. In the same way as running a GF4TI4200 128MB at 250/500 isn't really o/c, like the GF3TI200 it is intentionally clocked lower in order to promote sales of the higher priced products above it! Oh and there's no need at all to couple a P4 with RAMBUS (PC800 or PC1066) as DDR333 works incredibly well with P4s unlike AthlonXPs.

Anyway here's a couple of benchmarks to show the diff in 3Dmark2001 with a GF4TI4200 (CPU, marks, games high detail FPS):

1024x768x32:
Athlon XP2000+: 10000, 53, 107, 65, 46
Pentium4 2.0ghz: 9000, 48, 90, 60, 38
Pentium4 2.5ghz: 11000, 63, 110, 78, 47

1024x768x32xAA:
Athlon XP2000+: 8000, 49, 81, 57, 39
Pentium4 2.0ghz: 7000, 40, 73, 52, 27
Pentium4 2.5ghz: 9000, 58, 85, 64, 35

I've included a P4 2.5ghz to give you an idea of what the P4 2.0ghz should easily obtain when o/c. In all cases I have used the average submitted result as opposed to the top result where possible due to this being more accurate in showing obtainable perf. Obviously different games will give different results but this does give a good indication of each CPUs capability.

 

[SnoopyDog]

All that I would say is GO FOR WHAT YOUR WALLET SAYS

If you overclock take Intel and hope to get a lucky chip.

If you dont get AMD XP.

 

[RanDum72]

Well, an XP running solid at 50 degrees and at 40 degrees are two entirely different things. You need the massive cooling to reach respectable temps, but they will run higher, if you're willing to put that kind of pressure on your cpu and lower its lifespan

LOL, what makes you think you're stressing an Athlon XP CPU at 50 degrees C? Its rated to run at 90 degrees C. 50 degrees is a respectable temp. The only time to worry about it is if you plan to OC like crazy but if not and it runs stable, leave it alone. I have a micro-ATX setup on a 1600+ CPU that runs 53 degrees (CPU) 24/7. Inside the cramped case, temps read 50 degrees. Zero problems. I'd worry more about mix and matching the right components than worry about the CPU running at 50 C.

 

[MadRat]

Both Willaimette and Thoroughbred aren't going to exactly save you anything on the electric bill. If its for the chick then you'll not overclock of course! Makes it easy to decide for me, the Athlon XP. Price does make a difference.

If you want to be foolhardy and overclock then consider the P4-1.6A at a 533fsb on the SiS645DX chipset.

 

[AnAndAustin]

It's not only temperature but technical limitations as to why the AthlonXP2000+, 2100+ and 2200+ don't o/c. The XP2000+ and 2100+ are right at the edge of the 0.18mu Polly core, while the XP2200+ is already right at the edge of the 0.13mu T.bred core. Hopefully AMD can find the fly in the ointment and get faster versions produced.

With the old 0.18mu Williamette core P4 (256k) it was reliant upon a very o/c'able chip to reach 533FSB and thus bump up the speed of the CPU from 1.6 to 2.1 for example. However the 0.13mu Northwood P4 (512k) easily reaches 533FSB and thus the default 400FSB CPUs (ie anything less than 2.4ghz) like 1.6ghz becomes 2.1ghz and 1.8ghz becomes 2.4ghz WITHOUT any special cooling or voltage increase. They reportedly go higher but you do then begin entering the realms of true o/c and as such reliant on getting a very o/c friendly chip.

It does depend on what the PC is going to be currently used for, and what the future plans are likely to be. Either way I don't think you'll regret your choice, as said both are very fine CPUs. Without factoring in o/c the AthlonXP is clearly better value for money while the P4's Skt478 is likely to age better.

 

[EvilCoconut]

my athlon xp 1800+ on volcano 7 runs load 45C idle 38C so axps dont run that hot. get the amd chip, faster without overclocking and better in everyday tasks

 

[Pabster]

Speedy3D! wrote:

"Stability? You've got to be kidding me... AMD left those problems behind almost 2 years ago."

You are kidding yourselves if you believe that. For the record, it isn't AMD. The problem is VIA, which (unfortunately) powers the vast majority of Socket A users. They have not left the problems behind.

Let's put this in perspective. You are building a rig for a chick. You want it to run, be stable, and perform well. You don't want her bothering you about issues with it on a daily basis. And you don't want headaches. Hmm, again, P4 2.0A. Sorry guys, just can't recommend AMD -- especially in this type of situation. Stability and reliability are paramount.

 

[RanDum72]

Let's put this in perspective. You are building a rig for a chick. You want it to run, be stable, and perform well. You don't want her bothering you about issues with it on a daily basis. And you don't want headaches. Hmm, again, P4 2.0A. Sorry guys, just can't recommend AMD -- especially in this type of situation. Stability and reliability are paramount.

why can't you recommend AMD when, according to you, VIA is the problem? VIA is not the only chipset in town. If you want a stable and reliable AMD rig, get an Asus nforce board (Asus has three-year warranties on their mobo), 420 if you want the built-in video, 415 chipset if you bring your own. It saves you on the sound card and the Asus board also supports full thermal protection for the Athlon XP's. From personal experience, the only problem VIA chipsets have given me are with Creative sound cards and some BIOS settings that mess up Nvidia video cards. Knowing how to work around those issues resulted in a system that is 100% stable.

You can also go with other chipsets like SiS 735/745 or even the older AMD 760.

 

[SteelCityFan]

Heat and Noise in a cramped Dorm room is something to consider. No doubt about it.

 

[Speedy3D!]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Speedy3D! wrote:

"Stability? You've got to be kidding me... AMD left those problems behind almost 2 years ago."

You are kidding yourselves if you believe that. For the record, it isn't AMD. The problem is VIA, which (unfortunately) powers the vast majority of Socket A users. They have not left the problems behind.

Let's put this in perspective. You are building a rig for a chick. You want it to run, be stable, and perform well. You don't want her bothering you about issues with it on a daily basis. And you don't want headaches. Hmm, again, P4 2.0A. Sorry guys, just can't recommend AMD -- especially in this type of situation. Stability and reliability are paramount.

You're not giving any examples of these "daily" stability and reliability problems you simply say that they exist, which is false. You're obviously an Intel zealot who has never used an Athlon XP with newer mainboards, especially the newer VIA based boards.

You're right that the problems were mainly caused by VIA, but those problems are long gone and VIA is by far the best choice for Athlon XP based mainboards. Stability between Intel & AMD is equal and the reliability of a computer depends much more on the company (or person) who builds it.

The truth of the matter is BOTH platforms are excellent choices, and you really can't go wrong either way. You need to assess what exactly you will be doing with the system, and take a look at the benchmarks for the programs you will be using.

The general consensus here is that if you're not going to overclock you would probably be better off purchasing the Athlon XP, it is faster in non-SSE2 optimized programs, and you'll need to overclock that P4 to get it up to the same level of performance.