[Rampage]

Dear HLP Denizens:

I intend to construct a computer pretty soon and would like to conduct some research.  (I'm pretty sure that this will turn into an altercation.)

My simple question is:  "Which processor is better: Intel P4 or AMD Athlon (I really don't know AMD.)"

Just post your opinions with the processor's pros and cons.  Thanks.

Rampage

[FreeTerran]

AMD by far

[aldo_14]

From what i understand;

Intel - beginning to move ahead in the power stakes, but tend to use gimmicks to artificially increase the clock speed (ahead of actual performance) or make the chip appear better performing than is (i.e. hyperthreading, which I've heard is completely useless and even a hindrence unless programs are written to use it*)


AMD - cheaper, but losing ground in performance.

Not really up to date on this stuff, though...........

*presumably a cunning plow to try and get developers to support AMD and rival chips less

[Grey Wolf]

Hyperthreading is an attempt to do two operations at once on the core, giving it the possibility to produce higher speeds, especially in programs optimized for it, but overrall gives you no real advantage.

[JC Denton]

Something else to consider is heat buildup.  I've found that Pentium 4s run much cooler than the equivalent Athlon, and if the fan does fail, it will not burn out the processor die.  Athlons, on the other hand, need a good, reliable heatsink (and if you go the AMD way, I'd highly suggest a water cooling system), and a case that can efficiently disperse the heat.  Athlons may be more efficient in actual processing (a 2200+ has a clock speed of ~1.8ghz, I think), but they pay for that with being an extremely heat-inefficient chip.

[Stryke 9]

Intel. As many P3s as you can cram onto your motherboard without breaking something.

[Admiral LSD]

Originally posted by aldo_14
(i.e. hyperthreading, which I've heard is completely useless and even a hindrence unless programs are written to use it*)

All SMP implementations have this problem, it's due to the vast majority of applications being single threaded becuase the vast majority of PCs out there only have a single processor. 'Real' SMP has the advantage though of having pretty much the full power of each CPU at it's disposal meaning you won't see a performance hit running single threaded apps on such a setup like you see with HT.

I still firmly believe that AMD make the better CPU architecture the new C class (800Mhz FSB) P4s along with the new i875 chipset blow it away in terms of performance even if they aren't based the worlds most efficient CPU architecture. If I were building a new PC tomorrow, a 2.4C P4 (I'd have to think long and hard about whether to go for the widely reported overclock to 3Ghz though) and a good i875 motherboard would be where I'd start looking.

Originally posted by JC Denton
Something else to consider is heat buildup. I've found that Pentium 4s run much cooler than the equivalent Athlon

The newer P4s are no angels when it comes to heat output, either. Last I heard, the 3.06Ghz P4 was the hottest chip out there.

Originally posted by Stryke 9
Intel. As many P3s as you can cram onto your motherboard without breaking something.

That number would be 2.

[mikhael]

AMD for the only two reasons that matter:

1. they cost less than the equivalent Intel chip.
2. Stronger Floating Point Unit.

No. 1 should matter to most everyone here. No. 2 should matter to every person here who does 3d modelling, render, and animation. Stronger FPUs mean faster, more accurate renders, especially with CPU intensive things like volumetrics, mathematical expressions, and sprite/voxel/dynamic-subdivision operations.

Anyone who says you really have to have a water cooler to run with current AMDs is dead wrong. Water cooling is always nice when done right, but is strictly unneccessary on any of the standard, non-overclocked processors out there from either company. The safe temp for AthlonXP parts is up to about 90C per the AthlonXP test engineers, so if you get even a stock AMD heatsink and fan, you'll be all right, as long as your case is properly ventilated (IE front fan, rear fan and PSU fan). If you've got a GeForceFX "dustbuster" video card, or one of the bigger Radeons, you'll want to invest in a Zalman all-copper heatsink (NOT one of those stupid flower sculptures, either). My AthlonXP 2800 is running at about 60C, during most things right now. During Lightwave renders, which tasks the CPU more than anything, I'm getting as high as 65C.

About the P4s with Hyperthreading: don't bother unless you use apps that are multithreaded. That leaves out pretty much all games except for that one Quake (Arena? Team Arena? I can't remember the title). Photoshop, 3ds Max, Lightwave, Maya, XSI, etc, can all take advantage of it. Oh yeah, and its a complete loss on any Win9x /ME OS. Only Linux, the BSDs, or WinNT/2k/XP can even see it, even if your apps can use it.

