Apples to oranges.

[Blakhart]

Just kinda think it interesting that with the same memory and vid card the results would be so different;
XP2500/NForce2 memtest score 1239
P4 3.3/Gigglebyte memtest score 2520
XP2500 3dmark 15000
P4 3.3 3dmark 17000
The sandra results were embarassing to the amd.
I know the comparison shouldn't be made but with the same mem and vid card, you figure it would be closer match. Odd that the amd mobo would not fsb oc at all, but the giggle will oc to 3.5, wich is 240 fsb. I also conclude that the Intel way of dual channel ddr is vastly different (and superior) from AMD's interpretation. Don't mind me, it's my first new Intel system, and I am well pleased.

[lil Jimmie]

no comment

[Panama Red]

What would Hal say? Probably something like, "Welcome back from the dark side"!!

[lil Jimmie]

Originally posted by Panama Red What would Hal say? Probably something like, "Welcome back from the dark side"!!

Or told ya, told ya, told ya soooo

[bailey]

or, you could say also that the proof is in the pudding.

its something to do in the way code is handeled I think

[Kubie]

Blakhart,

Yep, those P4s really do the job.
Good job!

Carl

[TwoRails]

Congrats, Blakhart, on the new system! Looks like a nice hotrod

Tworails

PS: You won't get any complaints unless it was the other way around: comparing a better AMD to a lesser Intel.... Then all the screamers would come out

[Alfie]

I would sincerely hope a 3.3gig cpu would give better results!

[DragonNOA1]

I agree TwoRails. AMD is always the underdog, so to see it up against an Intel and lose, I don't mind. BUT oh my, let an Intel CPU lose and then reasons will come out from everywhere on why they lost and how the test was unfair. Try a 3.3ghz AMD with a 3.3ghz Intel and then see who wins.

[Atrius]

I want to see what happens when they get some 64bit software out, the new AMDs will kick ass

[DragonNOA1]

By that time Intel will have caught up and will claim that they have a better 64-bit proc.

[Jimmy White]

Originally posted by DragonNOA1 By that time Intel will have caught up and will claim that they have a better 64-bit proc.

proberly yes but they will be so expensive theres no point in looking at them

Blackhart what was the original ghz before ocing the P4?

[DragonNOA1]

Originally posted by Jimmy White they will be so expensive theres no point in looking at them

Riiiight... no reason to even look at Intel... they are such a small company with no influence in anything.

[glc]

Where are we going with this thread?

groan

[Panama Red]

Reminds me of the old racin' days - Chevy vs Ford!! Everybody has opinions and preferences, why can't we just enjoy what we have and quit "bashing" the other brands?

It's like the Used Car Salesman's motto "There's an ass for every seat"!!

[DragonNOA1]

Who's bashing?

[Alfie]

Actually,us AMD users shouldn't get too upset,so Intel finally produced a cpu that's faster than the AMD Barton,we've been in the lead for a while now and so let the Intel boys gloat for a week
By the way,last I looked the AMD64 beats any Intel cpu,excluding the Intel FX.

[Craig100]

yes, the athlon 64 rocks against all other cpus at the moment, but i wouldn't recommend buying one until software has caught up/and bugs repaired a better comparison would be a barton 3200.

[Surge1243]

Originally posted by DragonNOA1 Riiiight... no reason to even look at Intel... they are such a small company with no influence in anything.

Not to be mean, but his comment wasn't to say that Intel has no weight in the processor world and that no one should look at them, just that the processor would be so expensive no one would want to look at it.

[sakeo]

The only cpu who gave a good challenge to the fx is the ee es and that cpu can't be found, the only reason why that ee gave a challenge to an fx is because it's multi are unlocked from 7-18, remember that's an es. You can't compare a 2500 non-oced with a p4 3.3... that doesn't exist not oced... duh! Let them all be stock and see the difference in scores, the fsb differences give you that 1000 points more on memory and how come the p4 ain't beating the hell out of the 2500... which is 1.5g mhz slower that the p4... who yeah... right I see now.

[DragonNOA1]

I understand Surge... I'm just being an a**. I just wanna make sure Panama and glc know that I'm not bashing any proc. I'm just saying that Intel will likely put out a 64-bit proc once windows64 is released. Sry if I offended anyone.

[Blakhart]

My intention wasn't to start a flame war. In that light, please stop purposely irritating those who may hold a difference in opinion.

My intention was, on the other hand, to mention the difference between the use of the same parts in dissimilar architectures. And their differences in performance.
The original cpu speed is 3.0GHz, and I found it easy to oc, unlike my 2500. I still am not sure how far the 3.0 will go, as the mem would not go further without errors. I need some Corsair or something. Thanks for the responses.