eddieflashes17

Distinguished
Jan 24, 2005
3
0
18,510
Hi, I am new to the board and I have a few questions.

First off, I watched the Video #15 and I thought it was very interesting. It made me think about the computer I am building soon...

I want to use A P4 560 CPU, but do I use the compound or should I just use the Thermal Pad on the CPU Cooler that comes with the processor in the box?

Also, I have a Kingwin Kt-424 chasis I purchased, was that a wise decession?

Thank you all for your insight!
 

ChipDeath

Splendid
May 16, 2002
4,307
0
22,790
ok...
1) No reason to not use the thermal pad, unless you're overclocking or something. Intel think it's good enough to give you a 3 year warranty, so it can't be awful :wink:
2)Build an A64 system instead.

AS for that case, I have no idea - I've never heard of it, so I'll have to look it up.

---
"Sex without love is an empty experience...
But as empty experiences go, it's one of the best" - Woody Allen
 

ChipDeath

Splendid
May 16, 2002
4,307
0
22,790
Just looked up the case, and IMO it's a pretty nice one. About the only negatives I could see with a quick glance is the lack of mounting possibilities for fans larger than 80mm. I would prefer 92 or 120mm fans, or at least the option for them (without drilling holes... But that option's <i>always</i> there :evil: )

---
"Sex without love is an empty experience...
But as empty experiences go, it's one of the best" - Woody Allen
 

peteroy

Distinguished
BANNED
Jun 14, 2004
280
0
18,790
<A HREF="http://support.intel.com/support/processors/pentium4/sb/CS-008537.htm" target="_new">Best Prescott case approved by Intel</A>

<A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/searchProductResult.asp?Submit=advance&Range=1&catalog=7&DEPA=0&bop=or&description=air-duct+3g&InnerCata=7" target="_new">Newegg sells them</A>

==================================
<A HREF="http://www.clancas.net" target="_new">clan CHAOS</A>
<A HREF="http://www.daynighthosting.com" target="_new">DayNightHosting.com</A>
 

endyen

Splendid
I will agree with chipdeath. If you want to use that case with that chip, be prepared to mod the case, to allow at least 2 120mm fans.
The prescotts generate a lot of heat. They can also withstand a lot of heat. The other components in your system hate heat. Unless you want them to cook, you need great ventilation.
Unless you use this system for heavy video rendering only, you would be better served by an A64 system. Even video rendering may benefit from long mode, making the A64s better for that as well.
 

G_K

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2005
27
0
18,530
Most game companys like EA games optimize their games to run on Pentium's. Very Few companys optimize for AMD processors. So benchmarks arn't very good for measuring real world use. In real world use I would have to say because of the optimizations currently out pentium 4's smoke athlons also multi tasking on pentium 4's is phenomanally better. From my experience they are far more stable as well.

Also the case I posted previously runs at 38-41C its prefectly good the way it is. I am also using the vanilla Intel heatpad.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by G_K on 01/24/05 07:00 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

endyen

Splendid
Let's see, the guy says every review sight in the world is full of shtt, because he says games run better, faster on Intel. He also says the prescott runs at 38 to 41c. Reality check. 12 year old morons should not post lies here.
 

G_K

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2005
27
0
18,530
Why the need for personal attacks? Fact is with a proper case and a 3.4 ghz with stock cooling will idle at 38C.

Benchmarks do not test real world use is what a remember saying. They DON'T They just measure what kinds of hardware can run that certian benchmark better. Every EA game I can remember playing has a "optimized for pentium 4" In the load screen. A great deal of game companys have deals with intel so that their processors will run the game better.

You're the one sounding like a fool basing everything on test that just says what hardware works better under certain conditions.
 

peteroy

Distinguished
BANNED
Jun 14, 2004
280
0
18,790
<A HREF="http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/developer/asmo-na/eng/index.htm" target="_new">Let's remember that Intel also has a very organized compilers database for program developers.</A>

==================================
<A HREF="http://www.clancas.net" target="_new">clan CHAOS</A>
<A HREF="http://www.daynighthosting.com" target="_new">DayNightHosting.com</A>
 

ChipDeath

Splendid
May 16, 2002
4,307
0
22,790
The attacks are not personal really, just pointing out that you're wrong.

[EDIT] OK, one or two might have been a little bit... But some people have seen untruths spread so many times they take it personally themselves, and get quite tired of debunking them[/EDIT]

Most 'Benchmarks' that gamers rely nowadays on are recorded demos played <i>within the game engine for that game</i>. If the recorded performance is higher on one system than another, then the game engine runs faster on that system, therefore <i>the game</i> runs faster on that system. period.

