If intel is so popular and they "allegedly" have the best cpu's then why...

[Markfw]

I wouldn't go so far to say it's useless (PCIe), just no better(16x pcie) at the moment than AGP(8x). And the 1x slots are no better than pci as far as I can see. And PCI-X kills PCIe(1x), so it doesn;t win in server setups at ALL. At the moment thought PCI-X is better for servers, and PCI/AGP is tha same for desktops. So for the moment its just more exspensive IMO.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: jbh129
Dont forget that Intel must be better because their chips have higher numbers.

Apparently AMD gives some merit to the higher numbers to. Otherwise, why use a PR rating? Higher numbers sell better than lower numbers, both AMD and Intel know this. Not meaning any flamage here, just trying to keep things real.

 

[klah]

Originally posted by: Nixsun

Does anybody have any links to benchmark tests for the Intel -vs- AMD war?

Some Anand guy puts benchmarks on the internets sometimes. You can probably find his site on google.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: klah

Originally posted by: Nixsun

Does anybody have any links to benchmark tests for the Intel -vs- AMD war?

Some Anand guy puts benchmarks on the internets sometimes. You can probably find his site on google.

lol! :thumbsup:

 

[carlosd]

Originally posted by: Nixsun

PCI-E is useless and doesn't look to be useful for at least another year or two.

YOU MUST BE CRAZY!!!! Have you seen a PCI-e X800 yet, im guessing not. I have a a 9800 XT and its sweet, but man.... That PCI-e card is just insane! you need to check one out before you make a statement like that. Pretty much makes your whole post useless.

Yeah! but if you use An AGP version of this card in an a64 it will blow out a similar range P4-PCI-E System.

 

[Lithan]

Useless as in not advancing the end proposed. PCI-E currently has no performance advantage over AGP, and has a price premium. It doesn't look like pci-E will have a performance advantage for at least a year or two.

 

[VIAN]

Basically, AMD processors do more per clock cycle, therefore they don't need to run as fast 'megahurtzally' to be as fast actually.

I hate this efficiency crap. This has nothing to do with anything.

This is absolutely correct. The AMD CPUs have much shorter pipelines than the Intel CPUs. This means that each thing an AMD processor does has less 'stages' to go through than on an Intel. Because of this, the AMD CPU can pump work through much more quickly (per clock cycle) than an Intel.

This means nothing at all.

dont forget the coolness factor. at college a girl told me she wants a new comp, i told her im getting one as well. she asked me what kind. i told her an athlon she was like 'huh? whats that?', said she never heard off that and that she did inform herself tho and to prove it said shell be getting a pentium 4 3400 with 512 mb ram a 120gb harddisk and a 8x dvd writer. had i told her ill get a 3.8ghz p4 with 1024 mb 4 300gb hdds anda 16x dvd writer she woulda been jealous.

The coolness factor?!:roll:

What are the advantages of running 64bit windows, are there any other applications that are supported?

At the moment and in the near future when it releases, there will be no real advantage besides the fact that you can use more than 4GB of RAM, which isn't needed by any gamer, but maybe Codec people and servers.

PCI-e is a big one for me, I may be sticking with Intel for this reason alone. I know AMD has it in the works, but I need something now.

It should be released in a bit. Review boards have already been sent out.

So than I have to ask, why AMD? and for those who choose intel why?

The choice is not AMD or Intel. It is what price point you want and what you want to use this chip mostly for. Then looking at benchmarks choose which one performs better within the same price point. That's the way I see it. (And don't just go to one site.)
Generally however, AMD it best if you want to do a wide variety of things for its price, but, also for its price, Intel is better suited for Codec people (meaing people who encode and decode things, rip video, audio etc.) and for mutitasking where HT is supported.

Found some, I know I should have looked before I posted, what can I say im lazy.

Thanks for the help Jiffy. I play a lot of games, and I also code games using C++, so gaming is real important to me =)

I would choose AMD for that. IIRC AMD was faster than or similar to Intel with compile times. And AMD is faster in gaming. This is all for the price. Just check it out.

