Will AMD surpass Intel's processor speeds?

[Zincq]

I'm actually looking to build a new computer, either Athlon based or Pentium based. I've read on AT about AMD bumping up their thoroughbred core to revision B, and calling this processor 2600/2400+. From the articles, the 2600/2400+ have reached up to ~2.4 GHz, whilst the P4s are already trying to break the 3.0 GHz mark. I have a feeling that AMD is lagging, and I'm weary to invest in a computer that will be quickly outdated a month after it's built. I've read that the Athlon's new core will be shipping sometime in september. And so, would it be wise to wait a while longer for new chips to emerge and prices to fall? Or is the wait pointless, since the performance increase wouldn't be very extroidinary anyway?

So I'm asking for advice one my next computer. All I need to know is what type of chip to select, and what type of motherboard to go along with. I'm looking for something above or near a 2.0 GHz, and overclocking is an option; I would just need to learn how to do it. Thanks ya'll.

 

[Duvie]

I would wait for the 2800+ or 2700+ which may have the new 166fsb...This chip however will still have 256kb of l2 cache and not be a huge improvement alone over 133fsb tbred chips. These chips when they arrive likely in late october early november will still be behind current p4 flagship chip as intel should be releasing the 3.06ghz p4 end of Oct.

Hammer, Amd's exciting new architecture chip has been now officially delayed until Q2 2003 from Q1 2003...this is the real one to wait for...

Barton, Amds major core revision for the tbred which should include 512kb of l2 cache, 166fsb, and maybe some additional sse and/or sse2 coding, has also been delayed until Q2 2003.

Amd is likley gong to continue to ramp these tbred b chips which are appearing to oc better now and have some headroom to grow. If 2.4ghz is eality with these tbred b chips then it should allow amd to hit 3000+ level in pr rating.

 

[ai42]

Well I think it is apparent that AMD will not win the Mhz battle. By AMDs scaling system they are admitting to it. However it dosen't mean that their scaling system isn't justified, as a 2000+ compares pretty closely with a P4 2Ghz. It is just that the AMD chips do more per clock, and Intel's do less.

Honestly contrary to the massive amount of AMD fanboys here I think P4 is the way to go. When you can buy a 1.8A for around $160 and overclock fairly easily to 3Ghz without supercooling, or spend $150 for a 2200XP and perhaps hit 2.4 (3100XP by their rating system), and spend the $40 or so for a high end heatsync etc. And at least at the IDF recently we have seen the current P4 core hit 4.7 (I assume under extreme conditions, and high end cooling)

BTW I did check overclockers database and while I guess I am being a bit overly optimistic the clock speeds are possible.

If your willing to wait... Yes the Hammer is something to wait for, Barton is something to be seen as well. But in both cases you will be waitting until sometime next year. On the Intel side Prescott will be something to watch out for as well.

 

[Goi]

Agreed...AMD has lost the Megahertz race a long time ago, ever since they won the race to 1GHz. The Intel P4s scaled and scaled, and the Athlons had no chance to catch up. They also lost the performance crown one Intel reached 2GHz and gained the 533MHz FSB with 512KB L2 cache. In most cases the P4 Northwoods outperform similarly rated Athlon XPs. AMD still has the price/performance title though, but judging by the way things are going, I don't see AMD surpassing Intel processor speed-wise in the next 2-3 years, even with the upcoming Hammers. Performance is another matter though.

 

[DeRusto]

Originally posted by: ai42
Well I think it is apparent that AMD will not win the Mhz battle. By AMDs scaling system they are admitting to it. However it dosen't mean that their scaling system isn't justified, as a 2000+ compares pretty closely with a P4 2Ghz. It is just that the AMD chips do more per clock, and Intel's do less.

Honestly contrary to the massive amount of AMD fanboys here I think P4 is the way to go. When you can buy a 1.8A for around $160 and overclock fairly easily to 3Ghz without supercooling, or spend $150 for a 2200XP and perhaps hit 2.4 (3100XP by their rating system), and spend the $40 or so for a high end heatsync etc. And at least at the IDF recently we have seen the current P4 core hit 4.7 (I assume under extreme conditions, and high end cooling)

If your willing to wait... Yes the Hammer is something to wait for, Barton is something to be seen as well. But in both cases you will be waitting until sometime next year.