Fact is with a proper case and a 3.4 ghz with stock cooling will idle at 38C.
The same level of cooling applied to an A64 will end up with a <i>load</i> temp of 38C. Although that's just a personal approximation, as no-one with an A64 <i>needs</i> that level of cooling. :tongue: And that's before you consider that the stock Prescott fans are whiny as hell. I hate them.

A great deal of game companys have deals with intel so that their processors will run the game better.
I think you have a rather naive view there... Here's how it <i>really</i> works:
1)Developer makes game for x86 Platform. Maybe they'll implement SSE, SSE2, 3DNow!, etc.. maybe not.
2)Intel pays developer money to put 'Pentium 4' on the box and in the start-up graphics.
..
..
Ta-Da! Welcome to the world of marketing.

You're the one sounding like a fool
You're the one who's believing what the marketing people are telling you.

---
"Sex without love is an empty experience...
But as empty experiences go, it's one of the best" - Woody Allen<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by ChipDeath on 01/25/05 04:46 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

slvr_phoenix

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
6,223
1
25,780
Since a majority of gamers (according to a Valve gate pole) use Amd systems, that doesn't sound like a good idea.
I hate to fan any flames at the moment, but I do have to point out the flaw in this rebuttal. The target audience of Valve games is highly different from the target audience of EA games. One one hand you have the FPS genre where there is a plethora of enthusiasts running highly tweaked systems. On the other hand you have much more generalized gaming usually aimed at the more casual consumer who often doesn't even know the difference between Intel and AMD, or between Dell and Gateway for that matter. So if one were to take a much more rounded poll of the hardware in use by serious and light gamers combined, one would find Intel the clear majority.

He also says the prescott runs at 38 to 41c.
Are you saying that with a good setup and cool ambient temps it is impossible to cool a Prescott to this level? Come on. 41C is hardly a fanciful notion for a <i>good</i> setup.

<pre>I just want to say <font color=red>I wuv you</font color=red>.
And I mean it fwom the <font color=red>bottom of my hawt</font color=red>.</pre><p>
 

slvr_phoenix

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
6,223
1
25,780
I'm just going to assume 'optimize' equals SSE&SSE2.
Athlon64 has got them both, but not SSE3.
Actually, there are a number of ways to optimize for a Pentium 4 that don't even involve SSE instructions. The most specific is that bitshifting operations that a P3 and any Athlon could execute extremely fast, the P4 can't. So by explicitely <i>not</i> using these very old programmer tricks you are in effect optimizing for a P4 over a P3 or Athlon. There are also ways to organize data to better suit the P4's prefetch and so on and so forth. The P4 can be very much optimized for, just as <i>any</i> architecture can be if you choose to write code in a low level language such as Assembly instead of a higher order language like C++ or FORTRAN. In fact, using profiling softwares you can even determine how to fully maximize the throughput of a CPU's resources by doing things like balancing floating point and integer operations in your algorithms, which is of course a very core-specific optimization. But even just the use of certain compilers over others can benefit certain systems over others. These kinds of optimizations are often what set apart the various video and audio compression softwares, but they also frequently make it into gaming engines.

<pre>I just want to say <font color=red>I wuv you</font color=red>.
And I mean it fwom the <font color=red>bottom of my hawt</font color=red>.</pre><p>
 

endyen

Splendid
Does it really matter if EA low end games are more often played on Intel, or Amd, the guy is saying that game makers are more interested in optimizing for Intel, so games run faster on Intel systems. Do you agree?
Do you believe that a that a socket T chip @ 3.4 can run at 41c in games, with that stock whiny fan? Sure, if it's running on refrigerated air!!
Why are you defending this guy. He is either a simpering idiot, totally ignorant of the facts, or trying to start a flame war.
 

endyen

Splendid
Actually, there are a number of ways to optimize for a Pentium 4 that don't even involve SSE instructions
If you want a game to run faster on P4, it's easier just to dissable SSE for amd chips. Fact is, if a game is worth playing, some amd fan will fix the code, and make it run the way it should.
 

slvr_phoenix

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
6,223
1
25,780
Most 'Benchmarks' that gamers rely nowadays on are recorded demos played within the game engine for that game. If the recorded performance is higher on one system than another, then the game engine runs faster on that system, therefore the game runs faster on that system. period.
This is of course very true. :) Real world tests are the best kind.

However, most real world tests center around FPS style games. They often ignore the more mundane types that most people play.

