What is a Athlon XP 3200+ (200fsb) equal to on the Intel side

[kehi]

Please lmk and thanks for the help

 

[Corporate Thug]

2.6C?

 

[nCred]

2.8C

 

[kehi]

thanks for the info

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: nCred
2.8C

 

[Markfw]

2.9 (they don't make) to 3.0. It is definitely overrated. The Athlon 64 3200+ is another story. That is compared to or beats a 3.2.

 

[Ardan]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
2.9 (they don't make) to 3.0. It is definitely overrated. The Athlon 64 3200+ is another story. That is compared to or beats a 3.2.

I agree with you on that one. I would also say it is comparable to the 3.0 and I have seen both side by side. Granted, the 3.0 was faster with video encoding but it was stomped on by the 3200+ I have when it came to mp3 encoding, ogg encoding, and building files from source (namely in linux) and that can be many factors of course. I generally don't notice a difference in speed between the two, including in games, and i'm sure other people are the same way. Unless, of course, they can magically tell the difference between a system running at 100 fps in a game and another running at 98

 

[alexruiz]

Depends on the application.... in some cases it could be like a 2.2, in other like a 3.8...... Pick it based on what you do. General concensus seem to be close to a 3.0C overall

 

[beatle]

Originally posted by: alexruiz
Depends on the application.... in some cases it could be like a 2.2, in other like a 3.8...... Pick it based on what you do. General concensus seem to be close to a 3.0C overall

Definitely depends on the application.