I don't know about a 1.8A hitting 3ghz..that just seems like a bit much to me.. of course, I'm not a p4 overclocker, so I wouldn't really be one to know

 

[Dulanic]

They have caught up quite a bit with the new T-Bred tho... HardOCP got a 2400+ (2.0Ghz) up to 2.4Ghz with air cooling... I think AMD could probably release a 3000+ if they wanted relatively soon... the new revision of the cores helped alot and gave them quite a jump in a speed. And really there is no reason for AMD to catch up to Intel in clock speeds... you cant really compare AMD and Intel Mhz wise... their different cores... you need to compare on performance. AMD isnt striving to pass Intel Mhz wise... their trying to do it with performance... Mhz is a marketing tool.... performance is what counts. And Intel does have that crown right now... but AMD still holds the Price/Performance.... Nothing beats my 1600+ (1.4Ghz) that costs $55 and runs at 1.8Ghz

 

[Dulanic]

Originally posted by: DeRusto

Originally posted by: ai42
Well I think it is apparent that AMD will not win the Mhz battle. By AMDs scaling system they are admitting to it. However it dosen't mean that their scaling system isn't justified, as a 2000+ compares pretty closely with a P4 2Ghz. It is just that the AMD chips do more per clock, and Intel's do less.

Honestly contrary to the massive amount of AMD fanboys here I think P4 is the way to go. When you can buy a 1.8A for around $160 and overclock fairly easily to 3Ghz without supercooling, or spend $150 for a 2200XP and perhaps hit 2.4 (3100XP by their rating system), and spend the $40 or so for a high end heatsync etc. And at least at the IDF recently we have seen the current P4 core hit 4.7 (I assume under extreme conditions, and high end cooling)

If your willing to wait... Yes the Hammer is something to wait for, Barton is something to be seen as well. But in both cases you will be waitting until sometime next year.

I don't know about a 1.8A hitting 3ghz..that just seems like a bit much to me.. of course, I'm not a p4 overclocker, so I wouldn't really be one to know

And a 2200+ will never hit 2.4Ghz... not a chance... until they switch to the Rev. B core.... however the 2400+ will.

 

[imgod2u]

Well, invariably any machine you put together now will be outdated in months. It's just how technology works and you really can't do anything about it. Unless of course, you put together a watercooling kit and overclock to 3.something GHz, it won't be the best of the best for very long.

 

[Gunnar]

Question is does it matter? The megahertz (or gigahertz) thing is blown way out of proportion, and no matter how fast intel or AMD ramp their chips, it still doesnt address the major problems associated with the architecture itself, its still going to be tied at the balls by the x86 instruction set.

This is why you often see other architectures cleaning up on the Pentium at speeds that are miles below. Even a measly 1Ghz UltraSPARC III (which has never been know to be a high flyer) manages to compete with a Pentium IV. If your talking pure performance, would you choose a Xeon over a PA-RISC running at 800Mhz (which issues something like 16 instructions out of order)? Even more stunningly, how is the PowerPC able to even compete with the x86 architectures when its strangled with lower speeds and memory bandwidth (and believe me, Apple competes). Essentially, x86 is the garbage that should have been taken out long ago.

Just imagine if the other architectures were to catch up? None of the other architectures even have DDR support natively.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

You just can't match pure brute force. Intel is ramping their clockspeeds up so high, that you can't really catch up.

 

[Vehementi]

IMHO, AMD doesn't really need to. What AMD does with it's clock cycles blows Intel out of the water...

Intel may just go for brute force - as much MHz as possible - but AMD's chips are alot smarter. The Quantispeed architecture is just amazing!

I'll still be a loyal AMD fan, whatever happens...

 

[BD231]

Well considering Intel said that their 3ghz processors would need new motherboards I think you'll hit a road block with pretty much anything you buy at this point.

I'd just make sure you got a very up to date motherboard and a new revision T-Bred of your choice (I noticed while running a P4 at 2.4ghz that my Athlon XP system did better on certain games than the P4 did, that's why I'd just stick with the T-Bred, both the processors put out loads of heat). Once you get into those really high end speeds, a simple step up in mhz that costs you 100+ bucks over something that is barely slower is really just a waste of money (AND time if you decide to wait for the 2800+). Bottom line, you need to look at what you NEED the computer to do for you, then get something that gets the job done.

 

[BD231]

Originally posted by: Vehementi
IMHO, AMD doesn't really need to. What AMD does with it's clock cycles blows Intel out of the water...

Intel may just go for brute force - as much MHz as possible - but AMD's chips are alot smarter. The Quantispeed architecture is just amazing!

I'll still be a loyal AMD fan, whatever happens...

Eh Hem....., around these parts we call that type of person a fanboy.

 

[Duvie]

I agree, besides the one anamoly at amdmb.com no one hit 2.4ghz with a 2200+ Tbred (1800mhz actual). The rev b chips which still are yet present eventhough they launched nearly 3-4 weeks ago, may hit though speeds...

