Help me in Choosing AMD or Intel

[KenAF]

For those claiming that AMD offers the lead in price/performance, where have you all been living the past few weeks?

If you've followed this or other forums at all, then you know that the P4 1.6A is available for $145, and runs at 2100+MHz using default voltage and the stock Intel heatsink. Moreover, when paired with the $110 Asus P4B266 DDR motherboard, every 1.6A will do at least 2400MHz with slightly increased voltage, and many will do 2550 to 2700MHz. That's about $250 for a guaranteed 2.4GHz setup that will outperform all AMD systems (see Tomshardware where 2.4GHz P4 outperforms Athlon 2000+ @ 1866MHz), with the strong possibility of a much higher overclock. It does all this with the stock Intel heatsink that produces less noise than just about every Athlon heatsink aside from the 8045+L1A combo. Even at 2700MHz, the P4 1.6A still produces less heat than an Athlon XP 2000+ at stock voltage; idle temps reported for a 2600-2700MHz P4 run 32-34C.

AMD used to be the price/performance leader. It is not anymore--for now.

 

[MoFunk]

<< AMD all the way. Faster, always, and MUCH cheaper. Just get a nice stable board and you'll be fine. Run win2k and not XP too, that can help, XP sucks >>



Hmm. I have run WinXP pro for a couple months and it is rock solid for me!

 

[KK]

<< For those claiming that AMD offers the lead in price/performance, where have you all been living the past few weeks?

If you've followed this or other forums at all, then you know that the P4 1.6A is available for $145, and runs at 2100+MHz using default voltage and the stock Intel heatsink. Moreover, when paired with the $110 Asus P4B266 DDR motherboard, every 1.6A will do at least 2400MHz with slightly increased voltage, and many will do 2550 to 2700MHz. That's about $250 for a guaranteed 2.4GHz setup that will outperform all AMD systems (see Tomshardware where 2.4GHz P4 outperforms Athlon 2000+ @ 1866MHz), with the strong possibility of a much higher overclock. It does all this with the stock Intel heatsink that produces less noise than just about every Athlon heatsink aside from the 8045+L1A combo. Even at 2700MHz, the P4 1.6A still produces less heat than an Athlon XP 2000+ at stock voltage; idle temps reported for a 2600-2700MHz P4 run 32-34C.

AMD used to be the price/performance leader. It is not anymore--for now. >>



I agree 100% with this. Everything I've been hearing is show that this 1.6A will OC atleast 30% up to 50%. Sure with it at stock then the AMD will probably beat it price per performance. But why run it at stock. Kinda like getting a crotch rocket and using it like a moped. Personnally I would go with Intel on this deal, and I even have an AMD which has served me very well for the past year. I think the choice is clear.

KK

PS>I don't mean to plss the AMD fellows off, don't take it that way.

 

[Jerboy]

<<

<< For those claiming that AMD offers the lead in price/performance, where have you all been living the past few weeks?

If you've followed this or other forums at all, then you know that the P4 1.6A is available for $145, and runs at 2100+MHz using default voltage and the stock Intel heatsink. Moreover, when paired with the $110 Asus P4B266 DDR motherboard, every 1.6A will do at least 2400MHz with slightly increased voltage, and many will do 2550 to 2700MHz. That's about $250 for a guaranteed 2.4GHz setup that will outperform all AMD systems (see Tomshardware where 2.4GHz P4 outperforms Athlon 2000+ @ 1866MHz), with the strong possibility of a much higher overclock. It does all this with the stock Intel heatsink that produces less noise than just about every Athlon heatsink aside from the 8045+L1A combo. Even at 2700MHz, the P4 1.6A still produces less heat than an Athlon XP 2000+ at stock voltage; idle temps reported for a 2600-2700MHz P4 run 32-34C.

AMD used to be the price/performance leader. It is not anymore--for now. >>



I agree 100% with this. Everything I've been hearing is show that this 1.6A will OC atleast 30% up to 50%. Sure with it at stock then the AMD will probably beat it price per performance. But why run it at stock. Kinda like getting a crotch rocket and using it like a moped. Personnally I would go with Intel on this deal, and I even have an AMD which has served me very well for the past year. I think the choice is clear.

KK

PS>I don't mean to plss the AMD fellows off, don't take it that way. >>




overclocking is out of question when we are talking about price vs. performance outside of computer geeks and enthusiasts

 

[KenAF]

<< overclocking is out of question when we are talking about price vs. performance outside of computer geeks and enthusiasts >>

Maybe so...but if you're not a computer geek or enthusiast, why would you be here in the first place?

