best processor?

[Electron]

Some interesting points.

Put an Intel processor on a Via (or any other 3rd party) chipset and you have the same stability (or lack thereof) as an AMD processor on a Via chipset. GLC

The PIII 600mhz i upgraded to and have no stability problems with is on an Abit Via chipset board.

Are the processors the real issue in stability or is it the other hardware? Respectfully, Demosthenes

Apart from case, motherboard and CPU i used everything out of the old box, including HDD, FDD, Graphics card, modem etc.

So for me the stability came from the Intel chip.

[Terrorbyte]

The answer is simple and can not be disputed, AMD XP 1500 - 1800.
there are no others worth a mention.
P4's really suck.

[HAL9000]

That's all a matter of personal opinion now isn't it. You can give me your reasons as to why AMD is so much better, but can only spew out that P4 sucks. To me, AMD sucks. Well, I wouldn't actually go that far, I just prefer Intel for my own reasons. We can all do the same and have a back and forth flame war, but that would be somewhat pointless as they are both a quality product from a failure, or lack of failure point of view. They are both really frickin' fast, they both have their strong points and their weak points, be realistic, if AMD was strong points only, there would be no Intel and if you really think you would get a cheap AMD processor without Intel around, it must be a nice fantasy world to live in

[wrelax]

i agree with terrorbyte
As for HAL dissin AMD

To me, AMD sucks.

[Toaster]

Yet another CPU flamefest!

Well, You folks know where I stand: Intel or RISC

Benchmarks are essentially worthless as they can be "edged" to a particular CPU.
Worse yet, benchmarks are not "real" in that they have little bearing on "real" applications.
So which is best?
If you buy an Intel, get a system board with the Intel chipset, period.
If you buy an AMD variant, cross your fingers and hope for the best.

AMD loves the "approved this and that" game. Remember this when you consider building an AMD.
Now, read the forums and count the number of posts dealing with AMD class systems.
Many with installation probs and stability issues.
As far as the P4, ignore the 423 pin CPU and go for the later version.
RAMBUS may be dying but with the P4 it shows a 25% speed increase over SDRAM and a 20% increase over DDR. DDR based system utilized the VIA chipset and have problems with stability.

As system speeds exceed 1ghz, stability becomes an issue. If you buy the cheapest they got you will have no end in goofy problems.


It is my personal hypothosis that VIA has far too many problems to be considered under any circumstance. The AMD chipsets have thier problems as well.
The biggest problem that I see is that the CPUs (AMD) are being built in faster and faster types and no one is taking the time to build a decent chipset/system board. They add options but they won't refine existing chipsets.
On top of this, add the "4 in 1" driver suite offered by VIA. VIA chose to update/patch the drivers rather then the chipset.
An Intel chipset and an AMD CPU? Never I'd think but even I might consider something akin this.
With a poor chipset, the fastest CPU regardless of make can only provide the fastest BSODs.

So...if the P4 were only available with a VIA chipset, I would NOT recommend it.
However, the P4 has both VIA and Intel chipsets. My opinion is simple, if Intel, use the Intel chipset. If not an Intel CPU, avoid via if possible.
Its not that i'm biased toward Intel but rather disgusted with VIA.
Its not that i'm biased toward Intel but rather disgusted with AMD for playing the "approved this and that" to sway folks from thinking thier CPUs are "unfinnished" and "unrefined".
AMD "could" be a decent CPU were they to refine it and its associated chipsets.
AMD nor Intel can stay the course of the battle lines they both have drawn in the sand. However, Intel is in a FAR better posistion to "cast the last stone" due to thier emmense monitary reserves.
Don't give me the "underdog" line where AMD is taking on "chipzilla". This is a bullsheet line if I ever heard one. Remember the evil empire of Micky$oft whoom you all swore allegience to.

[DrZaius]

I don't have much to add to this weeks Intel vs. AMD fest, just to reiterate my previous points which Xayd, Toaster, and glc have also made: It's not the processor that determines stability, it's the motherboard and chipset. Give me any processor on a VIA board and it will crash.

