Whats with the debate about AMD vs Intel in the PRICE/PERFORMANCE segment? - AMD is the clear WINNER

[Gog]

Whats the purpose of buying a 1.6A P4 and oc'ing it for $155 when you could just get a Athlon XP 2000+ for $123??? A 1.6A P4 that has been overclocked to above 2ghz levels will still not be able to outperform the XP 2000+ that runs at stock speeds. It will perform on par with a non overclocked 1.8A P4. If you don't believe me you can check out benchmarks at Sharkyextreme, where they have an article on the topic.

A lot of you folks seem to be buying into the hype without doing the proper research... more threads have been posted on the topic of 'switching over' than I care to remember, so here is a rebutal. Of course if you want the high end, there is no question that Intel is in control there with their 2.53 ghz P4... but who wants to pay 4x the price of a 2000+ for an insignificant increase.

 

[pdo]

Put your flamesuit on and let the flame began..

 

[FishTankX]

To unlock the true performance of the AthlonXP, you must use high quality RAM (266 CL2/333 CL2) and the Via KT266A/KT333 chipset. And you know the general sentiment on Via. Via has too many problems.. and bugs.. and headaches..

People like you, on the AMD760 chipset, get no where near the performance that they talk of in benchmarks. If an AthlonXP 2000+ was stuck on a 760 chipset it couldn't touch a 2.133GHZ Pentium4 in anything but gaming performance. Simply put, it's either

AMD+AMD=Stability+Mediocre performance
Via+AMD=Good+Cheap performance+Questionable stability (For a workstation user, or a heavy user, or somebody with the wrong hardware)
Intel+Intel=Intel class Stability+Good performance at a reasonable price

 

[DaveSimmons]

There is some value in the plug-and-go compatibility you get with intel. If you're just building one machine the odds of the build being problem-free and tweak-free are much higher with intel.

"But AMD is just as stable if you know what you're doing" -- sure, once you learn what to tweak (voltages, 4-in-1, etc) and what cards work / don't work with what mobos, what mobos need extra power. Again, if you're just building one system there's value in not having the extra learning curve.

AMD is defintely the better value if you have the time for it, or someone to build your system for you.

 

[Soulkeeper]

I agree with the guy that posted this thread
ohhh and
VIA ROCKS !!! Stable as an oak tree
i rather have a system based on an athlonxp 1600+ or 1700+ and oc it to like 2400+ speeds
than a P4 1.6 or 1.8 and oc it to 2.5+ or whatever they are getting
the price of an Athlon system still makes building one the most viable solution in my opinion
even if you are an overclocker
don't matter what anyone says building an athlon system is still the best for many people

 

[Viper96720]

I like Intel because I like to have my computer cool and quiet. Instead of cool and loud.

 

[DeschutesCore]

And I'd much rather have Wendy's over MacDonalds. What's the point of post like this? Anyone wanna debate me on the qualities of making a taco on pita bread instead of a regular tortillia?

Flamesuit On!

DC

 

[Gog]

DC perhaps its time for a new glasses prescription, I said in my post that this thread was a retort to all those folks that post threads about how they have or are switching over from AMD to Intel.

FishtankX, I agree with your comments about the amd 760 chipset (which btw came out almost a year ago), but I question the entire Via/stability debate... It seems to get mentioned way out of proportion when you consider how people actually have problems.

About the argument that an Intel machine is easier to put together... this is barely an issue as well for most people. A friend of mine, who is a newb, put together his first AMD machine a couple of months ago and ran into no problems... and this is a guy who never put together a pc, albeit one does have to be careful with the core of the pc.

The major advantage that Intel does have over AMD pc's is that they run much cooler and therefore require less sophisticated/less noise heatsink/fan combos.

 

[Tanked]

The AMD760 chipset is more then a year old, almost pushing 18 months I think (correct me if I'm wrong). In no way is the 760 a mediocre performer. It's slightly slower then the newest KT266A / KT333 rigs but it still holds its own, and also no VIA headaches...except for the darn southbridge...

EDIT: P4 rigs don't run much cooler then Throughbred rigs of similar ratings.

The 1900+ Throughbred has a TDP of 52.4 watts, while
the 2.0 GHz P4 Northwood has a TDP of about 50 watts.

The P4 does have a heatspreader, but the difference is not as great as many make it to be.

 

[glenn1]

I think you might have set your sights a little bit high, but your basic premise is correct. The true value segment of the market is the sub $100 price point, where on a price/performance ratio, AMD is miles ahead of any Intel offering. The gap gets even wider when you start talking about the super value segment (under $50). There, Intel doesn't have anything which even is in the same ballpark as AMD.... a 1.2 Duron (which now goes for $42 shipped) will smoke the everlivin' crap out of anything Intel can offer for even twice its price.

 

[Gog]

Thanks for the headsup Glenn... , just changed the thread title.

 

[Zugzwang152]

For some OC'ers, I think it's just the novelty of getting such a gigantic OC with room to push even further. the p4 1.6A is a monster OC'er, and almost everyone who hasn't hasn't even pushed it to its limits yet. MHz-wise, AMD is going to get much poorer overclocks %-wise than a P4. But with price in mind, top of the line XPs are like half the cost of P4's, we can only wait until thei T-bred revision or Barton comes out to see where the final lines will be drawn price-wise until Hammer.

 

[merlocka]

Whats with the debate about AMD vs Intel in the value segment? - AMD is the clear WINNER

Yeah, and the Subaru WRX is the "clear winner" in the "value sports" sedan segment but it's a piece of unequivocal crap compared to the Infinity G35.

You get what you pay for.


