how AMD 64 cpu 2.2 GHZ perform better than p4 @ 3.2GHZ?

[trk1980]

how AMD 64 cpu working @ 2.2GHZ can perform better than a pentium 4 operating @ 3.2 GHZ ?

 

[deveraux]

AMD CPUs have a higher IPC (instruction-per-clock) hence can do more "work"/procesing per clock cycle than Intel can. Intel is aware of this shortcoming of their chip and wanted to overcome it by allowing a rapid increase in clockspeed. However, due to architectural inefficiencies, they are unable to truly ramp up clockspeed as much as they had hoped.

One analogy which I read on some other forum applies well to a certain extent:

Think of the Intel chip as a fast sports car while the AMD chip is say a van.
The workload is to "ferry" 30 people from point A to point B. The sports car can only fit say 4 people while the van can probably fit 7-10 people. Although the sports car is faster, the van will probably end up finishing the task first. This is definitely an oversimplified analogy and doesn't take into account a lot of other factors but I still think its quite a nice analogy.

My 0.02.

 

[Astu222]

the people at AMD used a spell checker, thats why its better because it was designed by smarter people.

 

[Pandamonium]

Originally posted by: Astu222
the people at AMD used a spell checker, thats why its better because it was designed by smarter people.

:thumbsup:

Just keep in mind that the performance is NOT due to 64-bit processing. It is difference inherent to the design of those CPUs.

 

[echelonphoto]

Actually , the intel chips do some operations better because of hyperthreading. They definitely handle photoshop faster.

 

[Insomniak]

Because clockspeed doesn't mean #*%$. There's alot more to processing than just how often you push electrons through the pipe.

 

[ts3433]

Besides IPC, you also have other architectural differences like the on-die memory controller, etc.

 

[devildog45co]

Originally posted by: Insomniak
Because clockspeed doesn't mean #*%$. There's alot more to processing than just how often you push electrons through the pipe.

:thumbsup:

 

[imported_Phil]

Another analogy: two guys walking a kilometer (or whatever). One guy takes lots of very fast, but very short steps. The other guy takes slightly slower steps, but they're much larger steps.

Who wins?

The guy with the longer steps, of course.
(Or the guy with the helicopter )

 

[Garlic]

Also the athlon 64 has shorter pipelines so it takes less clocks to complete an instruction and less clocks to recover from an incorrect branch prediction.

Intel designed the pentium 4 with long pipelines and less work per clock than even the pentium 3 so that it can run at an ultra high fequency. They were hoping people would be stupid enough to still go by the rule "fequency = speed". Thats when AMD quickly went back to the good old PR rating system just like they did many years ago with the K5 cpu hence the athlon XP XXXX names were born.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: echelonphoto
Actually , the intel chips do some operations better because of hyperthreading. They definitely handle photoshop faster.

I don't know where you get that from. Check here

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Astu222
the people at AMD used a spell checker, thats why its better because it was designed by smarter people.

[RANT!] They also use the freakin SEARCH function, thus not wasting space on questions that get asked every few days on a situation that has existed for a few years now. [/]

I feel better.

 

[Porter21]

My friend was asking the same question about how AMD can win against Intel, even though AMD runs lower clock speeds. I described it the same way. Its funny how Intel really mis-leads people, huh??????

 

[coejus]

Intel doesn't mislead people. The general public just has no idea what determines how fast a computer is. They see clock speed advertised everywhere, so they assume that's the only important thing.

If anyone is really being misleading, it's AMD. Their whole naming scheme compares the speeds of their processors to a comparable Intel based CPU. Officially, it's what an original Athlon would supposedly have to be clocked as to match the performance, but really... it's just a device for measuring itself against Pentium processors. AMD is making a lot of people think a 3200+ runs at 3.2 GHz. And before I get accused of being an Intel fanboy, I've always preferred AMD.

 

[Macro2]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: echelonphoto
Actually , the intel chips do some operations better because of hyperthreading. They definitely handle photoshop faster.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know where you get that from. Check here"


---

Yet another Intel myth debunked....

---------------------------------


In a year or so Intel will have to convince desktop users that chips that run at even slower clockspeeds than AMD...are BETTER.

That's when the Mhz myth hits the fan for Intel.

 

[echelonphoto]

I own only AMD, so I am not a troll...but check out this thread...real world tests. BTw, my AMD did pretty well here.