Be careful with your choice of motherboard too, especially in the P4 arena. Some motherboard (Epox I think is guilty) crank up the front-side bus speed when the processor is under heavy load. This cranks the benchmark scores up, but it also heats up your CPU more when its already under its heaviest heat load. This is not a good thing. Heat, even when it doesn't kill the CPU, can cause bit errors that lead to machine lockups or black/blue screens of death.

[Grey Wolf]

MSI also has "dynamic overclocking" on their P4s

[CP5670]

I took the AMD route mainly for the second reason that mikhael give there; the FPU is what is required for games and numerical integrals. But that was quite a while ago at a time when the two companies' processors were more evenly matched.

[Xelion]

New AMDs are out or they will be depending on your location...but from what I've read they're fast.. and also cheaper then Intel CPUs...

[Admiral LSD]

Originally posted by CP5670
I took the AMD route mainly for the second reason that mikhael give there; the FPU is what is required for games and numerical integrals. But that was quite a while ago at a time when the two companies' processors were more evenly matched.

I don't know about maths software but even with a weaker FPU the sheer brute force of the P4s higher clock speed and more recently, the 800Mhz quad-pumped FSB (and the latency advantage that offers over the Athlon in dual channel DDR mode) have enabled it to well and trully eat Athlon for breakfast in more recent games-oriented tests. AMD is being let down by the inability of the Athlon to scale much beyond it's current 2.1-2.2Ghz and it's getting much harder to justify buying them for high performance machines.

[Grey Wolf]

Truthfully, the Socket A is dead. Wait for Socket 754, and buy a Paris core.

[Kamikaze]

I think the choice would depend on what you're willing to spend and the application. If you're willing to chuck money out the window, currently Intel is ahead by some amount with their 3.06s, however they cost an ungodly amount. (the motherboard, processor and RAM all do)

If you want something that's low power, cooler and smaller transmeta makes chips like that, I don't think their performance is up to par however. Iirc their use is mainly in small computers and such.

AMD is the cheap desktop solution, probably suitable for most uses.

[Admiral LSD]

Originally posted by Kamikaze
I think the choice would depend on what you're willing to spend and the application. If you're willing to chuck money out the window, currently Intel is ahead by some amount with their 3.06s, however they cost an ungodly amount. (the motherboard, processor and RAM all do)

You can save a lot of that dough by buying a 2.4C P4 and overclocking it to 3.06Ghz (you don't even need any special cooling either, 3.06 is perfectly achievable using stock cooling and voltage). You don't lose HyperThreading, either as all the 'C' class P4s have it available by default. The 2.4C isn't all that expensive (for Intel) either, at around USD$170 it's cheaper (and faster, if you take the 3Ghz overclock into account) than a lot of AMDs high end Athlon range.

[CP5670]

I don't know about maths software but even with a weaker FPU the sheer brute force of the P4s higher clock speed and more recently, the 800Mhz quad-pumped FSB (and the latency advantage that offers over the Athlon in dual channel DDR mode) have enabled it to well and trully eat Athlon for breakfast in more recent games-oriented tests. AMD is being let down by the inability of the Athlon to scale much beyond it's current 2.1-2.2Ghz and it's getting much harder to justify buying them for high performance machines.

yeah, I got my machine about two years ago when the P4 had only recently come out; at that time the Athlon TB 1400 was generally regarded as the better choice. The P4 may well have a significant lead now.

[Ryx]

Have been using AMD, since the Thunderbird core. Love 'em.

Just be sure to get a good heatsink.

Here's mine http://www.swiftnets.com/products/mcx462Plus.asp

[Grey Wolf]

Interesting note: If you plan to get a P4 and then upgrade to a Prescott on the same board, you can't: http://www.anandtech.com/news/shownews.html?i=20014

[LtNarol]

I don't know about you guys, but I'm on a limited budget here.  I can afford an AMD Athlon (2.6gHz with 333 FSB) but I certainly can't afford the Pentium 4.  As for cooling, like mik said, even the regular AMD heatsink and fan that come with the processor can keep things low enough, and the only case cooling I have right now is the 80mm case fan blowing out of the rear (system hovers around 56C while the chip around 53C).

Go AMD.

[Flipside]

Well, I've been running an AMD 1700XP with 2 fans as a server 24/7 for about 3 months now, and have not had a single screen of death, despite the fact it's been so hot here that I've been considering holding up a big card saying 'This person has performed an illegal action and will be shut down'!
I guess it really does boil down to budget. AMD's are cheaper (a 1700XP is around £30 these days), Intel have lots of Gadgets, but once the Hammer is knocking around, the market will change all over again.
Just remember, no matter what you buy, in 1 years time, it will be out of date

Flipside