<if that's not flame bait, i dunno what is >

 

[Zugzwang152]

Are we just trying to get locked the fastest now?

 

[dexvx]

Whats the purpose of buying a 1.6A P4 and oc'ing it for $155 when you could just get a Athlon XP 2000+ for $123??? A 1.6A P4 that has been overclocked to above 2ghz levels will still not be able to outperform the XP 2000+ that runs at stock speeds. It will perform on par with a non overclocked 1.8A P4.

1.6a is $155, 1.8a is $160, 2.0a is $195. The p4 pricing for the 1.6a is screwed up. And are you also saying that a 1.6a @ 2133 will perform on par with a nonoverclocked 1.8a? The 2133 will be more than a match for the XP2000+. Another thing with northwood overclockers is that they dont need to worry about warranty issues beacuse unless you're into xtreme overclocking (1.75+ V) then its physically impossible to tell the difference between an overclocked chip and non.

Via chipsets are unstable, period. You can tweak them and make they very good, but they are still unstable. If you put them thru extreme stress testing, they will eventually fail. For 99% of the people, that is not an issue, but the bottom line is that they are unstable. Via simply does not have the resources to do Q&A on the scale Intel does. Intel spent millions on Q&A just for the i850/i845 chipsets. I wont even go into how much money they spend on server level stuff. Thats why VIA chipsets are not validated for workstations and you rarely see them in workstations. Like I said before, the only validated chipset for AMD (modern chipset) is the 762MPX.

 

[JackBurton]

Gog,

Reason 1: You seem to forget, when you pay $123 for that nice new OEM Athlon XP, you're going to need a heatsink. And if you get an AMD heatsink of the quality of Intel's, you'll be VERY close to Intel's P4 1.6A's price of $155.

Reason 2: With the new Intel chipsets (i845E, i845G, i850E), you can swap out that old 1.6A GHz (running at 2.4GHz+) chip for a new P4 3GHz+. The Clawhammer ain't going in any AMD based mobo today.

Reason 3: XP 2000+ chips overclock, but you'll be hard pressed in getting it to 1.9GHz much less anything faster. There are people that have done it, but those are exceptions to the rule.

Reason 4: There are several people overclocking their P4 1.6A GHz chips to 2.4GHz+ and with the newer Intel DDR chipsets able to run memory at DDR400+, you've got an XP 2000+ killer, overclocked or not.

Reason 5: Even overclocked to the max, the babies are quiet.

Reason 6: No VIA. You can talk all you want about how stable the VIA based motherboard in YOUR system is, but I'll take an Intel based board if it's all the same with you.

Good enough for you?

 

[jonmullen]

I don't by this that Via chipsets are unstable. I went on a two week vacation and ran Seti@home the hole time and when I got home it was still cooking away error free. Now if you don't call stable being up and running after 400+ hours at full processor load then what do you call stable?

 

[Doomguy]

I'd like to see someone claim that Via chipsets are better than Intel chipsets. I've been using VIA chipsets for years with few issues, but I still love the ease of setup and stability with Intel chipsets. Via chipsets are good, but Intel chipsets are better.

AMD = best price/performance ratio, decent motherboard chipsets.
Intel = best performance but at a steep price, excellent motherboard chipsets.

IMHO.

 

[cmdrdredd]

well...a P4 1.6A at 2.4Ghz+ is running at a 533Mhz FSb vs 266mhz for AMD's best. Plus the memory timings can be set higher so you can even run ddr400 or don't forget about PC1066RDRAM ;-)

 

[merlocka]

nForce2 might change things, but after getting my a$$ kicked by VIA motherboard problems on the systems I've built for people the last couple years I'll pass on AMD for now. My personal A7V with T bird has been pretty stable, but I've had my share of SBlive troubles with it.

I still can't believe that I ever replaced BX boards with VIA boards. Someone shoot me.

 

[CrazySaint]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
well...a P4 1.6A at 2.4Ghz+ is running at a 533Mhz FSb vs 266mhz for AMD's best. Plus the memory timings can be set higher so you can even run ddr400 or don't forget about PC1066RDRAM ;-)

Actually, P4 1.6A @ 2.4 = 150MHz FSB = 600MHz FSB quad pumped

 

[Rainsford]

This debate just gets worse and worse as time goes by. The problem is that even something as "scientific" as what is a good CPU is a very subjective thing. Some people might prefer certain features like SSE2, some people may be looking for the best FPU, some may want to not spend very much and get a good CPU for the money, some may want the best rig they can buy for whatever the cost...

There is no best CPU for everyone. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages. Anyone who tries to tell you that a single solution will work best for every person is full of it.

Quick Thread Summary (in no particular order)
AMD is great
No, Intel is great
FUD about VIA "instability"
FUD about AMD heat
Infinity owns Subaru (???)
Irrelevant comparisons of bus speeds for two different CPU designs
More VIA FUD
AMD is great
Intel owns AMD
blah, blah, blah

 

[Viper5]

What's even the point of these AMD Vs Intel Threads? They serve no real purpose anymore. AMD zealots are still going to argue and standby AMD products and Intel zealots are going to do the same.

I dont think i've ever seen somebody in these kinds of threads go "your right and im wrong, im going to buy Intel/AMD from now on!"

I'm a avid AMD user, and recommend them to people wanting to purchase a system, but if people want to buy Intel its not sweat off my back

Just a thought

 

[merlocka]

Infinity owns Subaru (???)


At least I added some originality to one of these dreaded, same-old-crap threads.

 

[dexvx]

Running SETI isnt exactly what i call stressful (it only stresses the CPU)

I'd imagine you can get a retail XP2000+ for around 150, about the same price as a 1.8a