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipse...c.aspx?i=2275&p=10

shows A64 3200 ripping through a 3.8GHz P4.

PCI-E is useless and doesn't look to be useful for at least another year or two.

You are definitely crazy, because it seems that ATI and Nvidia will no longer be making any AGP parts.

 

[AWhackWhiteBoy]

BEATING THE DEAD HORSE, WHOOOO!

 

[VIAN]

He deserves it, the bastard ate my carrots!🙂

 

[AWhackWhiteBoy]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Useless as in not advancing the end proposed. PCI-E currently has no performance advantage over AGP, and has a price premium. It doesn't look like pci-E will have a performance advantage for at least a year or two.

I guess the fact that most new graphics cards aren't looking to support AGP anymore isn't going to matter? The next gen ATI cards are PCI-E only and the 6600 need a weird chip to convert from PCI-E to AGP.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: VIAN
He deserves it, the bastard ate my carrots!🙂

Haha. Totally irrelevant, but a sort-of-related story:
If you've ever played King's Quest 1 (yes, the original), there is scene with a goat, that you have to lure with a carrot, or something (IIRC). Well, on the version of the game for the SMS (8-bit Sega console), if you kill the goat.. he's not dead. You can kill him over and over again, and every time that you do, he shifts over one pixel. If you keep doing that, until you force his dead corpse to shift off of the side of the screen, then when you move to any other screen on the game, the top background graphics will be scrambled. Strange but true. (Yes, I am a veritable treasure trove of totally-useless video-game trivia like this.)

 

[SneakyStuff]

Look at any CPU benchmark, the last time I've seen an Intel CPU win was before the Athlon 64 made its debut. The Athlon 64 pummels the P4, because it has better architecture, and runs WAY more effeciently than a P4. Look at one of DOZENS of other threads just like this to find your answer, this forum has a wonderful search button, located at the top right corner of your screen 😉

 

[DAPUNISHER]

PCIe is useless? It is the foundation for SLI, and allows the use of nV and ATi cards in the same system. And yes there are situation/senarios where that could be an attractive config. For workstation use SLI is going to be a great price/performance solution by most indications. The diverse system configs it allows is another bonus, then playable frame rates@16x12 max eye candy with AA&AF in the most hardware intense new titles is the icing on the cake.

Yeah, lets just look at a single AGP card vs PCIe card and make pronouncements about its usefulness, One dimensional thinking at best.

What are the advantages of running 64bit windows, are there any other applications that are supported?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


At the moment and in the near future when it releases, there will be no real advantage besides the fact that you can use more than 4GB of RAM, which isn't needed by any gamer, but maybe Codec people and servers.

Just going to the 64bit OS is going to provide immediate benefits to some tasks, look here for instance Text Heck, even a couple of 64bit games may be out by the time the OS is. Then look at the basic difference between the 32bit and 64bit versions of XP pro and I am not as certain the immediate benefits will be constrained to the areas speculated above. Physical memory addressing isn't the only factor, the VM is going to prove very important as well.


Windows XP Professional Windows XP 64-Bit Edition
Virtual memory- 4 GB 16 terabytes
Paging file size- 64 GB 512 terabytes
Paged pool- 470 MB 128 GB
Non-paged pool- 256 MB 128 GB
System cache- 1 GB 1 terabytes
System Page Table Entry- 1.2GB 128 GB

EDIT: Thanks for the beer M4H! I got the next round 🙂

 

[IamIkari]

Originally posted by: Nixsun

I just read this:

If games are your main interest, AMD is still impossible to beat. However, the more you move into the professional area with applications such as A/V encoding or rendering, the more attractive the P4 will be. Increased support for the SSE3 instruction set will only add on top of Intel's advantage here; this is an area that still needs to be addressed by AMD.

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2264&p=3

SSE3 is already been taken care off.

