Which is faster, AXP 3200+ or A64 3200+ and why does this question seem odd?

[bupkus]

I know, these should by some condition of logic be the same speed, so could someone explain this rediculous naming system to me?

Does the same problem arrise when comparing the speeds of AXP processors to the Semprons?

 

[Bateluer]

The A64 3200 will mop the floor with the AXP 3200. Architectural differences. You can only compare model numbers between the same line of CPUs. For examply, you can safely say an AXP 2800 is faster than a 2500. Comparing a Sempron 3100 to an AXP 3200 or an A64 3200 gets a little dicey and you need to look at the benchmarks.

 

[Zebo]

I can explain the naming.

Sempons XXXX number value is meant to be equal the celeronD's Mhz value and does a good job of it. Sempron 3100 is more or less equal to a celeronD @ 3100Mhz

A64 XXXX number value is meant to be equal the Pentium 4 C/E Mhz value and does a good job of it. A64 3000 is more or less equal to a Pentium 4 C or E @ 3000Mhz..

Tbird owned pentium As but had no PR rating.

Tbred XXXX number value is meant to be equal the Pentium 4 B Mhz value
It fails most of the time.

Barton XXXX number value was meant to be equal the Pentium 4 C Mhz value
And failed miserably at this.


Here's all you need to know... Check out the Benchmarks and cool globals at the end

http://www.behardware.com/art/imprimer/531/

As you can see, even the slowest A64 2800 owns Athlon XP 3200.

 

[bupkus]

Zebo,
So my Barton 2500+ OC'd to 2.2GHz or supposedly equal to a Barton 3200+ is no match for a P4c @ 3.2GHz? I am shocked! :Q

 

[Zebo]

no match... a 2.2 barton is a 2750Mhz P4C

 

[bupkus]

Zebo, I've been trying to get an idea of whether to approach my nephew about his recent frustration with his gameplay with UT2004. He has a epox mobo with a VIA KT333 chipset, 2x512 PC2700 memory, an unlocked Barton 2500+(333) OC'd to 2GHz, driving a Radeon 9800Pro. It looks great on his CRT @ 1024x768 but he's complaining about the "servers" not being right.
I'm tempted to blame it on his 333FSB and to promote the idea that a new system would get him greater gameplay but I personally don't see any problem. To me it looks great and plays smooth. So, beside FPS, can the movement of his character be suffering from a pc slower than many of the other players online using the A64?
Until I have some sense of what the A64 can do for his game besides frame rate I'm gonna just keep my mouth shut about any upgrades.

BTW, I read that article you linked to and found it a good read.
Thanks.

What I'd like to do is take the data from the UT2004 test and space the listed chips along the X-axis by price with the y-axis listing the performance. I can then look for high rates of change to suggest best values.

 

[imported_Computer MAn]

Originally posted by: bupkus
Zebo, I've been trying to get an idea of whether to approach my nephew about his recent frustration with his gameplay with UT2004. He has a epox mobo with a VIA KT333 chipset, 2x512 PC2700 memory, an unlocked Barton 2500+(333) OC'd to 2GHz, driving a Radeon 9800Pro. It looks great on his CRT @ 1024x768 but he's complaining about the "servers" not being right.
I'm tempted to blame it on his 333FSB and to promote the idea that a new system would get him greater gameplay but I personally don't see any problem. To me it looks great and plays smooth. So, beside FPS, can the movement of his character be suffering from a pc slower than many of the other players online using the A64?
Until I have some sense of what the A64 can do for his game besides frame rate I'm gonna just keep my mouth shut about any upgrades.

I don't think his system is an issue for the lag. Maybe his settings are too high for his system, and what is his interent speed that might be causing it.

 

[bupkus]

We both have cable and atleast he doesn't suffer from "Speed Hack Detected" like I do.

 

[imported_Computer MAn]

Ok so the internet is not the problem. What settings is he running the game on

 

[bupkus]

Originally posted by: Computer MAn
Ok so the internet is not the problem. What settings is he running the game on

Other than the 1024x768 resolution, I don't recall. However, his frame rate is not the problem as it appears smooth, or atleast much smoother than my GeForce4 Ti4200 w/ 64MB @ 800x600.

 

[Zebo]

Sounds to me he's all whored out with spyware and malware sucking down his CPU and memory resources.

Start here:

http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm


I think it will fix problems> that system is plenty quick to play resolution he wants.

Also don't forget things like latest bios, video and motherboard drivers... Keep a tight clean ship

Third he would see most benefit by overclocking video to XT levels if possible.

