Which is faster?

[TenEgg]

1.6a @ 2.4 or 1600+ at 166 x 10.5?

 

[Duvie]

I say the 1.6@2.4ghz will be faster if coupled with DDR memory...definitely faster if you can get some pc3200 stuff to run 400mhz ddr....

The 2.4ghz with be at 150fsb or 600mhz total fsb...the performance will be better then a standard 400 or 533fsb....With the 150fsb and an i845e or d mobo you can use the 3:4 ratio and run 400mhz ddr and have memory bandwidth score of around 3000...better then any pc800 system and just below a pc1066 rdram....


The athlon will be only at 1743mhz or slightly better then 2100+...The athlon does not benefit tremendously from the overall system bus increase. At best we will say you are equal to a 2200+ which in reviews was just behind a 2.4ghz P4 with pc800 system.

Tha athlon will be only fractions behind in most things so if the cost is a main factor AMD looks good....Price/performance stuff!!!

I say at least with a p4 system now you will have a better likelihood you can upgrade chips up to or near 3ghz in the future. More and more stff is kicking in sse2 stuff all the time.



Are you buying a 1.6 that is aleady running at 2.4ghz??? Are you expecting this??? A lot of the may chips or newer were doing 2.4ghz at default and hitting 2.6ghz.

 

[TenEgg]

How high of a chance is there with a newer 1.6 oc'ed to 2.6?

I'm buying a comp in a month or so....don't have much money, so I'm looking at these 2 chips...just wondering about the performance difference since the 1.6 costs 2x more.

 

[Blain]

2.4GHz is faster than 1.74

Heck, who knows what kind of deals will be around in another month. I'd keep my options open until then.

 

[Duvie]

With ocing it is always tough to guage percentages...I would think 2.6 is a real reality with may or newer pack dates...2.4ghz is almost a given at this point...I and a handful got 1.6's around same point and many of us are all running 2.6 or greater...I amsure there are many who didn't get 2.6ghz, but then factor in most ppl (ie like 95perecent of the pucblic) do not oc at all...And there lies the difficulty in predicting likeliness of a given speed....

I like the intel option for 5 reasons...

1) no real heat concerns as chip will throttle and save itself...
2) less likely to damage core while putting on a heatsink...this is a real problem if you look on the boards...may wish someone experienced do this if you go amd route...
3) Intel chipset are better IMO then the buggy Via chipsets.
4) Most intel mobos have agp/pci locks to take that out of the ocing equation...
5)Higher likelihood that most i845e or newer chipsets will support the latest chips up to 3.06ghz...so you have room to expand inthe future...some amd mobos don't seem to support tbred as well as some may not support the 333mhz fsb or newer rev b tbreds...


If money is big option go with the amd as you can save alot....

 

[Duvie]

Where are you buying this at??? I did a search on pricewatch and northwoods 512kb 1.6as are higher then it would cost to get a 1.8a northwood....Make sure you are looking at a northwood and not the socket 478 1.6 willamette chip with 256kb cache. It is a .18micron chip and will not oc well at all...Beware...

 

[Blain]

It looks like the biggest Intel "bang for the buck" is the 2.4 (533) Northwood for $192.50 from Google Gear.

I remember, back in the day, being happy that I got my new P3-450 for $258 shipped!

 

[TenEgg]

I like intel better as well....I'm afraid I might damage/fry the amd chips...

I live in vancouver, canada...(currency sux and lots of tax)...googlegear ships to canada, but the shipping costs makes it almost the same as buying here.

I don't think I can get a 1.6a anymore...1.8a is at 244 CDN and 2.0a is at 255 CDN...the price on the 2.0a looks good to me. I saw a guy in another thread has a 1.8a@2.8, how high can the 2.0a go?

Also, I heard the 'c' steppings are better oc'ers, what is the lowest 'c' stepping p4? I might want to get that since I still have some time before I buy.

Thanks for answering my questions.