 

[Lithan]

"pcie... allows the use of nV and ATi cards in the same system"
Big... F'ing... deal.

" It is the foundation for SLI,"
Ummm. No.
And SLI will only be a good idea for people buying two top of the line cards. No company with its head outside of its ass would sell a better performing product, with less marketing budget devoted to it, and higher production costs; for less money. We saw how good that worked for the last company that did it. (And those weren't even the same line. And not many people will spend $1200 on video cards for a single machine.


"For workstation use SLI is going to be a great price/performance solution by most indications."

I'd love to know what you are basing that on.

"The diverse system configs it allows is another bonus,"
Who put the huh in the what now?

"then playable frame rates@16x12 max eye candy with AA&AF in the most hardware intense new titles is the icing on the cake."

Again, PCI-e has shown no performance advantage over AGP 8x. It has been proven time and time again. Try to find something substancial to say.

"I guess the fact that most new graphics cards aren't looking to support AGP anymore isn't going to matter?"

How much do you want to bet that the mainstream graphics line for either nvidia or ATI in the next 1-2 yrs will not include agp cards? Or if you prefer a more reliable investment... I can sell you thirty acres of lush greenary in scenic italy sealed for safe-keeping inside the rear end of a cat. Just thirty thousand dollars.

 

[Thermalrock]

workstation video solutions like the wildcat realizm would take any sli setup nvidia offer apart easily in the stuff workstations are used for like cad and other stuff. the realizm 800 has 640mb ram two gpus and does 7 terraflops which is way way more than two slied ultras could do. it does however cost a lot more than two ultras with its ~2700 dollars, but for companies time is money.

 

[AWhackWhiteBoy]

Originally posted by: Lithan
How much do you want to bet that the mainstream graphics line for either nvidia or ATI in the next 1-2 yrs will not include agp cards? Or if you prefer a more reliable investment... I can sell you thirty acres of lush greenary in scenic italy sealed for safe-keeping inside the rear end of a cat. Just thirty thousand dollars.

next gen ATI is PCI-E only, and Nvidia is already using weird chips to port their PCI-E 6600 to AGP signifying their chips are already drifting away.

"THE X800 BRAND is about to get some more followers. ATI plants to introduce two cards that will continue to carry the X800 brand but, as it is the case with X850 new X800 cards will be PCIe only."

All ATI has coming out that seem to be supporting AGP are the R430 and RV410 which are heavily stripped down low end x800esque with 6 or 8 pipelines. basically a new low end card.

the AGP bandwidth is all dried up, soon the next leap in GPU performance will leave AGP completely saturated and at a disadvantage.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Thermalrock
workstation video solutions like the wildcat realizm would take any sli setup nvidia offer apart easily in the stuff workstations are used for like cad and other stuff. the realizm 800 has 640mb ram two gpus and does 7 terraflops which is way way more than two slied ultras could do. it does however cost a lot more than two ultras with its ~2700 dollars, but for companies time is money.

Does that mean there isn't a market for sli Quadros then? Of course not.

Lithan, most of your reply is my opinion vs your opinion and there is no right or wrong to argue just opinion so I'll bow out having said what I wanted to on the subject. The following I will reply to though

"then playable frame rates@16x12 max eye candy with AA&AF in the most hardware intense new titles is the icing on the cake."

Again, PCI-e has shown no performance advantage over AGP 8x. It has been proven time and time again. Try to find something substancial to say.

It doesn't eh? AGP isn't offered in sli form so the results of 2 sli'd PCIe 6800Us shows it can lay a heavy smackdown on any AGP card at the settings I stated Text it has the capability as an interface to significantly exceed anything the best AGP card can do. If you were intending your comment strictly as a 1to1 comparison then I agree in that particular config the advantages are non-existant@ this time.

 

[Nixsun]

Wow, seemed to shift this thread from AMD -vs- Intel to PCI-e vs AGP, lmao.