[lpc300]

Hi all,

Here's an interesting thought:

Since M$, mostly, stands alone in the software market, they don't have to push themselves to new heights. But with the competition between Intel and AMD, BOTH companies have been pushing newer and more superior products. We've gone from just cracking 1 ghz to 2 ghz in under a year. Might that have happened if we only had Intel? I don't know, but I think the competition has helped both companies...and all of us.

Although I am an 'AMD fan' I wouldn't throw a P4 out the window. I think both processor have their strong points, and neither 'suck'.

Anyway, as Hal has said many times, once you're over 1.5 ghz, that's plenty fast.

[HAL9000]

You can almost guarantee that if either AMD or Intel stood alone without any competition, you wouldn't own half the system that you do today. Marketing would govern pricing and the release of a new processor.

[glc]

You know, we had a really good, intelligent discussion going on here till someone said that "*** Sucks". ENOUGH!

If that's all you have to say about it, we don't want to hear it, you know where the door is. Take that childish type of comment somewhere else, we are above that here. You are more than welcome to state exactly WHY you think that something is deficient, but a flippant comment such as that without justification is worthless.

[Nelreem]

the only problem with the P4 is that it puts out instructions slightly slower then the P3. if someone would do a benchmark showing a p3 oced to 1.4(if you can) and a p4 1.4, you would see that they would be equal due to pipeline effects made in the p4. pentium 4 is a good processor, i just think that it is too expensive to be worth it.

[Nelreem]

btw, those are the reasons i dont like the p4, despite it sucks...

[lpc300]

You know, we had a really good, intelligent discussion going on here till someone said that "*** Sucks". ENOUGH!

RIGHT ON, glc. If you can't discuss things intelligently, don't discuss them at all.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Stability. Stability. Stability. Everybody assumes stability is primarily a hardware issue.This processor or that chipset are more stable than that processor or chipset. I have 11 computers, 4 at home and 7 at my office. Six are intel and five are AMD. Nine of my computers are rock solid. Two of my computers (one intel and the other AMD) have lockup problems and by anybody's standards would be considered unstable. The AMD uses a much maligned VIA chipset and the Intel uses the vaunted BX chipset. The reason the two computers are unstable has nothing to do with hardware. Software is the culprit. Both of the "unstable" computers run the same combination of software packages--time/billing and accounting--on the same OS (Win98). Both packages work wonderfully well if left alone. Until I find something better, both are necessary to the functioning of my business. Never underestimate the power of a lazy or time pressed software engineer to screw up somebody else's application.

My point is that sometimes we worry too much about hardware and not enough about the software we are running. As to games being unstable, remember that a lot of games are maximized for performance on a very narrow range of hardware choices not because the designers are bad people, but because they don't have the kind of time or financing needed to test every possible hardware/software combination. Intel/AMD is sort of like Chevy/Ford. There is an endless debate between Chevy fans and Ford followers. The truth is both make fine cars that, if used properly, will get people from here to there.

CH

[Bobo23]

My friend built an AMD computer (AMD 1.3 ghz TBird) and it had a good heatsinkfan and everything. The instant he turned it on the cpu started overheating. His Chip and Motherboard were both fried. He wasn't even overclocking. Now he has a 1.7ghz P4 and has had no trouble with it.

I guess my point is that, even though I have never built one, I have enough information to show that AMD processors are not worth the money. Sure they are cheaper, but you run a huge risk of overheating. Its something about their architecture or something. Also, I have been using Intel processor's all my life and have never had a processor problem (though I did have a dud HDD once).

Now I'm building a P4 1.5ghz w/ Intel D850GB mobo. Its the most stable thing you can buy and the chip cost me $145 and the mobo cost me $152. Its not that much more than the AMD. Also, the heatsinkfan that came with it plugs into the motherboard. The motherboard has a build in heat detection system/thermometer which scales the fan use to keep temperature down. It only uses 70% when temp is between 31 and 46 degrees, above that it uses full. It also comes with a CD program that monitors the temperature and alerts you if it gets above 46 degrees. It is very useful and I don't think my processor will EVER overheat. BTW I think the program also shuts down the computer if it gets over like 55 degrees. (I am not sure about this since my processor has never gotten that hot!!)




