Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: bjc112
Comparing a overclocked Dothan to a STOCK 4000+ is just as stupid.. Overclock the 4000+ and watch it demolish it even more..
LOL. I never took you for an AMD zealot bjc112, but crap like that is going to change my mind.
The comparison was fair because Dothan was clocked up to match (as closely as possible -- note Dothan STILL with a far slower bus) the A64. And surprisingly, it was able to BEST the A64 in many areas. This despite two HUGE disadvantages -- single channel DDR -- and a slow FSB. The A64 has dual-channel as well as HTT running much faster than the FSB on Dothan.
This wasn't a desktop against mobile comparison or anything of the sort. It was designed to illustrate CLOCK-FOR-CLOCK performance of these processors. Clearly, Dothan IS faster than Athlon64 at an equal clock -- despite the huge disadvantages facing it.
Did you read the other 10 posts between Pariah and myself?
Read again.
USing the Anand Article, @ 2.0 the 3200+ takes 25 out of 33 test..
At tech reports, excluding one test I linked above, the 3200+ takes 17 or so out of like 22 or 23...
I don't know why you continue to argue about the Athlon 64 has a high HTT speed.. OH MY OH OH MY...
Drop it down to 400 and watch it still perform the same..
NExt, lets factor in price.. $450-$650.. And $190 for the 3200+
Clearly a win for the Athlon 64..
I am by no means a zealot, whatever is better at the time, price performance is what I am with..
The next core from Intel will be good, but intel then, the Athlon 64 is cleary a better overall value.