Amd64 Vs P4 64bit - AMD Athlon 64bit vs P4 64bit

I dont know if in other parts of the world if you have P4 64bit but in australia we do along with amd64. I recently got a new computer with the new P4 (rare in australia at the moment) and it is 3.0 ghz HT (Hyperthreading) (800 fsb). When i can compare that to the new amd 64 with only 2ghz no ht. We only got the 64 bit to prepare for the futrue technology of XP 64bit. Anyone else got the P4 64 or amd 64 if you have anything to say about comparing these to say it. I reckon the p4 is better because it has a higher ghz.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

I have always been an AMD fan and I have a dual amd 64 and I love it, I mean I dont know what could make it any better. My father is a P4 64 but I will always be a AMD fan.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

First of all, the gigahertz does not matter. That number does not mean better performance because it depends on how the chip is manufactured and structured because AMD chips are just as good as Intel chips performance wise and they have a lower gigahertz. Plus, with the new 64 dual processors, performance wise the AMD chip outperforms the intel chip which is kind of surprising. I personally am an intel fan but definitely will wait til they fix up their dual technology before upgrading.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

Oh no.

Fact: Just so you know, a higher GHz (or MHz) rating on a CPU has nothing to do with how well it performs. Intel has relied on this for a long time by increasing its clock speed, while AMD focuses on the architecture of its CPUs. Don't be fooled by this myth, the performance has nothing to do with clock speed! Although it does help increase performance marginally, it does not make a significant difference.

Here is a slightly outdated article, but it's worth reading: http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,59564,00.asp

Celerons: If you ever thought MHz / GHz is good, the Intel Celerons are a cheaper alternative, but even at higher clock frequencies, their performance is still very poor. AMD CPUs are more advanced, even if they are lower; their higher performing chips still outperform any higher performing Intel chip at the same frequency.

Heat: As CPUs get faster, they require more power. With more power comes more heat. With more heat comes lower performance. If you compare the performance between the P4 at 3.2 GHz, and a P4 at 3.4 GHz, they start to reach a bottleneck where the performance is no longer increasing due to the amount of heat it is producing.

 

 

 

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

ok heres where intell are corupting your mind mhz does not = performance. you see with the introduction of the P4, intell lowered the amount of work the processor does per clock cycle so they would get fater speeds. so while my friends 2.8ghz C class processor runs at 2.8ghz my 3200 @ 2 ghz will oup preform him easierly. let me put it this way what is better moving a ton of sand each hour in 1 go ot moving 1g of sand 5000 times in a hour...this is how a P4 works. it does less work so it can do more cycles... personally i think that AMD's 64 chips are better simply beacause there isnt the risk of the chip melting through the motherboard. then the case and into the floor of your house

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

I heard that Windows XP 64 bit wasn't that great anyway....

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

I bought a PC three years ago with P4.

Also, I bought one one year ago, and one this year. The last two use AMD Athlon, and they're alot more noicy than the one with P4... Is the AMD fan more noicy, or is it something else? Because the case of the newest should be a very silent case...

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

It's true, AMD CPUs are more noisy. Intel chips slow down as their heat rises, while AMD chips always run at 100% of their full potential, all the time no matter how hot they get.

The most recent 64-bit chips are very stable, and rock solid. I'm glad AMD chose to put larger heat dispersions on their chips this time, unlike the original Athlon XP CPU. They're great chips too, but they tend to crash more. Even if they newer ones run hotter, at least they'll be more stable considering the heat is more dispersed. Good job AMD, wherever you are.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

bah, intel stole most of the E64 from A64 anyways, it is incredible how it is pretty much exactly the same as A64, but A64 being in market for more than a year now.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)