GREAT P4 article
- Thread starter XMan
- Start date
I've never seen a more biased review in my life. It's funny that he quoted Tomshardware in his article because if you read Toms final review this is what he had to say:
__________________________________________________________________
If you have dedicated areas in which you want your computer to perform particularly well, if those areas should be 3D gaming, video encoding or other bandwidth intensive software and if you should not shy away from high system costs and the missing upgrade path, you should indeed consider Pentium 4.
___________________________________________________________________
The facts are this: Intel currently has the fastest processor on the market. It does outperform AMD (granted at a slower clock speed) in many benchmarks. If you want to run office applications then yes an AMD will be faster. If you want to play 3D games or do video encoding the P4 is the better choice. Another reason why I and other people prefer Intel is because of compatbility. You can search through these forums and find plenty of people who have tons of compability issues with AMD. More importantly AMD chipsets.
Most all hardware and software is written on Intel based computers for Intel based computers everything else is an after thought.
__________________________________________________________________
If you have dedicated areas in which you want your computer to perform particularly well, if those areas should be 3D gaming, video encoding or other bandwidth intensive software and if you should not shy away from high system costs and the missing upgrade path, you should indeed consider Pentium 4.
___________________________________________________________________
The facts are this: Intel currently has the fastest processor on the market. It does outperform AMD (granted at a slower clock speed) in many benchmarks. If you want to run office applications then yes an AMD will be faster. If you want to play 3D games or do video encoding the P4 is the better choice. Another reason why I and other people prefer Intel is because of compatbility. You can search through these forums and find plenty of people who have tons of compability issues with AMD. More importantly AMD chipsets.
Most all hardware and software is written on Intel based computers for Intel based computers everything else is an after thought.
That article, as obscure as it may seem (on the internet, anyway), could have huge impact on markets. I printed it, in it's entirety and want to see what my stock broker has to say about it, namely, whether to invest in Intel or AMD at this time. It is a very interesting twist, even is it is half true. 
g14 I have Never had a compatbility with AMD Im new to AMD been with them for about six months. I do think there were problems with the old AMD but not with there new cpu's and as far as the p4 out performing the T-Birds in many benchmarks I would like to know were you are reading this all the articles I have read the AMD smokes the p4 in just about everything.....
Renob here's the results you asked about. They were found in the Pentium 4 vs AMD artilce over at Tomshardware.com
Flask MPEG
Quake 3 Arena
BAPCo Webmark 20001
BAPCo Webmark Business to Business
BAPCo Webmark Business
Of the graphs that were shown in this review the P4 1.5GHz outperformed the AMD 1.2 GHz in 5 out of 7 tests.
Flask MPEG
Quake 3 Arena
BAPCo Webmark 20001
BAPCo Webmark Business to Business
BAPCo Webmark Business
Of the graphs that were shown in this review the P4 1.5GHz outperformed the AMD 1.2 GHz in 5 out of 7 tests.
I though only the first one was showing Toms logo. They should all be working now.
<< G14 what the guy is saying is that clock for clock the P4 is crap. >>
You have to take you hat off to Intel for having the fastest chip on most aplications on the market regardless of clock speed.
<< G14 what the guy is saying is that clock for clock the P4 is crap. >>
You have to take you hat off to Intel for having the fastest chip on most aplications on the market regardless of clock speed.
You cannot directly link to images on toms servers, you instead need to link to the page that they are on. You probably see them fine because they are in your cache. hope this was helpful
Mr.IncrediblyBored
Lifer
- Jun 18, 2000
- 11,208
- 775
- 126
<< I get the impression that the author loves the P4. >>
LMAO
<< I've never seen a more biased review in my life. >>
So true. I quit reading after a couple of minutes. His bias is incredible.
g14 this was taken from your article at Toms:
New Results New Conclusions
It is obvious that Pentium 4s mediocre x87 floating-point unit is responsible for the poor results. It is incredible bu Intel didnt seem to care about Pentium 4s fpu performance whatsoever when this processor was designed. The Pentium 4 designers relied on completely new SSE2 unit and the fact that SSE2 enabled sofrware wont use the xx7 fpu anymore. I leave it up to you to decide if you consider this as a brave move of intel or an ignorant one. I suppose that intel doesnt want to sell pentium 4 processors to quake 3 players only. However for the time being quake 3 s th e only bench mark that shows above average schors of pentium 4.
I do certainly admit that MPEG4 encoding is only one of many tasks that could run significantly faster on pentium 4 once new sse2 code is used in the encoders however these are future tunes. Right now there is quake 3 and then there is quake 3, besides that there is only quade 3. Have i mentioned that pentium 4 is really good in quake 3?
Lets summarize the latest findings:
P4 scores very badly in MPEG4 encoding benchmarks the IEEE high quality iDCT is used.
P4 runs current office applications slower than P3 and Much slower than AMD athlon as proven in our Sysmark 2000 benchmark results from Monday.
P4 scores wores than Athlon in Unreal Tournament
P4 is a Very bad solution for compilations with gcc 2.95.2 under Linux
P4 scores VERY badly in 3D studio max proving a sub par FPU
P4 gets slightly beaten by Athlon in the 3d game MDK2
P4 is Badly losing out against P3 as well as Athlon in clock for clock comparisons.
P4 is currently the most expensive x86 system solution available.
But P4 is really good at Quake 3 Arena! Honestly!
That sure Makes Me Want to run out and get a P4.......
