New P4 Northwood still slower than AMD XP!

[Tim1]

Come on Intel whats with these exspensive P4 that are slower than the afordable AMDs? http://www.gamepc.com/reviews/hardware_review.asp?review=p42a&page=1&mscssid=&tp= The site loads slow though.

------------------
Operating System: Microsoft Windows ME
Processor: Intel Pentium® 4 @ 1.5GHz
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Total Physical Memory: 512MB
Motherboard Manufacturer: Intel Corporation
Motherboard Model: D845HV
Monitor 19" KDS i190

[Hobit]

Yo Tim1,

Have you noticed that P4 becomes P$ when you leave the shift key depressed. Your assertion about price is of course correct, about performence it is only true for the moment. The P4 with the its' .13 micron core can be pushed to MHz rates exceeding 3GHz. Until AMD in the second quarter follows suit I do not think they will be able to maintain their performence lead.

The real question is will the next generation Athlon CPUs run on existing motherboards???

Perhaps you can shed some light on this.

Hobit

[Randy_tx]

For me the question is: What are we going to be able to DO with these ultra fast [over 1600 mhz] machines that we can't do now ? The benchmarks won't increase much 'cause virtually all software of consequence [that being anything other than games or autocad] can't keep up with these "Screamers" to begin with http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
XP didn't save Me !

[kfh]

Hi Tim,
If it's more speed you want try This. (http://www.muropaketti.com/artikkelit/cpu/northwood2200/ln2/index.phtml)
kfh.

[Hobit]

Tim1

Randy_tx is right-on it will take some years for software (even games
and Autocad) to push a 2GHz processor.

Hobit

[Paleo Pete]

OK this is becoming tedious...people are splitting hairs over benchmarks while their human senses cannot tell the difference in speed. You're talking about a processor that communicates with the rest of the system at well over a billion times per second. It spends most of its life sitting around waiting for the hard drive and periferals to catch up.

I've pointed this out before, the fastest hard drive currently available spins at 10,000 RPM. The CPU can do 1,700,000,000 cycles per second. QUite a difference...not to mention the various periferal speeds, that cannot possibly keep up with the CPU.

It's also a fact that you will not see a diffence in speed until you upgrade to a CPU that is at least 3 times as fast as your current one. That means if you have a 900MHz CPU now you won't see a difference at lower than about 2.7GHz.

Why the fuss over benchmarks that have no relationship to real time performance...what you see with your own eyes? I played around with a couple of new machines in stores a few weeks ago. I could not tell a 1.2GHz from a 1.7GHz until I read the labels. Both running XP, 128MB RAM...no way I could tell one from the other. So what if the benchmarks say it's faster if you can't tell the difference?? Your human senses will never see that few milliseconds.

Until I can SEE a noticable difference the benchmarks are basically meaningless.

------------------
Support the right to keep and arm bears.
Note: Please post your questions on the forums, not in my email.

Computer Information Links (http://www.dreamwater.com/paleopete/computer.htm) has been moved, please update your bookmarks.