 

[KouklatheCat]

I have never had a problem installing the VIA 4 in 1 drivers or with my SB Live cards. I have had an ASUS A7V, A7V-e and now an Epox 8kha+. I have had several Intel based boards as well and I have never had anymore problems installing a board with an AMD processor then I have with an Intel. Or any issues with a SB Live with either. Meebee I have just been lucky...............

 

[Duvie]

< Moreover, when paired with the $110 Asus P4B266 DDR motherboard >

Ahhhh NO!!!!

This is a p4b266-c version...Get it right...It comes without the usb 2.0 and is a slightly newer version...it also does not have the pci lock which was told to me by a user of the board. The non c version also cost about 150 plus...

Just getting the information to be correct....

 

[wildting88]

wow, thanks for the many replies so far.

just to answer a few questions that some of you may had, i have 256 RDRam running at 800 currently.
also, I am more concerned with performance and reliability than price. But I've heard so many good things about AMD recently, that I wanted your expert opinions. I don't know how to overclock but my good friend does so that shouldn't be a problem.

Thank you again for so many responses. I'll keep checking this post to build up my knowledge.

Thanks
Jason

 

[Robor]

Like others have said, Intel is generally more stable but more expensive. AMD is generally faster but requires more knowledge and/or tweaking.

 

[KenAF]

<< Like others have said, Intel is generally more stable but more expensive. AMD is generally faster but requires more knowledge and/or tweaking. >>

AMD is only faster if you don't overclock. As it seems almost like the 1.6A and 1.8A processors are just 2400MHz processors mislabeled, I personally can't see why an enthusiast from this board wouldn't overclock. As the benchmarks at Toms and elsewhere show, even an overclocked top-of-the-line XP 2000+ doesn't outperform an overclocked 1.6A.

I also disagree with the broad assertion that AMD systems are less stable than Intel systems. That said, I would agree that many AMD systems require more work to get stable. With Intel systems, you can pick just about any drivers and the system will run stable...whereas sometimes on the AMD platform, and VIA or SIS motherboards in particular, you have to go through different drivers or bios settings to find those that will eliminate mainboard conflicts or other issues. These issues have more to do with the VIA, SIS, nVidia, etc chipsets than they do with the Athlon itself.

 

[rogue1979]

It is a tough decision. However the bench tests I read show the 1866MHz AMD XP slightly behind a Northwood 2.2 at 3000MHz. So I would think that a 1700MHz XP (1800 XP which is a fairly easy overclock) will be about even with a Northwood 1.6a at 2.5GHz. The price is about the same for both set ups. A plus for P4 is easier cooling. But a big consideration for AMD is the release of the Thoroughbred.

 

[AGodspeed]

<<

<< overclocking is out of question when we are talking about price vs. performance outside of computer geeks and enthusiasts >>

Maybe so...but if you're not a computer geek or enthusiast, why would you be here in the first place? >>



Because the vast majority of AT members here are just average Joes trying to get the best computer for the money.

 

[KenAF]

<< It is a tough decision. However the bench tests I read show the 1866MHz AMD XP slightly behind a Northwood 2.2 at 3000MHz. So I would think that a 1700MHz XP (1800 XP which is a fairly easy overclock) will be about even with a Northwood 1.6a at 2.5GHz. The price is about the same for both set ups. A plus for P4 is easier cooling. But a big consideration for AMD is the release of the Thoroughbred. >>

What tests are these? The tests at Tomshardware show that an Athlon XP 2000+ overclocked to 1866MHz with watercooling and 155MHz FSB/memory offers performance that falls between the P4 2.2GHz and P4 2.4GHz. Moreover, they test the P4 with a base FSB and memory speed of 100Mhz and 110Mhz respectively, unlike the PC1066+ RDRAM or 160-175MHz DDR that many on this forum use.

 

[Duvie]

rogue1979,

You lack deductive reasoning....I am sure you read the THG review yet it seems you didn't read or understand his configuration....

Lets take the 2.4ghz with rdram....watching the numbers I can tell you it beat the athln 2300+ in 9 test, lost 4test and tied one w/ synthetic sandra test removed...

