P4 over clocked to 3GHz, time to switch back to Intel

[TranceNation]

doesn't look like AMD can compete when the P4 goes to 3, 4 , 5+ ghz

 

[m2kewl]

*YAWN*

 

[jcovercash]

And your poing would be, Wait you dont have one thats right

Josh

 

[TallBill]

eh? wrong forum.. and your wrong.. intel and amd are very equal right now.. and probably will be throughout 2002..

edit - its a repost too

 

[minendo]

<< eh? wrong forum.. and your wrong.. intel and amd are very equal right now.. and probably will be throughout 2002.. >>


dont forget to mention that this is also a repost.

 

[Mungla]

From what Ed, over at overclockers.com, said, the 3GHz P4 still doesn't smoke an XP processor.

FYI - wrong forum!

 

[Ionizer86]

Um, the P4 Northwood doesn't scale well. Go back to the benches; From what I see with the P4 2.A and the P4 2.2, those 3ghz scores *should* be achievable with a P4 2.5ghz. If the benches didn't label that big bar P4 3.0, I would have put the 2.5ghz label there.

What good is a 3ghz processor that isn't scaling well at all?
<---imagining Via C3 or Via C4 @ 3ghz

 

[Lord Evermore]

Just because it can be clocked high doesn't mean it's actually getting anything accomplished.

 

[Linux23]

<< *YAWN* >>

 

[Pincherman]

I bet my old thunderbird 1200 will beat the pants off of the oc 3ghz

 

[StandardCell]

In the same way that "it ain't all about the Benjamins", "it ain't all about the megahertz"... Look at the efficiency of a top of the line Alpha or PowerPCG4 (or even, for that matter, to an Athlon XP) relative to a P4 and you'll see that megahertz means nothing. Even Tom's benchmarks dont' show a proportionate lead. The real interesting part will be when AMD releases its new processors this year and the 'hammer series.

 

[TranceNation]

<< I bet my old thunderbird 1200 will beat the pants off of the oc 3ghz >>



how much you wanna bet?

 

[novon]

still like AMD, most bang for the buck, I dont' like spending $340 on a processor

 

[newbiepcuser]

man, can I have your inferior AMD chip then?

 

[Ionizer86]

still like AMD, most bang for the buck, I dont' like spending $340 on a processor

More like $650 for a Northwood 2.2ghz. Hehe, talk about rip-off processors!

 

[Bluga]

<< Just because it can be clocked high doesn't mean it's actually getting anything accomplished. >>

 

[spanky]

are you trying to start a flame war?

 

[christoph83]

Um, the P4 Northwood doesn't scale well. Go back to the benches; From what I see with the P4 2.A and the P4 2.2, those 3ghz scores *should* be achievable with a P4 2.5ghz. If the benches didn't label that big bar P4 3.0, I would have put the 2.5ghz label there.

What good is a 3ghz processor that isn't scaling well at all?

What are you talking about? The 2.2ghz versions hit 2.7ghz with only a .15 volt boost and air cooled. These things can hit 3.5ghz easily,just look at tom's hardware's take on their water cooled version hitting 3.5ghz.

are you trying to start a flame war?

Thats all Bluga does.

 

[Lord Evermore]

I do have to admit that Intel isn't doing anything "bad" by designing the P4 as they did, with a lower instruction per clock. The same thing has been done by both Intel and AMD every time they change designs. They have to do it in order to allow the chips to reach higher clock speeds. The problem is that without a tremendous boost in clock speed, the first batches will always end up being slower than the previous design. They can't just make the first chips slightly faster than the most recent of the old design (well they CAN, but shouldn't), because the increase in clock speed isn't enough to make up for the reduced IPC. Essentially, all new chip designs will be slower than the previous design if you dropped them both back to the same clock speed (excluding optimized processes like the P4 with MPEG encoding), but the newer design is able to reach such significantly higher clock speeds that they're able to far outstrip the older design, once you reach the "turnover point", where the higher speed makes up for the lower IPC. For the P4, it seems that there's a very large difference in clock speed needed before the P4 outdoes the P3 or Athlon for most applications.

 

[tcsenter]

<< What are you talking about? The 2.2ghz versions hit 2.7ghz with only a .15 volt boost and air cooled. These things can hit 3.5ghz easily,just look at tom's hardware's take on their water cooled version hitting 3.5ghz. >>

"To scale well" does not mean "to overclock well".

 

[Nemesis77]

I have no intention to switch to P4. I'll hang on to my Duron, and switch to Clawhammer when the time is right . No, I don't really need 64 bits, but I'm gonna get one regardless.

EDIT: YEp, current Athlons have hard time competing against 3-4GHz P4's. But you have to remember that by the time Intel ships those CPU's, AMD has released Thoroughbreds with more MHz and bigger caches (and possibly other improvements as well). And you can't compare extremely overclocked P4's to un-overclocked Athlons.

 

[SinNisTeR]

when intel gives more bang to the buck then i'll switch..

 

[SiLEighTy]

<<

<< *YAWN* >>

>>

 

[pillage2001]

<< are you trying to start a flame war? >>




Too late dude. Too late............. . It's already started!

 

[christoph83]

"To scale well" does not mean "to overclock well".

Yeah but a good overclocking processor...like this one...considering on average you can do around a 20% overclock is a good sign that it will be able to scale well. Thats the whole point of the P4 and the .13 process, to be able to scale much higher than before. Show me a link that shows that the P4 northwood wont scale well, you wont find one.