 

[bupkus]

You know, that could be atleast part of the problem. I've been promising a rebuild for weeks as he still has pop-ups.
But even so, wouldn't that stuff effect his frame rates as well? I guess I'm asking the Flyover vs. Bot match question. Whichever the cause of the problem, can I actually describe the problem not as a frame rate problem, but as a cpu problem that you can't see but occurrs due to the cpu cycles that R too low due to whichever?

 

[imported_Computer MAn]

What does he mean by the servers not being right because that setup should run the game just fine.

 

[bupkus]

I don't know. As I watched over his shoulder it seemed to me he was just whining, but maybe I was missing something that was obvious to him.

 

[LostInSpace927]

As far as not seeing anything wrong with his set up, I can vouch for that. He has a pretty good set up.............but someone with...... say my other computer would be rendering the game faster. Its an A64 3200+, 1 gig Mushkin "Special 222", and a 9600 Pro. I know the video card is a little behind the time, but for me it works like a charm. I usually play Americas Army, FPS by all means.

You can't see anything wrong with his set up from just looking at it, you have to play it to fully understand it. These games depend as much on the processor as the video card. You may be playing at (for arguement sake) 60 Frames Per Second, and someone else Playing at 60 FPS. Now If he running my set up He will ultimately render the game to the monitor faster than your nephew. Thus seeing your nephew b4 your nephew sees him. I am not going to get into equating ping into this, that is whole other story. Hopefully you can see what my point of veiw is. I have played FPS on the A64 3200+, AXP-M 2600+ OC'ed to 2.6 Ghz and on a 1800+, all with the same video card. The A64 pretty much owns many other computers when it comes to rendering games. This is a fact of life, for gamers.

As far as overclocking the video card to an XT........ Its iffy that he will see any performance gain, as far as frames per seconds go. I have a buddy, that has a 9800 Pro, He oc'ed it to an XT. In game he saw 2 fps more. Is it really worth the effort and money for better cooling. IMHO....... NO!!!

On the subject of video cards, a clan mate of mine went out and got a 6800 GT and OC'ed it to Ultra speeds. I spent $170 on my dinky video card, at the time He spent $450 I think. In game he gets 15 fps more than I do.

So in real world performance, I would say have your nephew upgrade to A64 CPU (speed of his choice) He will notice the difference.

 

[bupkus]

I have played FPS on the A64 3200+, AXP-M 2600+ OC'ed to 2.6 Ghz and on a 1800+, all with the same video card. The A64 pretty much owns many other computers when it comes to rendering games. This is a fact of life, for gamers.

So if the frame rate was good for all three of those machines, advantage still goes to the A64? See now, this is the question I was asking.
Thanks.

 

[bupkus]

Ok, I'm going to suggest a new rig, afterall he's used this one to death and it sure can't hurt to upgrade although I don't think a video card upgrade would help for UT2004 as it's not Doom3 or HL2.

I'm also wondering if a UT2005 is in the works. My nephew didn't care for UT2003 but UT2004 became his favorite game, so I expect the next version to be interesting.

 

[LostInSpace927]

Well the frames per second where exactly the same for each CPU, but they did not vary much, but yes the advantage goes to the A64. It just flat out crunches all the info faster.
Your right about he video card, no need to upgrade it yet. Unless he wants to play Doom3 or Far Cry. BTW Americas Army is based on the UT2004 engine. Forgot to mention this earlier. This is why I am thinking OCing his card will not give him much of a gain.

 

[imported_Computer MAn]

I think the problem is eleswhere maybe he just wants a new rig so he is making stuff up. Try removing spyware and see if that helps before recommending a new rig

 

[LostInSpace927]

I agree, before dropping $1000 to $1500 for a new rig, I would look for the obvious first.
I highly doubt he is making this up. They are several reasons why his rig doesn't compare to a "Nice" set up like yours. Try this computer Man, find a buddy with a rig similar to the one his nephew is playing on, and play your game of choice on it. Go home and play the same on yours, you will see the difference. So I ask you, for your gaming rig, why did you choose the A64 over a similary configured AXP system?

 

[imported_Computer MAn]

I'm not saying he made it up I'm just throwing out some suggestions to try and figure out the problem. And I did have an XP 2800+ OCed to 2.2ghz and only upgraded because I wanted to try out an A64 and IMO the difference is not very noticeacle between the two except for in benchmarks but for someone else the difference might be bigger,