Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Originally posted by: crimson117
RussianSensation: Your post just helped me notice something... all that those benchmarks show is that AMD isn't properly naming their chips. When you compare a XP 3200+ to a Pentium 3.2 ghz, you're trusting the marketing dept at AMD. But people tend to trust their wallets once they get to the store. The Pentium costs almost 50% more ($280 pentium vs $200 athlon)!!! Whenever price is a factor, and it almost always is, processors should be compared based on their prices. How does a $100 AMD cpu fare against a $100 Intel cpu? $200? $300? $400? If you ignore price, you could say a BMW is better than Honda because the BMW is faster and drives better. But obviously you can't disregard price like that when you're out shopping for a car!
Reviewers should compare processors with a common price, not a common marketing name!
First of all $280 P4 CPU vs. $200 Athlon is only 40% so your rounding might be off here
As I learned in GW Bush's "fuzzy math" class, I always round to the nearest 50.
Read this: "Price Comparison on Newegg:
XP-M 2500+ OEM @$95 need $10 for a cooler => total $105 at least (you might need a better cooler)
i forgot they lock the multipliers of the non mobile, but for $80 you can get a retail 2500+ shipped at newegg. So my argument would have been better before AMD locked the multiplier
. You only need to OC a barton-m to 2.12 ghz (+300mhz) to equal a p4 2.8 in most applications
Overclocker's motherboard - Abit NF7-S Retail@102 (includes shipping)
Prices vary, and the NF7-S is the top of the line OC mobo; you could use most nforce2 boards and get a decent OC. The NF7 is better at wild overclocks like to 2.5-2.7 ghz, but most boards could handle 2.1 or 2.2 no sweat. 2nd best OC board, Shuttle AN35 Ultra is $65 shipped at newegg
Total: $207
P4 2.8C Retail @ $183
Overclocker's motherboard with same features Abit IS7 Retail@96 (includes shipping)
Total: $279
Price Difference: $72."
...or $100, or $50, depending on your mobo and whatever deal is going on. I guess it does all come down for what you want and how big your wallet is. $100 isn't a huge deal to me, especially since I make my computers last long; the difference over 2 years is very small, maybe $3 a month. But you can't discount the thrift factor. It feels good to save $100
Like I said $72 dollars or $100 for that matter is 1 day of work. When for someone who does encoding, rendering, SETI@Home, audio conversion and so on this justifies the 10-40% speed increases in those areas.
If we're going by what kind of effort it takes to earn $100, then it varie greatly from person to person. ...and my SFF Digital Audio Workstation (on my wishlist) includes a P4, not an athlon
I like your BMW/Honda analogy but the fact of the matter is spending $70-100 extra on a cpu does not mean selling off you soul, as opposed to the price hike between a 3 series bmw and a honda civic or whatever that might be. Of course a person who can afford a BMW will never consider a Honda (except NSX, S2000, or an Acura variety). Now how many people truly cannot afford to buy a P4?
I'm a workin stiff, and I do okay, so $100 isn't a huge deal. But it means several lawns mowed or several weeks allowance to a kid. It also means two brand new games, or a DVD-burner, or some cold cathode lights. If your budget is unlimited, of course buy the best, but most people would rather be thrifty, and could think of a better way to spend $100.
If you read my opinion carefully I did say AMD is a better price/performance ratio processor, but what I do not agree here is that everyone says it is a better CPU. In terms of speed it is not better. Overall if you feel like $100 is a lot to you then sure it is better.
that's the key to the whole argument. if $100 is big, go AMD. If it's not, and you don't care whether or not you feel thrifty, go Intel.
Then explain to me why people on these forums spend $400 for a Radeon 9800xt vs. $200 for 9800Pro and buy PC4000 ram vs. 2-2-2-5 PC3200 ram to get a measly 10-15% speed increase?
Cause it's a hobby for some
But you don't need PC4000 ram to get a mild overclock, only to get the most extreme watercooled psycho overclock. PC3200 or PC3500 will do just fine
Also the only way to overclock an XP seems to include having nothing less than an SLK style cooler which with the fan together cost ~$40.
My final opinion: - 3 years ago AMD XP was better, that is why I bought Athlon 1600+
- 2 years ago JIUHB XP 1700+ was better
- then 1 year ago P4C was better than is why I bought 2.6C
- now A64 is the best choice if you are willing to spend $200+ which I definately AM since I upgrade
my CPU only once in 3 years.
- But if you are going to spend Below $200 the choice is less clearcut depending on your usage.
If you just care for games, XP is fine, but for everything else it might be too slow for some.
Then the price difference of $72-100 is justifiable.
I guess to answer your remarK I am going to say that the best processor on the market depends on what your usage is. For someone in the graphic design industry there is no substitute for an Apple regardless of price. Similarly someone who benefits greatly from HT on a P4 will not find a substitute with AXP. Otherwise I can justify buying an XP.
Yeah, it really does depend, and I guess most folk just like the idea that will a little hard work (oc'ing), you can be super thrifty without sacrificing performance, and you can be proud of it. Otherwise, the cheapest thing to do would be to buy a P4 Dell, an have someone else build it for you.
Facebook
Twitter