P4EE 3.73@4.25 Wipe floor OF AMD 64

[Socrilles]

For every1 talking price and performance etc.....I'm tired of the AMD fanboy intel bashing. I use to have an A64 3000+ winny at 2.6 ghz, and decided to switch over to a Dell, the price/performance as many of the fanboys would say here OWNZ ALL JOO, can any1 post a better price to performance for a complete system then what follows:

Intel 925 X chipset mobo
p4 630 @ 4 ghz EE (1066 fsb)
512 mb DDR2
160 gig SATA HD w/ NCQ
dvd burner and dvd rom
Case w/ PSU
keyboard and mouse
Legal copy of winxp
ATI radeon X300SE 128 mb PCI express (and the 850XT could've been had for another $300)

For about $330

From the actual email
Dimension 8400
Pentium® 4 Processor 630 with HT Technology (3GHz, 800 FSB), Microsoft® Windows® XP Home Edition Qty: 1
Unit Price: $1,508.00
Dimension 8400 Pentium® 4 Processor 630 with HT Technology (3GHz, 800 FSB)
Memory 512MB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz (2x256M)
Keyboard Dell Quietkey® Keyboard
Monitor FREE UPGRADE! New 17 in E173FP Analog Flat Panel
Video Card 128MB PCI Express? x16 (DVI/VGA/TV-out) ATI Radeon? X300 SE
Hard Drive 160GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/ Native Command Queuing
Operating System Microsoft® Windows® XP Home Edition
Mouse Dell 2-button scroll mouse
Network Interface Integrated Gigabit Ethernet
Modem 56K PCI Data/Fax Modem
CD ROM/DVD ROM Dual Drives: 16x DVD + FREE UPGRADE! 16x DVD+/-RW w/dbl layer write

Sound Card Integrated 5.1 Channel Audio

Optional Second Monitor 17 inch Ultrasharp? 1704FPT Digital Flat Panel
1704FP

Dell Home Customers: Save $750 on select Dimension·desktop purchases of $1499 or more (before tax and shipping)! (affialite only online offer)
Expires on 2005-04-26 05:59:00 - $750.00


Dell 720 Color Printer
Free Dell Color Printer 720 Qty: 1
Unit Price: $0.00
Hardware Support Services 1Yr Ltd. Warranty- Advance Exchange
AE1YR

ADDITIONAL DISCOUNTS AND COUPONS

Dell Home Customers: Free Ground Shipping on any Dell Dimension order greater than $499!
Expires on 2005-04-26 06:59:59 - $99.00

Dell Home Customers: Save $75 off orders over $999!
Expires on 2005-05-15 23:59:59 - $75.00

Sub-Total $614.70
Shipping Discount -$99.00

Shipping and Handling $0.00

Tax $44.05
Total $658.75

Note I took $325 off the price for the two LCD monitors and tax ($150 + tax for each)

 

[Duvie]

No....That is a screamin deal, but that is what it is, a DEAL!!! Sale!!! Loss!!! ....That is a clearance sale item and no way indicative of a a true price most can get. If Dell sold AMD you could find some screamin deals as well....Even OEM copies of WinXp which are pretty consistent are in the 80's....


Price performnace is being directly compared to cpu price only, and some may be figuring DDR2 cost to it to get the top performance as seen uin reviews...Dont read much more into it and get your pamties in a bind.....


A 630 oem at pricewatch is 210.00 dollars..cheapest....A 174 dollar Newcastle 3400+ for 175 wuld kill it..A 3200+ Venice can be had for 200 and OC to perhaps 2.8ghz plus and then kill your 4ghz OC!!!

Ppl are going to be looking there and not at some Dell close out or sale....If that is a true price it explains why most of their systems suck so bad now and tech service had to be outsourced....They make no money on their systems...

 

[Zebo]

since when can you OC a dell? BTW is that deal still going on? I'm all over intel if so.😉

What you mistake for fanboy is recognition of superior bang for buck most of the time...plus cooler..use less power.

 

[Socrilles]

Actually it wasn't a clearance sale item, I could've ordered a thousand if I wanted to. You just have to wait until the end of the quarter and even before then you can get deals close to as good. You are also claiming AMD processors will own intel's, however that is only in gaming and only if your willing to buy a venice/winny and an OCing board. If you want a fair comparison you should realize the P-M's outperform the fx's clock for clock in most of the benchmarks used today. A P-M can be had for $220 (or much cheaper on ebay) and paired with an asus board OC to 2.7 ghz on air consistently, but neither of these can touch the dell system haha

P4@4ghz on a Dell

 

[clarkey01]

Is that deal for real ?

 

[Zebo]

If you want a fair comparison you should realize the P-M's outperform the fx's clock for clock in most of the benchmarks used today.

::SIGH:: we've been over this before with the idiot who started this thread, anands own tests show dothan losing 31/44 benchmarks to a same speed A64, not even an FX but a winchester with less cache. Nevermind to fact you can't OC a dothan to A64 speed levels w/o extreme cooling.

 

[Socrilles]

Hey Zebo if were going to be fair it would've been a much better article if a lower speed default processor was used or at least a lower multiplier 160 fsb on the Dothans is hardly fair when people are hitting well over 200 fsb with the 533 fsb variants, it would be like comparing a stock A64 at 2.6 ghz A64 at 2.2 ghz by decreasing the FSB, to a Dothan with an OCed fsb, or do you disagree? (and I'm referring to clock for clock - speeds fsb should be equivalent for all I know they might've been running the ram at the same fsb and now your looking at 160 fsb ddr compared to 200 fsb......

Oh and you might check your spelling of compitition because I don't think even a 486 has any compitition

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Zebo

If you want a fair comparison you should realize the P-M's outperform the fx's clock for clock in most of the benchmarks used today.

::SIGH:: we've been over this before with the idiot who started this thread, anands own tests show dothan losing 31/44 benchmarks to a same speed A64, not even an FX but a winchester with less cache. Nevermind to fact you can't OC a dothan to A64 speed levels w/o extreme cooling.

looks like someone has opened the idiot floodgate...I like how they are never the regular Intel crowd in here who seem to be much more intelligent on the matter...NO...It is the new members all the time....

How about that 32mb scoring in superpi 32mb with a Dothan...Why cant these ppl get it that the Dothan has weaknesses and is not a well enough cpu to compete with the A64's and FX's??? Even Intel is going to change this to make it so...

Also quit trying to compare OC'd Dothans, Dothnas running on desktop systems with adapters when you are running them outside of what Intel has intended to...Compare straight up what can be had now on given systems with the price of current chips and not insane "no money" making deals....

 

[Zebo]

They lose a sh1t pot on those deals but it's still a deal. Wish I could get one.😛


Spelling corrected...I'm much better at math.🙂

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Technically the comparison is not so bad given that FX55 corresponds to A64 4200+ speed ratings. It would have been more fair to compare regular 6xx or 5xx series at 4.2ghz. I always used to laugh when websites compare 6 series 3.6ghz and 5 series 3.8ghz to FX55 or A64 4000+ and say that they lose. Well no Sh*t. Why don't we compare P4 3.6 to A64 3600+? Obviously FX55 is the fastest single threaded processor since there is no P4 4.2ghz. It should win every single benchmark. I do agree that A64 processors shine for price/performance and overclocking. But I dont think Intel is doing as bad as people make it out to be just because they cant achieve past 3.8ghz. If they could get to 4.2ghz they would probably be a lot closer in performance. Since they cant, they have to price their slower line processors that can make it to market ie. 3.6 and 3.8ghz at levels that 4.0 and 4.2ghz models should have been priced at. Just a loss for consumers if you ask me...

Finally, most people who own high end chips have high end videocards. In which case, they probably play at high resolutions and settings. Then processor speed does not count as long as you have something above P4 3.0/A64 3000+ ghz. In the past cpu speed mattered, now it's 90% videocard. Until games start to utilize dual-core and multi-core processor speeds, people should honestly stop stressing cpu speed so much for gaming (a forte for AMD). In reality, there is no difference between amd and intel at gaming because the videocard either chokes in both or the game plays just as smooth on both systems 🙂 ... until R520/G70 come out that is.

RS you're a smart dude I can't belive you're posting this "CPU not matters" nonsense. Look at the link I provided above. Stock FX is still 20 fn' % faster than overclocked P4 in: " All of these games were run with maximum eye candy, thus with anti aliasing set to 4x and anisotropic filtering to 8x at a 1600x1200 resolution, as we never said we?d go easy on either processor. "

 

[Aenslead]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Zebo

If you want a fair comparison you should realize the P-M's outperform the fx's clock for clock in most of the benchmarks used today.

::SIGH:: we've been over this before with the idiot who started this thread, anands own tests show dothan losing 31/44 benchmarks to a same speed A64, not even an FX but a winchester with less cache. Nevermind to fact you can't OC a dothan to A64 speed levels w/o extreme cooling.

looks like someone has opened the idiot floodgate...I like how they are never the regular Intel crowd in here who seem to be much more intelligent on the matter...NO...It is the new members all the time....

How about that 32mb scoring in superpi 32mb with a Dothan...Why cant these ppl get it that the Dothan has weaknesses and is not a well enough cpu to compete with the A64's and FX's??? Even Intel is going to change this to make it so...

Also quit trying to compare OC'd Dothans, Dothnas running on desktop systems with adapters when you are running them outside of what Intel has intended to...Compare straight up what can be had now on given systems with the price of current chips and not insane "no money" making deals....

Don't be so cruel on those Intel fanboys, Duvie. Dothan is all they have left. Its the only processor than can "somewhat" compete against AMD solutions.

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: Socrilles
Actually it wasn't a clearance sale item, I could've ordered a thousand if I wanted to. You just have to wait until the end of the quarter and even before then you can get deals close to as good. You are also claiming AMD processors will own intel's, however that is only in gaming and only if your willing to buy a venice/winny and an OCing board. If you want a fair comparison you should realize the P-M's outperform the fx's clock for clock in most of the benchmarks used today. A P-M can be had for $220 (or much cheaper on ebay) and paired with an asus board OC to 2.7 ghz on air consistently, but neither of these can touch the dell system haha

P4@4ghz on a Dell

It was a loss. Dell has the same sale every year to push up their income numbers right before they are released. They take big losses on it. Also you aren't mentioning that your rig isn't prime stable.

Finally, My 2.65ghz sempron, 8kda3j, 512 megs of Generic and 9800np @ pro clocks (I didn't buy it, but I could have off the for sale forum a couple weeks ago) would beat your rig in gaming, And if I had bought the card I'd have paid about $225 total for those parts, then used a spare PSU, Hard disk, case, etc. But as everyone's said, using specific "deal" examples like these doesnt show anything.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Moron strikes again. Intel, I don't see any benchmarks there. Do you? show me...where they at? No fuggin way a OC to only 4.2 pentium will beat a stock FX..

Here's one for ya..

Need 5.2 Ghz P4 to beat stock FX-55

Ouch! Better get phase and save for your power bills.

Toms Hardware did the same thing of getting an P4 3.2 Ghz running at 5GHZ (cooled by liquid Nitrogen )

Still the AMD won, only at 5.2 Ghz was it able to beat the 64 FX running at half the speed and stock.

That's pretty sad you need to overclock like a mad man and spend thousands using phase change to beat AMD's chips running stock... All I had to do in old Athlon-XP days was air overclock a little bit to beat the superior northwoods running stock.

Zebo I agree that A64 is faster but that link above is a joke. Even by looking at it you can extrapolate that it will take much slower than P4 5.2ghz to beat FX55. This was discussed months ago in another thread and ripped apart.

Let's for a second look at the numbers in that very article that actually matter:

P 4.0ghz vs. FX55
Doom 3 1600x1200 = 67.8 vs. 69.1 (you wont be able to tell)
Far Cry 1600x1200 = 71.78 vs. 77.91 (wont be able to tell)
HL2 1600x1200 = 41 vs. 47 (both too slow for smooth gaming = both systems must reduce video settings because too choppy or put in a better graphics card)
Valve video stress test - 85 vs. 90 (no difference)

With respect to why I think cpu speed doesn't matter look at here:

Doom 3
Far Cry
Half Life 2
IL2

Also Tomshardware moved away from benching high end systems at low resolutions in gaming because they realized it doesnt make sense:

"Nobody who goes for a high-end system (dual core or not), a decent platform and 1 or 2 GB of RAM is going to equip their system with any graphics card below $200. Nor will they accept low quality settings at all.

The results are by far good enough for smooth gameplay and make pretty clear that the graphics card is still by far the most important component for stunning 3D graphics."

LINK

You have to realize mathematically A64 cpus are faster in games. But in the real world you wont feel any difference. Why? Because P4 will output frames high enough where 200 or 100 frames makes no difference. On the other hand, where a game is graphics intensive, cpu speed will not help to make it more playable but the graphics card will. I am just saying that the importance of cpu for high end gaming is by FAR and large OVERRATED on almost every single website. Only few have looked into it and realized it's better to have a mid-range cpu and high-end videocard than a high-end cpu and mid-range videocard. Yet how many ppl on these forums you see with a64 2.5-2.6ghz and slow 6600GT videocards?

With respect to Centrino based cpus, you can see that HERE they are doing very well given their clock speed.

The problem lately is so many different websites keep stressing the numbers ... but what about reflecting on real world usage? We have now seen Anandtech describe the feeling they had using dual-core processors and useful information like one done HERE

If websites started to describe exact differences they "feel" between 6800GT and x850xt pe or P4 3.0ghz and P4 3.8ghz then the numbers will have a better meaning. Frankly, to me everything over 60 frames is smooth so what difference does it make that Quake 3 give 550 frames with FX55?

 

[Socrilles]

alright, anyway I was a long long time AMD fan, and I am still a very big fan of AMD, 3 months ago I built 2 3000+ systems for friends. The processors run extremely cool, quiet and fast now. My point is two, you can't just shout that AMD rules in everything, I have shown a system that price/performance will beat anything ever available so far for AMD (deal or not), and to claim the p4 and pM get trounced is just wrong. The P4 is a dog clock for clock even mine at 4 ghz is probably equivalent to a 2.4 ghz at best, but for a complete system that is quiet it is still amazing. The pentium M's do not have a mature platform on the desktop yet, nor were they designed for the desktop which makes it all the more incredible that they're doing as well as they are, but given a good platform and a dual core the P-M's are going to be a very competitive option to the X2's as long as intel isn't crazy on the pricing or as long as dell sells them. In reading through the thread I saw bash after bash against the intel guy who started (somewhat deserving) but in the bash's there is also a lot of BS, I'm just trying to show that intel makes some very good alternatives.

I also built a sempron system heres the breakdown of yours
8kda3j cheapest at newegg lets say $50 semrpon 1.6 ghz 128 kb retail box $70, 160 gig hd $30, antec slk1600 case and PSU $25, video card $100, legal win xp $30, dvd bruner and dvdrom $50, 512 mb ddr $25, $380 so far still w/o taking into account keyboard, mouse and more. I just bought a 6600 256 mb for $80 and can sell my x300se for at least $30, and my system with the 6600 will still easily out perofrm yours com on man of course a better video card is going to make a huge difference, if i threw in an x850XT instead of the extra monitor the system would've cost me about $750 and it would still have one 17" lcd...I've looked at the cost to built things barebones and there just is no comparison

 

[Aenslead]

AMD RULES IN EVERYTHIIIING!!

 

[pplapeu]

I would like to "look at that"....Who has the benchmarks on stuff like that????

 

[pplapeu]

I looked at those VooDoo gaming PCs too....nobody does credible benchmarking on those things....too bad.

 

[pplapeu]

You probably think 3DMarks is a video game.....

 

[pplapeu]

Loook....all those games play differently and some can be rigged to favor Intel due to the execution and pipelines and stuff.....now all the games are favoring the AMD design and the 3D Now! set up.

Hell, if you go online with a lousy bandwidth you lose anyway.