Ben

Trying your best means nothing!!!!

[HAL9000]

Nelreem, GLC already posted a comment about "it sucks" so lets leave it to die. I personally use Intel, but don't take your comment as an insult, but others might and the comment "you suck" will soon follow resulting in closure of the thread and action towards those involved if necessary.

As for not being worth it, biases aside, look at an AMD XP 1900 and a P4 1900Mhz. Although the XP actually runs at 1.6Ghz, it performs reasonably to the tune of a P4 1.9Ghz,or slightly better. Now remember that I said all bias aside as there are benchmarks out there biased toward Intel as well that show a 1.7 performing better than the 1900+, so we will go with the AMD claim of 1900+ (I believe this to be reasonably fair.

XP 1900+ = $265

P4 1900 = $275

$10 is a huge difference for processors that perform equally? Don't go into AMD beats at this and that because it's just a flame war that comes back with Intel beats AMD at these and those. But really, $10????? If somebody walked into a computer store and looked at identically equipped AMD and P4 systems and saw that the Intel was $1299, but the AMD was $1289, it becomes a no contest for him/her?

[Nelreem]

i said that the pentium 4 is a good processor, it just comes out with instructions slower than comparable processor. that is why a 1.6 ghz athlon can perform as well as a 1.9 pentium

[wrelax]

AMD= King of overclocking

You know you act like if i get a 1900+ amd i'll keep it at that? lolzz.... i mean i don't even have to o'c and it'll still be better than a shanty P4 2ghz. However, you overclock that to i'd say 1.8 ghz (from 1.6) atleast, and now ur talking SUPER FAST. Killz p4 anyday and if u object then ur wrong.

Sorry for how i came out but i got sick of reading all these intel biased statements u people wrote also thinking like stock speeds is what amd people use. I'll tell it how it is, like it or not.

AMD RULES

[Nelreem]

uh oh, sounds like an AMD vs. Intel war. well, pcmech has a whole bunch of good articles on cpus, and so does toms hardware

[HAL9000]

And Intel can't overclock? 1.5Ghz goes to 2Ghz without even trying. Suffice to say, at 1.5Ghz+, they're all frickin' fast.

[Nelreem]

click here to see about the calculations i told you about

[wrelax]

great thats 400+ mhz of worthless intelness.

Anywho, i agree anything above 1.5 ghz is friggin fast. So i will end it here about amd vs intel. Choose what u want, i choose amd u choose intel, we're both damn fast.

CYA

[Bobo23]

Wow, nobody seems to be responding to what I said.

I agree with HAL about the fact that once you pass the 1 GHz mark the actual speed is irrelevant. You compare a AMD XP 1900+ with a 1.9 GHz P4 and you may get some difference in the benchmarks. But try actually using the two CPU's. You will clearly see that if you hadn't installed the processor yourself, you wouldn't know which was in there. The difference is not even close to noticable.

I therefore submit that past the 1 GHz mark speed is irrelevant and we must turn to other values to determine the better processor. Some of these values are:

Price
Stability (crashing, slowdowns, etc.)
Physicality (overheating is the main issue for this one)

If anyone has any more of these values to add please tell me.

Price:
As HAL9000 pointed out, there is only a $10 difference between the two processors I mentioned above...too insignificant an amount to argue on. Price is a less significant value since most people are willing to pay more if it gets them a better product.

Stability:
I submit that an Intel processor will be more stable than a comparable AMD. The fact is that Intel processor's don't crash as much. Its been tested just like the speed benchmarks. From my personal experience with Intel processors, I have had 0 problems with the processors (my problems were with WINDOWS!!!!! I will start a post about how bad all windows OS's are later)

Physicality:
Everyone knows from personal experience and from reviews that AMD processors run at a higher temperature. Even with a good heatsink and fan my friends homebuilt AMD Tbird computer fried its processor and motherboard due to overheating. I have never heard anyone tell me that their Pentium overheated, and if one did, I'm sure it was because they didn't have a good heatsinkfan or none at all.

Those are the values and Intel stands tall in all of them. For those of you who want to bash me and say the Intel can't overclock...go ahead, thats only useful for the below 1 GHz range. As I said above and countless people before me have said, above 1 GHz processor clock speed becomes irrelevant and arbitrary.