Found some interesting things talking to friends. You can already download 64-bit windows for trial, Im sure some of you have this but for those who dont here is a link;
64-Bit Windows

carlosd: Yeah! but if you use An AGP version of this card in an a64 it will blow out a similar range P4-PCI-E System

So are you saying that when a64 gets PCI-E it will be BAD ASS??

I dont know what benchmarks you guys are looking at to bash this PCI-E thing, but all I know is I have played games on my so called top of line AGP ATI Raedon 9800 XT 256mb card and also played them on a PCI-E X800 XT 256mb and it just simply blows my AGP card away.

Please I beg of you, go out there a test this card, I know it will be on an intel system for now, but hey the card is sweet. And just think when AMD releases PCI-E it will be even better. Come on guys, its double the bandwidth of AGP how can you even stick with AGP. That just reminds me of when people stuck with PCI when AGP came out.

🙂

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Haha. Totally irrelevant, but a sort-of-related story:
If you've ever played King's Quest 1 (yes, the original), there is scene with a goat, that you have to lure with a carrot, or something (IIRC). Well, on the version of the game for the SMS (8-bit Sega console), if you kill the goat.. he's not dead. You can kill him over and over again, and every time that you do, he shifts over one pixel. If you keep doing that, until you force his dead corpse to shift off of the side of the screen, then when you move to any other screen on the game, the top background graphics will be scrambled. Strange but true. (Yes, I am a veritable treasure trove of totally-useless video-game trivia like this.)

While it may seem irrelevant, it is still the best post in this entire thread. I didn't know they had a SMS version of King's Quest 1. Informative!

I hereby declare this thread to be a dead, pixel-shifted goat! Feed it your carrot and go home! Go and sail upon your birsea!

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: NixsunI dont know what benchmarks you guys are looking at to bash this PCI-E thing, but all I know is I have played games on my so called top of line AGP ATI Raedon 9800 XT 256mb card and also played them on a PCI-E X800 XT 256mb and it just simply blows my AGP card away.

umm... the x800 (pci-e OR agp version) is 2x as fast the 9800xt. it's not AGP holding back the 9800, it's the fact it's an old architecture.

pci-e has not inherit real-world advantages at this time (save for sli which will soon be avail), but it will have in the future.

 

[Nixsun]

CaiNaM: pci-e has not inherit real-world advantages at this time (save for sli which will soon be avail), but it will have in the future

AND I QUOTE!
"NVIDIA SLI takes advantage of the increased bandwidth of the PCI Express? bus architecture"

Guys just give it up, PCI-E is the future and it is better than AGP

 

[caz67]

Boring?? Do the research..!!!

 

[VIAN]

yeah, you guys should give it up.

PCIe is the future and I would get it just to be on the safe side.

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: Nixsun
Wow, seemed to shift this thread from AMD -vs- Intel to PCI-e vs AGP, lmao.

Found some interesting things talking to friends. You can already download 64-bit windows for trial, Im sure some of you have this but for those who dont here is a link;
64-Bit Windows

carlosd: Yeah! but if you use An AGP version of this card in an a64 it will blow out a similar range P4-PCI-E System

So are you saying that when a64 gets PCI-E it will be BAD ASS??

I dont know what benchmarks you guys are looking at to bash this PCI-E thing, but all I know is I have played games on my so called top of line AGP ATI Raedon 9800 XT 256mb card and also played them on a PCI-E X800 XT 256mb and it just simply blows my AGP card away.

Please I beg of you, go out there a test this card, I know it will be on an intel system for now, but hey the card is sweet. And just think when AMD releases PCI-E it will be even better. Come on guys, its double the bandwidth of AGP how can you even stick with AGP. That just reminds me of when people stuck with PCI when AGP came out.

🙂

X800 Xt's are twice the card that 9800 Xt's were. Honestly, how could you even think that the interface change is responsible for your performance difference?

Vian:
Yes, PCI-E is the future. But it's the future past most people's next platform change, and as such shouldn't be a concern when purchasing now.