Dual Core AMD's, how good?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Get right to it, I now have a P4 3.2 and am thinking of going to the
other side, AMD 64 X2 3800+, or possibly the 4200+. Will the AMD be the
equivilent or better to the P4? I do alot of multi-tasking, as well as
gaming. I've tried looking into the AMD's but only found limited
information, could someone point me in the right direction to
self-educate?

I'm concerned mainly that it will run at the same level as the P4,
don't want to lose any performance in gaming and when single
tasking(lol).

Any help appreciated


--
MoToX20

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

MoToX20 wrote:
> Get right to it, I now have a P4 3.2 and am thinking of going to the
> other side, AMD 64 X2 3800+, or possibly the 4200+. Will the AMD be the
> equivilent or better to the P4? I do alot of multi-tasking, as well as
> gaming. I've tried looking into the AMD's but only found limited
> information, could someone point me in the right direction to
> self-educate?

That's hard to believe that you couldn't find at least one ton of
information about X2, if not several tons.

> I'm concerned mainly that it will run at the same level as the P4,
> don't want to lose any performance in gaming and when single
> tasking(lol).

I think both single-tasking and multi-tasking wise, even the lowest X2
will wipe the plate of the P4-3.2.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Bitstring <MoToX20.1v8ojm@news.computerbanter.com>, from the wonderful
person MoToX20 <MoToX20.1v8ojm@news.computerbanter.com> said
>
>Get right to it, I now have a P4 3.2 and am thinking of going to the
>other side, AMD 64 X2 3800+, or possibly the 4200+. Will the AMD be the
>equivilent or better to the P4? I do alot of multi-tasking, as well as
>gaming. I've tried looking into the AMD's but only found limited
>information, could someone point me in the right direction to
>self-educate?
>
>I'm concerned mainly that it will run at the same level as the P4,
>don't want to lose any performance in gaming and when single
>tasking(lol).

Both the 3800 and the 4200 should eat a 3.2Ghz P4 for lunch, even single
tasking, unless the task happens to be one of very few (like video
encoding) where the SSE2 on the P4 (you neglected to mention which
version of the P4, but I guess a Northwood) can sometimes bang in two
instructions for the AMD's one. For grizzly details see the Prime95
forums (running Prime95 is another thing a P4 excels at).

For two or more tasks, no contest (or for any future multi-threaded
games). Definitely the build of choice for people who want a future
(although dedicated gamers with infinite cash &/or no foresight will
probably still buy an FX57).

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:

> Both the 3800 and the 4200 should eat a 3.2Ghz P4 for lunch, even single
> tasking, unless the task happens to be one of very few (like video
> encoding) where the SSE2 on the P4 (you neglected to mention which
> version of the P4, but I guess a Northwood) can sometimes bang in two
> instructions for the AMD's one.

Don't AMD64 X2 support SSE2 and even SSE3??

Or is it the particular *implementation* of SSE2 on NW P4's
what you're referring to?

Carlos
--

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Good only for gaming. You need a good video card.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

MoToX20 wrote:
> Get right to it, I now have a P4 3.2 and am thinking of going to the
> other side, AMD 64 X2 3800+, or possibly the 4200+. Will the AMD be the
> equivilent or better to the P4? I do alot of multi-tasking, as well as
> gaming. I've tried looking into the AMD's but only found limited
> information, could someone point me in the right direction to
> self-educate?

AMD's Athlon 64 X2 4800+ & 4200+ Dual Core Performance Preview
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=7

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Bitstring <%XmVe.36512$eW1.558363@wagner.videotron.net>, from the
wonderful person Carlos Moreno <moreno_at_mochima_dot_com@xx.xxx> said
>GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:
>
>> Both the 3800 and the 4200 should eat a 3.2Ghz P4 for lunch, even
>>single tasking, unless the task happens to be one of very few (like
>>video encoding) where the SSE2 on the P4 (you neglected to mention
>>which version of the P4, but I guess a Northwood) can sometimes bang
>>in two instructions for the AMD's one.
>
>Don't AMD64 X2 support SSE2 and even SSE3??
>
>Or is it the particular *implementation* of SSE2 on NW P4's
>what you're referring to?

It's the implementation .. last time I looked the AMD still had
something (nobody had figured the details exactly) which was stopping it
executing SSE2 instructions at the same top rate as the P4, even when it
'should' have been able to. Mind you, that was a few months back.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" <GSV@quik.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:tIIQWKGE$pJDFA7E@from.is.invalid...
> Bitstring <%XmVe.36512$eW1.558363@wagner.videotron.net>, from the
> wonderful person Carlos Moreno <moreno_at_mochima_dot_com@xx.xxx> said
>>GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:
>>
>>> Both the 3800 and the 4200 should eat a 3.2Ghz P4 for lunch, even single
>>> tasking, unless the task happens to be one of very few (like video
>>> encoding) where the SSE2 on the P4 (you neglected to mention which
>>> version of the P4, but I guess a Northwood) can sometimes bang in two
>>> instructions for the AMD's one.
>>
>>Don't AMD64 X2 support SSE2 and even SSE3??
>>
>>Or is it the particular *implementation* of SSE2 on NW P4's
>>what you're referring to?
>
> It's the implementation .. last time I looked the AMD still had something
> (nobody had figured the details exactly) which was stopping it executing
> SSE2 instructions at the same top rate as the P4, even when it 'should'
> have been able to. Mind you, that was a few months back.
>


AFAIK the problem is the size of the Wallace trees: 80 bit on the Athlons,
128 bit on the Pentiums. This means that the Athlon has to split each 128
bit SSE2 data word into two to operate on.
--
Derek