Debating 755 or 939

[Clstrphbc_donut]

Last night, me and a mate were discussing the Socket 755 P4's, and the 939 3500+ processors. He said that a 3.2 755 would beat a 3500. I laughed, thinking it was pretty obvious it wouldn't. Then, he had just built a machine for his mate, running 4GHz and sent me this..

4GHz on air (1600x1200 - 227k)

He also told me, the Opterons are faster than the standard AMD64's. I dont know about AMD Opterons TBH, so could someone confirm that please?

As dicussed in other threads, 64-bit Windows is a while off, so if this is infact, an AMD64 eating CPU, thats gonna be my next purchase.

Your help is greatly appreiciated.

Thanks.

[gallo81]

try to ask him a picture of CUP-Z to see how he overclock it and if there are something bad (clocks or voltages), but it smells like fake with that temps.

And as for the Opteron question, I will tell you tomorrow.

GALLO

[Clstrphbc_donut]

His is at 4.11GHz and hes built that for a friend. I have seen his PC in CPU-Z and i know for a fact it is no fake. And i would prefer an answer about Opterons today

[skuzgib]

Yes but those temps are very low for an overclocked prescott.

[BUFF]

Yes but those temps are very low for an overclocked prescott.

Depends what he's cooling it with surely?
Not air ....

[skuzgib]

4GHz on air (1600x1200 - 227k)

Yes air apparently

[PMM]

Sandra is not a good benchmark to use to assess a CPU TBH so many other factors go into how a CPU is or is not better.

Sandra focuses on certain Intel specific instruction sets i.e. iSSE2 where as AMD have
there on alternative way's that yeild better results if programmed for.

Can beat the Dhrystone ALU on my 3000 Winchester with 12124 but the others are slower Whestone FPU = 4250 & Whestone iSSE2 5556.

In reality e.g. a P4 @ 4ghz is eql. to a AMD64 @ 2.5Ghz

Or stock speeds a Intel 3.2 = A64 3000+

Its very unlikely you could find a benchmark that reflects the strength of either chip
and the debate will always run to which is better as each has its own strengths and weaknesses.

[BUFF]

Nothing there that says what cooling though?
On air his mobo is telling porkies or he lives in Siberia.

[javalord]

Speedfan is reading wrong temp sensors.

And as for a P4 @ 4gig, it'll proberly throttle back using TM1 / TM2 sensors, so its effective performance will be scaled back a lot lower unless water cooling is used.

So in this case, a P4 prescott overclocked on air is a step backwards. Dont tell him that, let hiim enjoy his virtual 4ghz

And as mentioned, Sandra means nothing.

[PMM]

I know some have got 4G on air with some of the newer stepping chips
most 4ghz Intel machines though are watercooled at a minimum.

People hitting 6ghz+ under extreme cooling now where as not long ago the limits were 5ghz so things are improving under the Intel cores.

[Meleminii]

i have just read all of this post, and im they guy that can get 4ghz out of a intel 775 - 540 3.2ghz cpu... id just like to clear a few facts.

Il start off with, have any of you actually used a p4 775 let alone tried to overclock one?

ive hit 4.11ghz on my 550 3.4 ghz machine at 242 x 17 @ 1.55 Vcore, and i idle at 32'c on my water cooling kit, (Corsair TwinX XMS pc4000 500mhz) i cant get higher than this either because of the lock intel have placed on the cpu's of 10% or there abouts the stock speed set by them.. which is bull**** in my oppinion because if you would like to overclock, its your own problem if it blows as it clearly states in the warranty if u change or modify the cpu in any shape or form ur not agreeing to your warranty contract. The other reason i may not be able to get a higher speed is because of my cooling which will be remodied this christmas via Vapochill so il keep you in post about that.

Also, i have just built a pc for a friend, i got him a 540 3.2 (200 x 16) stock cpu, with corsair TwinX 3200xl xms 2-2-2-5 low cas ram, i managed without any problems at all to reach 4.04ghz at 35'c with a gigabyte 3D rocket cooler. If you dont believe the speed of these chips from me, please try them for yourselfs as you will find them very nice indeed... i do reccomend however staying away from DDR2 as it doesnt like to get past 3.7ghz on the 3.2ghz chip.

if you would like futher proof of the speed of these chips, please let me know and you are most welcome to come round and visit me in my humble aboard

by the way, to clear the amd/intel speed issue, i have my own theory.. it may be incorrect but off my own use of both brands i have come up with this

You have to think of amd/intel as cars, your Amd is a nice 2.0 lump with a supercharger, your intel is a 3litre turbo lump.
at general apps you will find an amd will kick an intels ass, however once the turbo kicks in, you will find the intel will shoot ahead vastly at games/encoding.. its my own sights and what i like to use to help people who arnt as geeky as us lot understand

oh and also, just so you know i have used other amd systems, i find that my amd 2800+ at 2.64 ghz (corsair twinX xms 3200xl 400mhz) is faster than my 4.11ghz at general apps, and im not sayin that intel are the best processors, im merly saying that if i had a choice, id go with the 775.. and eventually il uprgrade to 775 with 64bit support when i get bored.

Thanks
Rik x

[BUFF]

It's possible to get a 775 P4 to do over 300fsb - ASUS, ABIT etc. have found a way around Intel's 10% limit.

Nice to know that it wasn't on air - I'm sure that you will agree that the temps looked highly suspicious if it was on air.

Btw, you mention Athlon XP but not AMD64 - have you tried an AMD64?

It's generally recognised that AMD64 is the gaming CPU in the same way that it is recognized that the P4 is still better for encoding.

[Clstrphbc_donut]

"gigabyte 3D rocket cooler" google that

3D Rocket Cooler

[bouncin]

as an avid gamer and overclocker who has owned chips from both camps id say ur theory is wrong.

an intel will not beat a 64 at gaming end of discussion

but in other apps such as editing suites the intel will take the lead by a small but relative margin.

as for opterons i dont even think they come ibnto the equation because if my chip would run at 2.6 as those opterons were in the sandra mark then it would indefinately eat them alive even when running at a ht of 200x ldt 5.

i also use both chips and can safely assume that for workstation use opterons when overclocked as u have done with the p4 would eat it alive.

its all relative u cant compare a heavily overclocked p4 to a stock a64

heres the score of a overclocked a64



by the way this isnt my system but i know a few guys who have hit 2.7 with the winnies and this is on air aswell

i dont doubt ur clocks at all they seem perfectly believable to me i had 3.95 out of my old 3.4c on air

[Meleminii]

ur just all amd junkies lol its what ive found, and its all good for me, if you have problems with intel overclocks, well take it up with intel after all, my systems run faster than every overclocked amd system i have had the chance to use.. prove me wrong by bringing your systems down, oh you can all drive?

[bouncin]

honestly m8 i have no preference for either company i have a preference for performance.

if this guy is going to be doing loads of editing and workstation s**t then by all means the intel is the best way to go.

But for gaming its the opposite

opterons dont come into it cos they are real expensive and i really dont know any1 who would buy an opteron to use in a single cpu situation.

if he wants to trust sandra then get a dual cpu system as you can see from the screenie below you would expect em to kick ass but in gaming they arent optimised so dont cut the mustard if u know what i mean