The same level of cooling applied to an A64 will end up with a load temp of 38C. Although that's just a personal approximation, as no-one with an A64 needs that level of cooling.
This also is quite true. :) Heat is heat after all.

And that's before you consider that the stock Prescott fans are whiny as hell. I hate them.
But at least Intel allows you to use third party HSFs without invalidating your warranty. AMD doesn't. I hate that. Is AMD really so hard up from losses on returns that they can't allow people to use 3rd party HSFs?

I think you have a rather naive view there... Here's how it really works:
1)Developer makes game for x86 Platform. Maybe they'll implement SSE, SSE2, 3DNow!, etc.. maybe not.
2)Intel pays developer money to put 'Pentium 4' on the box and in the start-up graphics.
..
..
Ta-Da! Welcome to the world of marketing.
As a scientific programmer who was trying to break into the gaming world, I think this time it's you who is naive. My experience has been that optimizations often go quite extreme in serious game engines. The things that the folks at Id do would blow your mind. The best engines after all get sold to other companies to use in a myriad of other games, so they often optimize to extremes that would make you dizzy just to squeeze every last ounce of performance to make their engine the best. Id makes a lot of revenue that way, as do others. Valve particularly is growing into this style as well. For many it's not about their one game, but about using their one game to market their highly optimized and superior engine to other gaming companies. And thus the optimizations in that engine get propigated to many other games.

And Intel doesn't pay developers as far as I've ever seen. They just simple make a lot of information readily available to developers and provide many tools that they've developed in house to others developers for reasonable prices, and in many cases even for free.

It's the same reason why I'd much more readily work with ATI or nVidia than I would work with Matrox. Their developer relations and the tools and materials that they provide make working with the platform much easier. AMD (and Matrox) could learn a lot in that respect.

You're the one who's believing what the marketing people are telling you.
I think he has some valid points. Some of them are mitigated by other factors, but they're still valid no less. Software is often optimized for Intel, even if AMD in general has a higher performance and overcomes this. A Prescott can be cooled effectively if you do it right, but an Athlon still runs even cooler than that with the same money/effort put into cooling it.

Even the stability claim has some merit. Before I get flamed to death for saying that, let me first explain. On a purely CPU-only standpoint I'd call the stability claim a farce. I'd wager that AMD CPUs are even more stable than Intel CPUs in some cases.

<i>However</i>, on the level of an entire system this is often something else entirely. Unfortunately AMD still relies heavily on VIA chipsets. They aren't all from nVidia. (And even nVidia has had their share of problems.) And more to the point many OEMs who use AMD are looking to cut costs as much as possible for 'budget' systems, which often results in corners cut on RAM, the power supply, etc. That makes the majority of the <i>whole systems</i> using AMD less stable. The CPU is (IMHO) <i>more</i> stable, but the usage of that CPU in the system as a whole is quite unfortunately often less so.

But still, this is again mitigated by the fact that an enthusiast building a good system by not cutting corners can make an AMD system that is just as stable or more so than an Intel system.

So it really is a point of view thing. There are a lot of good points from both sides.

<pre>I just want to say <font color=red>I wuv you</font color=red>.
And I mean it fwom the <font color=red>bottom of my hawt</font color=red>.</pre><p>
 

slvr_phoenix

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
6,223
1
25,780
Does it really matter if EA low end games are more often played on Intel, or Amd, the guy is saying that game makers are more interested in optimizing for Intel, so games run faster on Intel systems. Do you agree?
Do I agree that game makers are more interested in optimizing for Intel? Yes. In general this is very true. In specific cases it is quite the opposite, but in general it is true. Do I agree that this actually makes games run faster on Intel systems? No. AMD still has several performance advantages that mitigate this even to the point of their gain over Intel. Were the world to turn around and optimize for AMD instead of Intel their performance differences would become much more extreme. However in that the market share majority is still held by Intel, the economic sense of reversing the priority of optimization is still minimal.

Do you believe that a that a socket T chip @ 3.4 can run at 41c in games, with that stock whiny fan?
Though likely a rarity, yes, it is <i>possible</i>. Intel hand picks exceptional dies to overclock for their IDFs, so not <i>all</i> of them are as bad as the average. Plus we don't know the ambient temps, which could be lower than average as well. I'm not saying that I expect every or even most to cool so well. I'm simply saying that it is entirely <i>possible</i> that one rare sample in a good case does cool well. Since one cannot prove one way or the other whether this is true or not, I see no reason to discount the possibility.

Why are you defending this guy. He is either a simpering idiot, totally ignorant of the facts, or trying to start a flame war.
Or he simply has only half of the facts, which we all have had at one time or another. We learn by sharing.

