Ok im confused, What sthe big deal with buying 3200 AMD chips when im reading on forums there running at 2.2g? Wernt we all playing with 2.2g chips this time last year? Im upgrading from a P4 2.4, And wanting to know whats the big hype with the AMD64 Someone post the speeds of each chip please, Thanks guys
Good thing your in the UK so that ZapWizard can't easily throttle you. The 'descrepancy' you've noticed has been going on for I'd guess 3 years now. It is the result of AMD switching back to what they call an equivalent performance naming convention. While it does tend to confuse at first, it's proponents are correct in saying that for the majority of computer buyers it's this number that they judge the performance of the chip by. So for some time the name of the AMD chip has been higher than it's actual frequency. Now this really isn't a scam though. If you'll check out several of the comparisons that have been done by various sites you'll see that AMD's naming convention has stayed pretty accurate. It comes down to realizing that a cpu's processing power isn't solely dependant on it's frequency. It's architecture has much more to do with it than just it's speed. Not just between AMD, Intel, or Motorola either. That's why we're not currently using 8086s clocked at 3 GHz at the moment.
The AMD64 architecture is very impressive, simply for the raw processing power and on die memory controller.
More instructions per clock cycle. Do all the Athlons work on a certain "multiplier"? Ie can you multiply the actual clock speed by "X" to get the AMD rating?
Can someone put the first two replies into n00b format so that people like me can understand why I should lose my P4 2.4 that I bought for £50. and pay twice as much for an AMD?
The Athlon 2500+ has roughly the same performance of a 2.5GHz Pentium. But it runs at a slower speed. You probably shouldn't lose the P4. Especially seeing as you got it so cheap. But you can get a 2500+ Athlon for less than £50 now. But it won't be much/any better than the P4
the frequency of the processor does not mean that it is more powerful. an athlon 3200+ runs at about the same capacity as a pentium 2.8 and is only 2.2g but say an athlon 64 3800+ runs about as welll as a pentium 3.2 EE (although those comparisones are very debatable) also a barton 3200+ will run better than a regular 3200+ however it will also get hotter, thus not as good for OCing.
they rawk, enough said. Read somewhere (on the inq i think) that the 3000+ A64 whoops the 3ghz p4 and it's a lot cheaper.
The AMD 64's are good, but they shouldn't be considered at the moment. Sorry for plugging my site, but I did a guide on it here: http://ricserv.servebeer.com/amd64.php
<n00biness for slink> OMG THOSE CHIPS ARE T3H ROXXORZ! OMFG LOLZ!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111111oneoneone</n00biness for slink> Plain and simply, these processors have so much power that they make the Pentium 4 look incredibly outdated. THey kick all ass, and thats why you should get them. The AMD chips do more per clock cycle than an Intel chip; subsequently, they are able to get more performance out of them, despite their 2/3 of the clock speed found on Intel P4 chips.
Thanks Ric, didnt realise they had made three types of chip! Which should I go for? Ill need a new motherboard obviously, Dont want to pay through the nose, and Ill be buying 2nd hand, So what are peoples recomendations for a mobo, and which chip will it support?!
Well, like the guide says, socket 939 is the best choice, but you WILL pay through the nose for it. Socket 754 is a dead upgrade path, but if you would be happy with the top socket 754 chip then what the hell.
