Print

[SeasonOfFire]

Intel does make their chips specificly so they will get a higher clockspeed, so most times an AMD chip with completely outperform an Intel chip with the same specs. However, Intel makes Xeon chips. Xeons are freaking sweet.... ask anyone who runs a dedicated server. However, AMD's answer to the Xeon is the Opteron, which is even sweeter yet. But Opterons are hard to get your hands on unless you want to shell out quite a bit of cash.

My dedicated server runs a 1.7GHZ Celeron hosting 400 websites.... it does pretty well but the CPU usage is often a lot higher than I would like it to be. Again, that goes back to the multitasking problems that Celerons have.

I'm babbling, but whatever. Whichever you go with, be sure and get some benchmarks for both from a third party.

[GameGuru]

QUOTE (bigshooter13 @ Nov 28 2003, 10:16 PM)

QUOTE (GameGuru @ Nov 28 2003, 09:25 AM) QUOTE (bigshooter13 @ Nov 27 2003, 10:44 PM) I have a question for all of you diehard AMD fans. I, myself, have not used an AMD processor so that is why I am asking. How do you guys come about saying that a 2.1GHz AMD processor is faster than a P4 3.2? The AMD's only have a 400MHz FSB while the P4's run 800Mhz FSB.  I just don't understand at all how you guys figure that an AMD chip with roughly half the power of another chip can be faster? Have you physically taken two different machines with two different chips and set them by each other and ran different programs? I'm just curious to hear thoughts on this because the way I see it, it is against the laws of physics for a chip with 400MHz FSB to be faster than an 800MHz FSB chip with an entire 1GHz of faster processing power. I'm looking at building a P4 2.8 800MHz FSB so try to persaude me to AMD. Good luck because I don't think it's going to happen. Frontside bus doesn't necessary mean faster processing.  Just check out the benchmarks where a 2.2GHz AMD FX-51 beats the 3.2GHz P4 in games.  Beating the P4 even though it is running 1GHz slower!!  That shows that clock speed isn't everything, it is how efficient the chip is. Do you have a link to this benchmark test? I'm curious to see results.

Pick up the newest issue of Maximum PC today, they have a great article "AMD vs. Intel vs. Apple".

[lookformeb]

QUOTE (i.stole.this.name @ Nov 27 2003, 12:46 AM)

id go for the AMD cuz with the increased L2 Cache it can complete double the operations or more in the same time (P.S. i have a 2800+ with STOCK heatsink @ 3200+ no issues with overheating)

um, no you don't....

which xp2800+ is it and what are the multipliers set at?  

it is my opinion that you are lying you ass off...  

[GameGuru]

QUOTE (lookformeb @ Nov 30 2003, 12:30 PM)

QUOTE (i.stole.this.name @ Nov 27 2003, 12:46 AM) id go for the AMD cuz with the increased L2 Cache it can complete double the operations or more in the same time (P.S. i have a 2800+ with STOCK heatsink @ 3200+ no issues with overheating) um, no you don't.... which xp2800+ is it and what are the multipliers set at?   it is my opinion that you are lying you ass off...

You can easily do that just by upping the frontside bus.  The multipliers are locked, you can't mess with them.

[lookformeb]

QUOTE (GameGuru @ Nov 30 2003, 11:12 PM)

QUOTE (lookformeb @ Nov 30 2003, 12:30 PM) QUOTE (i.stole.this.name @ Nov 27 2003, 12:46 AM) id go for the AMD cuz with the increased L2 Cache it can complete double the operations or more in the same time (P.S. i have a 2800+ with STOCK heatsink @ 3200+ no issues with overheating) um, no you don't.... which xp2800+ is it and what are the multipliers set at?   it is my opinion that you are lying you ass off...   You can easily do that just by upping the frontside bus.  The multipliers are locked, you can't mess with them.

yes, you can mess with the multipliers.  I have the AMD 2800+ Barton and I can.  Messing with the FSB will still alter the CPU's temperature.  

Going from 2800+ to 3200+ isn't a big jump, but I don't think you can do it with a STOCK heatsink and fan.  Not many ppl brag about thier CPU speed in terms of a model though.  Seems as if braggin about an AMD 2.08 333FSB overclocked to a 2.2 400FSB is more common...