So you deduct cause the 3000 did poorly with ddr though it only had an fsb of 136 and though it beat the 2300+ in the majority of the test, that a 1.6a oc'd to 2.5 would be equal to roughly an xp 2050+??? How can you do that...The 1.6a when ocing to 2.5ghz will be achieved with a fsb of around 156mhz and could be coupled on a sis p4 board with 333mhz ddr which recent test showed about 95 percent of rdram scores of i850...i845d platforms close to that as well, but this test (sis645, i845d, i850 review) was based on no ocing...Higher fsbs will only increase the memory mhz and subsequent bandwidth of the ddr.


I think you poorly reduced the data into a bunch of FUD....

I would guess that a p1.6a at 2.5ghz with a 156fsb would be close to equal a straight 2.5ghz p4 w/ 100fsb and with rdram...therefore being much better then a 2300+ xp....If a person is running memory at pc2100 levels of 133mhz then it would be likely closer equivalent to a 2.3 straight up....yet still ahead of a ~2050+xp or 1700mhz cpu you describe...

I am guessing slightly but reading the data in this review coupled with bandwidth reports of recent i845d owners and northwoods and recent sis645, i845, i850 review....I think I am a helluva a lot closer then your pipe dream...


Also lets talk reality here....

It is likely for 158.00 dollars a person can achieve 2.5ghz on a p4 northwood, right now in the real world with stock cooling....

For 280.00 an amd retail chip 2000+ xp is unlikely to achieve 2300+ speeds...Tom had to use water cooler....I agree the thoroughbred will achieve this but reality is now most amd chips are unlikely to achieve 1867mhz with out much more expensive coolers and or water-cooled systems....



I want to sum up once again...That THG is a moron!!!! He can state "Here, we can deduce that a DDR SDRAM module clocked at 137 MHz cannot deliver the necessary bandwidth in combination with the Pentium 4"...can you say duh!!!!!

Take that chip place it on a sis645 board where you don't have to lock memory to fsb and run the ddr (pc2700) at 174mhz and it can and will deliver the bandwidth needed....if you can use a chip where you can take adavntage of the fsb boost to increase ddr ram speed to 150 - 166 you wwill see bandwidth you need at close to 5 percent off of rdram scores...

 

[rogue1979]

Well, I reread the review and you're right, the P4 3000 had a bigger lead than I thought. And your right, Tom is a moron, he picked a board that only allowed a maximum cpu voltage of 1.92v. Hell, I am using air cooling with 2.01v, a hotter running thunderbird non XP, and not even a Delta and I can keep my max cpu temp down to 47c. Go over to Icrontic Forums and read what those guys are doing with an Athlon XP and watercooling. Many of them are using 2.0+ volts, watercooling and hitting consistently over 1900MHz and fsb speeds ranging from 170 to 200MHz. Let's see the memory scores on those, much harder to do with the locked multiplier on the P4.
$280 bucks for an eligible Athlon XP? Jeez, just pick up an XP 1600 with AGOGA stepping for $130 and get the same results. And yes, Tom did use a watercooler for the P4 2.2 Northwood running 3000MHz. So, while we are in agreement that flat out the Northwood takes the performance crown, AMD still gets bang for the buck.

XP 1600 AGOGA at 1800MHz air cooling, $130, Epox 8K7A at 160-170MHz fsb (no voltage mods needed) $75- total $205
Northwood 1.6a at 2.4GHz air cooling $149, DDR board at 150MHz, as cheap as $80- total $229
Northwood 1.6a at 2.133MHz air cooling $149, RDRAM board at 133MHz, maybe $110 - total $259

Maybe we can get some benchmarks in here to verify this, but I don't think it is a pipe dream that the Athlon system will be quite comparable to both 1.6a systems. Tom the wimp used a 155MHz fsb for his Athlon XP testing, there is a sizable increase at 165-170MHz.
My board hits 170MHz easily, but my CD-burner (which I use daily) chokes at 163MHz. Just check the Data Base at Overclockers.com, the average overclocked speed for both the XP1900 and XP 2000 is over 1800MHz, and all XP 2000 are AGOGA.

Don't get me wrong, I really think the Northwood is a good deal and I am considering buying a 1.6a set up. But I would never consider paying $500 for the 2.2a or $280 for the XP 2000. I think it is ridiculous to pay the premium price when for much less you can overclock and beat the stock performance and come close to the overclocked speeds of a top of the line cpu. I am not interested in the absolute fastest cpu, I am interested in the most cpu I can get for the money. Check out my rigs, I didn't pay more than $90 shipped for the most expensive one.