New Results New Conclusions
It is obvious that Pentium 4s mediocre x87 floating-point unit is responsible for the poor results. It is incredible bu Intel didnt seem to care about Pentium 4s fpu performance whatsoever when this processor was designed. The Pentium 4 designers relied on completely new SSE2 unit and the fact that SSE2 enabled sofrware wont use the xx7 fpu anymore. I leave it up to you to decide if you consider this as a brave move of intel or an ignorant one. I suppose that intel doesnt want to sell pentium 4 processors to quake 3 players only. However for the time being quake 3 s th e only bench mark that shows above average schors of pentium 4.
I do certainly admit that MPEG4 encoding is only one of many tasks that could run significantly faster on pentium 4 once new sse2 code is used in the encoders however these are future tunes. Right now there is quake 3 and then there is quake 3, besides that there is only quade 3. Have i mentioned that pentium 4 is really good in quake 3?
Lets summarize the latest findings:
P4 scores very badly in MPEG4 encoding benchmarks the IEEE high quality iDCT is used.
P4 runs current office applications slower than P3 and Much slower than AMD athlon as proven in our Sysmark 2000 benchmark results from Monday.
P4 scores wores than Athlon in Unreal Tournament
P4 is a Very bad solution for compilations with gcc 2.95.2 under Linux
P4 scores VERY badly in 3D studio max proving a sub par FPU
P4 gets slightly beaten by Athlon in the 3d game MDK2
P4 is Badly losing out against P3 as well as Athlon in clock for clock comparisons.
P4 is currently the most expensive x86 system solution available.
But P4 is really good at Quake 3 Arena! Honestly!
That sure Makes Me Want to run out and get a P4.......
I agree with it being biased (maybe this guy just invested in AMD? ), but it is nevertheless worth reading because it goes over a fair amount of good info on processors.
Also I think anyone trying to compare processors on a clock for clock basis is incorrect. Sure, if you underclocked the P4 to 1.2GHz it would lose to the Athlon in almost everything, but the fact of the matter is that it's designed for higher clock speeds than the Athlon was. It doesn't do as much in every clock as the Athlon does however, so that's why you can't compare them on clock speeds.
), but it is nevertheless worth reading because it goes over a fair amount of good info on processors.Also I think anyone trying to compare processors on a clock for clock basis is incorrect. Sure, if you underclocked the P4 to 1.2GHz it would lose to the Athlon in almost everything, but the fact of the matter is that it's designed for higher clock speeds than the Athlon was. It doesn't do as much in every clock as the Athlon does however, so that's why you can't compare them on clock speeds.
GopherMobile: I would prefer processors desinged for better performance instead on higher clock speed...
fkloster: Yes, technically, G4 really is nice piece. But AFAIK linux doesn't run on G4, so I rather would prefer Alpha... ohh, sweet dreams
A lot of you forget the history of the processor. Intel laid the stepping grounds for the processor; AMD followed that same path, and developed a processor comparable to Intel?s. It?s already known for a fact AMD will be releasing a processor with a higher bus architecture at 266MHz bus. The reason is to utilize current and future DDRAM memory bandwidth at higher levels. Don?t be surprised if AMD release another processor with a quad channel bus at 400MHz (800MHz DDR). This would allow AMD processors to take even further advantage of DDRAM. Again following the same path as Intel.
The fact is with the current state of the P4, it allows the P4 to take full advantage of RDRAM?s high bandwidth, doubling that of DDRAM on current platforms. AMD knew this and thus 266MHz bus design.
If you asked me Toms hardware has always opened his mouth to soon. This was evident when RDRAM first emerged on to the computer seen. He wrote that big article about how bad RDRAM performed. What Tom and others including myself didn't release was RDRAM support sucked at the time, and was not being utilized to what it was meant to.
Look now:
Linpack
Linpack
Sisoft
Sisoft
My point is that a lot of you are taking a bunch of early analysis of the P4 and drawing an early conclusion. The reason why the P4 performs so poorly under many of today?s applications is because today?s applications don?t utilize the P4?s architecture to its full potential. It?s funny how a lot of you are also so fast to scrutinize the P4, and Intel, yet you don?t even understand the P4, or what it is that Intel is trying to do with the P4. It was also stated in another thread that Microsofts next OS Whistler will take the P4 to the next level with its newest kernel, which some close to Microsoft say it will be optimized for the P4+.
Read this and get a good laugh:
P4 Mihocka has attacks on him shocka
Hardware One
The fact is with the current state of the P4, it allows the P4 to take full advantage of RDRAM?s high bandwidth, doubling that of DDRAM on current platforms. AMD knew this and thus 266MHz bus design.
If you asked me Toms hardware has always opened his mouth to soon. This was evident when RDRAM first emerged on to the computer seen. He wrote that big article about how bad RDRAM performed. What Tom and others including myself didn't release was RDRAM support sucked at the time, and was not being utilized to what it was meant to.
Look now:
Linpack
Linpack
Sisoft
Sisoft
My point is that a lot of you are taking a bunch of early analysis of the P4 and drawing an early conclusion. The reason why the P4 performs so poorly under many of today?s applications is because today?s applications don?t utilize the P4?s architecture to its full potential. It?s funny how a lot of you are also so fast to scrutinize the P4, and Intel, yet you don?t even understand the P4, or what it is that Intel is trying to do with the P4. It was also stated in another thread that Microsofts next OS Whistler will take the P4 to the next level with its newest kernel, which some close to Microsoft say it will be optimized for the P4+.
Read this and get a good laugh:
P4 Mihocka has attacks on him shocka
Hardware One
The person who wrote that review either got fired from Intel or works for AMD. I couldn't read the article after first few paragraphs, since I already knew how it is going to end. Very biased and very unprofessional review in my opinion.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter