Pentium 4 2.6ghz VS Athlon XP 2000

[Kenji4861]

I currently own an Athlon XP 2000. Thinking of upgrading, but wondering if I would even see any difference, if I say.. upgrade to Pentium 4 2.6ghz. I have a decent graphic card and 512mb of PC2700 ram. Thanks for any input.

 

[Orsorum]

Athlon XP 2000 wins by a mile.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Orsorum
Athlon XP 2000 wins by a mile.

Riiiiiiiiight

 

[moonshinemadness]

I swear by AMD but thats my choice not due to any speed/stability reasons just personal preference although i do believe the amds are faster IMHO

**Dons flame suit**

 

[moonshinemadness]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Orsorum
Athlon XP 2000 wins by a mile.

Riiiiiiiiight

EDIT: I would hate to be playing any of those games on a 100MHZ rig :Q

 

[Spikey217]

I dont have exact benchmark numbers but I have a 2000+ in my desktop and a P4 2.66 (533 fsb) in a laptop and the P4 is noticeably faster. You will see the difference.

 

[BatmanNate]

That's sort of a loaded question. If you were to get the P4 I assume it would be a Northwood core, but some of the performance would depend on whether it was a 533 MHz or 800 MHz fsb. If it was an 800 MHz fsb HT P4 there is little chance that an Athlon 2000+ would surpass it at anything, however the athlon is quite a bit cheaper and the performance difference wouldn't be huge unless you were doing heavy divx encoding or something along those lines.

Oh, and choosing one over the other for reasons OTHER than performance or cost (ie brand loyalty) is pretty dense and I would think most of this forum would know better after more than 4 years of pointless flame wars.

 

[0roo0roo]

in games, unless the cpu speed difference is drastic, the video card is what matters.

intel doesn't give you much bang for buck though, and upgrading your cpu with that little difference is foolish. stick a barton in if you must, best to upgrade your vid card instead. unless your just after encoding/photoshop/rendering speed.

 

[murphy55d]

It isn't enough to justify a whole new motherboard and cpu. If you were going to a P4 3.0ghz+ then maybe. Otherwise it's a waste of money.

What are you trying to run that you're having problems with?

 

[arod]

AMD 64 3000+ will own what you plan on upgrading to... for about the same price.

 

[Lawrencetan21]

I can relate to this. I builted an XP2000 for my brother a couple of months back and I though it was pretty fast but I had just built another one for myself with a P4 2.4 and all I can tell you is you'll see the different right away let alone a 2.6!

 

[Saulbadguy]

uh..a P4 2.6 would kill an Athlon 2000. The 2000 isn't even made to "compete" with the 2.6 P4.

 

[kage69]

Well, this here 2.6C does 3.26Ghz overclocked without breaking a sweat, and this is on air-cooling mind you. I own a 2000XP as well, and can say that the 2.6C runs games faster at stock speeds. I've had rotten results trying to overclock the Athlon, a 1.4Ghz Thunderbird it ain't.

 

[Swanny]

The 2.6Ghz P4 is going to be faster than your XP 2000+, no doubt. A more valid question would be whether you should upgrade to a P4 2.6Ghz or an XP 2600+. I'd go for the 2600+.