But even half of the facts are still facts, whether they paint the whole picture or not. He hasn't said anything to actually warrant such an attack. Polite edification however is certainly in order as he clearly isn't seeing the whole picture.

I would dare say however that neither is the other side appreciating the <i>whole</i> picture in this.

<pre>I just want to say <font color=red>I wuv you</font color=red>.
And I mean it fwom the <font color=red>bottom of my hawt</font color=red>.</pre><p>
 

endyen

Splendid
Nice spin - doc. You almost make his lies believable. Are you sure you are not a politician? I suppose everyone is entittled to an opinion. It is sad when we allow an opinion to do harm to people who come here for real information. Just the same, those who support intel, without reguards to value must also have thier say.
 

khha4113

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,143
0
19,780
But at least Intel allows you to use third party HSFs without invalidating your warranty. AMD doesn't. I hate that. Is AMD really so hard up from losses on returns that they can't allow people to use 3rd party HSFs?
The difference is AMD HSF is relatively quieter than 3rd party's. Unless you overclock, there no reason you need to change to.

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
 

G_K

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2005
27
0
18,530
I can hardly hear My Stock Intel Solution.

Also, in response to the criticism of my system running at 41C. Read my post I said is IDELS at 39-41C. Where did I ever say it ran that when gaming or at full load? My case has 5 80 mm fans and 1 92mm on the side.

Also EA games are hardly second rate. They are on the verge of acquiring Ubisoft as well. The optimizations most game companies make put Intel ahead. As Slvr phoenix has said there are MANY Pentium 4 specific ways to optimize programs especially complex game code.

It is my belief that AMD has created a Processor good at one thing. That being benchmarks. If you look at the architecture of their processors they have much shorter pipes that Intel. This mainly good for 1 thing. This method is obviously far less stable than lintels longer processor pipes that can ensure data integrity. If Shortened processor pipelines run so much better why hasn’t Intel jumped on the bandwagon? Because their methods are foolproof and ensure stability which is the reason why almost every corporate company in America uses Intel processors and XEON workstations and servers. Step into any fortune 500 company and I bet none of them rely on AMD computers.

Intel processors are proven ingenuity that People have been able to rely on heavily for the past 10 years. Compared to Intel AMD is still in the experimental stages which is clear by their processor architecture.
 

endyen

Splendid
The reality is that Intel's chips are the poor design. They may go fast, but they do no work.
The only way the P4s are able to get as close as they do to AMD is because a lot of people have spent a lot of time writing code, so that the chip doesn't have to do any work. Fact is, that benchmarks are written to take full advantage of Intel's optimizations. In the real world, those optimizations dont work that well. Intel chips are the ones that take great benefit from benchmarks.
Just keep puting Intel Inside stickers on your case. That way people who know will know, it's another intel inside, idiot outside.
Oh, and your post said
runs at 38-41C its prefectly good the way it is
you will note, runs, not idles.
 

G_K

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2005
27
0
18,530
Technically it is running while it is ideling is it not?

Also... NO benchmarks are absolutally NOT optimized for intel processors they are not optimized for anything its raw code... If it were optimized that would defeat the purpose of the benchmark.

As far as you saying intel processors do not work this is quite a rediculous comment.
 

endyen

Splendid
Read my post I said is IDELS at 39-41C.
Read your own post.
Then again, at 100%cpu use, a prescott is not running, it's melting, or throttling.
NO benchmarks are absolutally NOT optimized for intel processors
You mean like when Bapco enabled SSE for the Intel chips, but shut it off for the Amd chips?
Learn of what you speak. Until you know something, STFU.
 

ChipDeath

Splendid
May 16, 2002
4,307
0
22,790
Look. Intel are a big company. They have made some great products (and continue to), but the Prescott core is simply too hot, draws too much power, and doesn't easily clock up high to make up for its inadequacies. If they'd just Shrunk the Northwood C core it might have turned out better...

If you look at the architecture of their processors they have much shorter pipes that Intel. This mainly good for 1 thing. This method is obviously far less stable than lintels longer processor pipes that can ensure data integrity.
You have no idea what you're talking about here. You do realise that by your logic the Northwood core P4s are less stable than the Prescott, as the latter has a considerably longer pipe?

If Shortened processor pipelines run so much better why hasn’t Intel jumped on the bandwagon?
They have. The Prescott isn't their only chip you know... :eek:

You need to do more research quickly, or you might be in danger of making yourself look ridiculous.

---
"Sex without love is an empty experience...
But as empty experiences go, it's one of the best" - Woody Allen