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/145693

 

[Mik3y]

clockspeed isnt an entirely accurate method of comparing or determining speed between different cored cpu's. cpu's are built on a pipline based architecure. basically, speed is determined by how fast data is transferred from one end of the pipeline to the other. note that amd and intel uses different length pipleines; amd utilizes a series of short pipelines and intel utilizes a series of long pipelines. as in relation to physics, the longer the distance, the higher the frequency is required to match the speed of short pipelines in going from one end of a pipeline to the other. this is why amd cpu's have much lower frequencies then intel cpu's and amd still performs on par or better then intel. generally speaking, amd does more work per clock cycle then intel does. also, amd does more operations per cycle and intel has more cycle's per second. i hope this makes sense.

 

[JasonandBecky]

My friend was asking the same question about how AMD can win against Intel, even though AMD runs lower clock speeds. I described it the same way. Its funny how Intel really mis-leads people, huh??????

How in hell is this Intel misleading people? By stating actual clock speed vs a PR rating? Show us all where the lie is.

Actually , the intel chips do some operations better because of hyperthreading. They definitely handle photoshop faster.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know where you get that from. Check here"


---

Yet another Intel myth debunked....

How is this an Intel myth?


Good grief some of you fanboys need to grow up and get off your highhorse.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: JasonandBecky

My friend was asking the same question about how AMD can win against Intel, even though AMD runs lower clock speeds. I described it the same way. Its funny how Intel really mis-leads people, huh??????

How in hell is this Intel misleading people? By stating actual clock speed vs a PR rating? Show us all where the lie is.

Actually , the intel chips do some operations better because of hyperthreading. They definitely handle photoshop faster.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know where you get that from. Check here"


---

Yet another Intel myth debunked....

How is this an Intel myth?


Good grief some of you fanboys need to grow up and get off your highhorse.

Fanboys ? All I did was provide a link proving that the P4 is NOT Better than AMD in photoshop. And I think term "misleading" in the context above is not quite right. Intel just advertizes their speed and lets people think that "more mhz is better".

 

[JasonandBecky]

Intel just advertizes their speed and lets people think that "more mhz is better".

ROFLMAO


I can see it now. A disclamer of "WARNING! MHZ DOES NOT MEAN FASTER! THE OTHER BRAND IS FASTER THAN US!" You want something like this?

Stop trying to play daddy for the public, if people can not in any way do some research for themselves, then they get what they deserve.

More and more these forums are becoming a den of fanboys who cant see past whatever CPU turns them on. It pathetic. I use two Intel and two AMD cpu's atm. I have no problem looking between the two companies fairly. Calling a company a liar or saying they should advertise a certain way simply because it doesnt jive with your view is out of whack.

 

[magomago]

Nah there are bad people on both sides. My friend is too hardcore Intel he refuses to listen to ANYTHING that remotely sounds like AMD praise. It even gets t the point where "Wow surfing on your computer is so slow!!!! My P4 definitely does a better job!" And i'm like "I'm about to kill you!"

But his dad recently got a PC that he built for him, and he went out and bought for 160$ a 2.4Ghz P4B....I was like "AHHHHHHH OMG!!!!" Thinking a A64 2800+ would've been MUCH FASTER AND CHEAPER!

I know another person and her father is a computer "Techie". Well her PC always has problems and whatnot due to hardware...and she says her dad doesn't want to spend too much money...nd he keeps her on a P3 Platform because he "Doesn't wanna spend too much". But LORDY he ends up spending more ANYWAYS! I'm like "just get a AXP Combo/ECS Mobo for like 40 dollars at frys..." but she said he refused and even went as far as spending a little over a month to get a P3 mobo that takes DDR just to avoid AMD. Because AMD is unstable...

Ah well...You speak and they learn~ that and AMD has to stay on top consistent for two years or so before it'll hit the mass market. I mean look at ATI...they were on top for WELL over two years with the 9700 before it started to actually affect Nvidia.

 

[BW86]

Originally posted by: Dopefiend
Another analogy: two guys walking a kilometer (or whatever). One guy takes lots of very fast, but very short steps. The other guy takes slightly slower steps, but they're much larger steps.

Who wins?

The guy with the longer steps, of course.
(Or the guy with the helicopter )

Great analogy

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: BW86

Originally posted by: Dopefiend
Another analogy: two guys walking a kilometer (or whatever). One guy takes lots of very fast, but very short steps. The other guy takes slightly slower steps, but they're much larger steps.

Who wins?

The guy with the longer steps, of course.
(Or the guy with the helicopter )

Great analogy

Small steps: P4.
Long steps: AMD/P-M.
Helicopter: Power.

 

[imported_Computer MAn]

Originally posted by: magomago
"Wow surfing on your computer is so slow!!!! My P4 definitely does a better job!" And i'm like "I'm about to kill you!"

I have a friend who does the same thing. He's like AMD sucks, my Dell is so much better

 

[Mik3y]

its funny how most people who know a dime or 2 about computers prefer amd.