The intel p4 should basically keep the lead or pull away slightly until the hammer comes out. The hammer should regain the title but now with the delay the possibility of having the PV (prescott) of 3.333ghz or greater competing directly with the hammer is more of a reality. Originally INtel looked to be 4 months behind hammer with this. The prescott will possibly offer 1mb l2 cache, 666mhz fsb, HT enabled (though unsure of what advantage this will do), .09 micron process...not to mention the delay of the hammer has made it very possible the system could be coupled with a duall ddr chipset to help fuel the p4 and its growing bandwidth (with the raise to 666fsb that is).

Before it was a slam dunk hammer release, and now it may be very tight...all speculation though since the hammer is so revolutionary no one really knows all its advantages.

 

[dowxp]

Originally posted by: BD231

Originally posted by: Vehementi IMHO, AMD doesn't really need to. What AMD does with it's clock cycles blows Intel out of the water... Intel may just go for brute force - as much MHz as possible - but AMD's chips are alot smarter. The Quantispeed architecture is just amazing! I'll still be a loyal AMD fan, whatever happens...

Eh Hem....., around these parts we call that type of person a fanboy.

yepyep. Quantispeed architecture BLOWS me too

 

[corkyg]

And unless they start making a profit, they are not going to make much of anything down the road.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: corky-g
And unless they start making a profit, they are not going to make much of anything down the road.

 

[flood]

already done

 

[Duvie]

With a recent rash of doctored photos...i will believe that when I see it...However if AMD was able to reach those speeds already it would sure make sense that they would milk the higher end tbreds until they actually need this much...

I doubt the picture...I doubt the pr rating...talk is the hammer would have a lower ipc closer to that of the p4 so mhz spread as that seen of the athlons to p4 northwoods wont be that great...

 

[limsandy]

Originally posted by: flood
already done

OMG....... I want one !!!

 

[flood]

their page does say: "[ H ] - Home of the real 3.3GHz CPU. (wink wink)"

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: flood
already done

Don't worry, Intel has no fear of that.

http://home.planetinternet.be/~bbaeyen2/8gig.jpg

Of course, both images are fake and were initially posted on the Aces forum in jest. The link to the hammer pic on the author's website is:

http://home.planetinternet.be/~bbaeyen2/hammer/

 

[Zincq]

This has been a very interesting discussion to read. Well, the reason for my getting a new computer, is that I'm giving my current setup to my sister. Now, if I wait for the 2800+ to come out, sometime is Q2 2003 (I believe), that's a long wait for me to be without a computer. I understand that no matter what kind of computer I build, it's going to be outdated. I'd just like a setup that will last me for the next 2-3 years. I'm curious to know how effective overclocking is, because by all means I like to keep this project low-cost. How high can I overclock say, a 1.4-1.6 Athlon chip to? I noticed that Duvie had a 1.6 Ghz @ 2.73 Ghz. Very impressive. Perhaps then, I'd like to pursue the route of overclocking, just to get a little more juice out of my computer for a bit less money. So Duvie, what kind of motherboard and chip are you using there? And other setups too... if anyone has had a successful attempt, please do share.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: corky-g
And unless they start making a profit, they are not going to make much of anything down the road.

Hmm, I don't seem to remember that Intel's making a profit lately either. And AMD has been around for 40 years IIRC and they are doing way better vs Intel in the last few years than ever before. I don't think they are going anywhere soon.

 

[CrazySaint]

Originally posted by: Zincq
This has been a very interesting discussion to read. Well, the reason for my getting a new computer, is that I'm giving my current setup to my sister. Now, if I wait for the 2800+ to come out, sometime is Q2 2003 (I believe), that's a long wait for me to be without a computer. I understand that no matter what kind of computer I build, it's going to be outdated. I'd just like a setup that will last me for the next 2-3 years. I'm curious to know how effective overclocking is, because by all means I like to keep this project low-cost. How high can I overclock say, a 1.4-1.6 Athlon chip to? I noticed that Duvie had a 1.6 Ghz @ 2.73 Ghz. Very impressive. Perhaps then, I'd like to pursue the route of overclocking, just to get a little more juice out of my computer for a bit less money. So Duvie, what kind of motherboard and chip are you using there? And other setups too... if anyone has had a successful attempt, please do share.

1.4GHz Athlons (1600+) typically OC to the 1.8GHz (2200+) range. P4 1.8As (which are now cheaper and OC higher than 1.6As) typically OC to the 2.5-2.7GHz. 1.8As cost about $100 more than 1600+s and also require higher quality (more expensive) RAM for a max OC. For an Athlon OC'd to around 1.8GHz, just about any PC2700 RAM will do, since all you need is about 170 or so FSB. A max OC on a P4, however, will require at least Corsair XMS PC2700, with PC3000 or PC3200C2 being recommended. However, a 1.8A OC'd to 2.6GHz will whoop ass on an 1600+ OC'd to 1.8GHz. You can get a good OC motherboard for either chip for about $100, although you could certainly spend considerably more or less (well, you could spend less for an AMD board, anyway) that.