Thoughts, comments, anger, please give me these.

HOBOMAN

[Nelreem]

and for the record: Hal(the computer, not hal9000), in 2001 a space oddesey, probably used a cyrix, cuz he probably used a via chipset, cuz he went crazy

[Nelreem]

whoa, that last post ended up strange
i meant to say that he went crazy because he used a Via chipset, just like my computer

[wrelax]

BOBO, ur a good guy and all, ur point is good.

however, i wouldn't say anything above 1ghz is all the same. i'd say around 1.4 and above. Anyways i get ur point.

[Bobo23]

wrelax

maybe 1 ghz is a little low. i bought a 1.5 ghz p4 and its going to be unnoticably slower than a 2 ghz.

I seem to be reiterating the point everyone has been trying to make. Everyone look at my above most and see some of the other factors that affect processor quality since speed is no longer the main issue.

[HAL9000]

I use 1.5Ghz as a reference only because I have recently had now an Intel 1.6Ghz and an AMD XP 1600+ on my bench at the same time and have challenged customers to tell me which processor is which without checking the system properties. So far, out of 15 people, 5 have chosen correctly and statistically, this is low as it should come out at about 50/50. If it comes out that they can correctly identify them more than 50% of the time consitently, then there is something to be said for one being significantly stronger.

If the HAL9000 were a Cyrix, even with the chill of outer space, he would have overheated long before going crazy

[Toaster]

So some folks think AMD are king of overclocking? Those are fight'n words!
Take a peek into a few years back and you'll find Intel put overclocking on the map, anyone who disputes that is ill informed.
Lets see and AMD best its rated (marked) speed by 100%, Intel can.
Intel CPUs are rated in this fashion:
The CPU speed in mhz is the suggested starting point only used for refrence.


Unused instructions on the Intel P4?
Gimme a break, there are literally tens even hundreds of unused instructions dependant on the program/app used. All those things you say are so bad for Intel but AMD does the same thing and then copies the X86 instruction set?
Remember, the following are Intel intellectual property and users of the copyrights pay a royalty:
1. The X86 (also called CISC) instruction set.
2. The PCI bus
3 The AGP bus
4 The ATX formfactor
5. The connectors/wiring used in the ATX power supply. (system board 20 pin connector)
6. The ISA bus. (actually an IBM unlicensable bus. AKA: freeware)

C'mon AMD, make something with your own with your own 2 hands and call it yours.
Arn't ya big enough to play with the big boys yet?
Oh...and the SMP compliant AMD....still vapor ware?
If they "go it alone" in the SMP field, throw away your software. If they stick to standards, thank Intel with appropriate royalties.
Monkey see, Monkey do. See Monkey do AMD.

There are a number of P4 instructions that are not used with "micky$oft" for the simple reason its too costly for Micky$oft to implememnt them. Why should they implement them, your going to buy it anyhow....right?

Intel is marketing the 64bit CPU....guess what....now AMD wants to play too.
So....AMD is going to RUSH out thier next generation CPU. You folks will buy it even if its problematic.
Simple math....misplaced loyalties.



Computer hobbiest:
Stability is EVERYTHING. It must be 100% or I do something else.
If you have random lock-ups with "everything", maybe you need a new .....

Many of us here in the forums have no such problems.
My lowly quad P-Pro system had its 2nd birthday without a restart or lock-up. Thats 2 years. Granted, it never saw a Micky$oft product in its life.
That should clarify a few things. BTW, this quad P-Pro system is running at 266mhz/ea. up from 200mhz. Stability? Sure, if not, its not worth the trouble or my time.
Still, my eyes have swayed from Intel to the 64bit world. Now, its Alphas and MIPS oh my! Then again, these system run flawlessly and you AMD folks wouldn't want that...would ya?

[HAL9000]

OK, now you guys have done it, you woke Toaster up TWICE in the same thread!

[whr2206]

man I used to be able to understand this thread whew this is above me...Ill just sit back and enjoy this..and try to make sense of this...how do you guys figure this stuff out??