Im well aware of the strengths of AMD and have always stuck to them, however i really need the pc for video encoding, so pentiums are the best in the 32-bit environment. And my E0 stepped 3ghz cpu for £100 is hardly expensive. Especially if it overclocks well (nearing 4ghz i hope...) . Oh and i have already bought a 480w Tagan which supplies 28A on the 12v rail. So that should be enough.
Actually Intel USED TO BE BETTER. They are not now.Originally Posted by Scarlet Infidel
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2004...et_939-20.html
This is coming from one of the biggest Intel Fanboy sites ever, and these charts are old. They do not include the faster 90nm Winchester core CPUs. For the same price as your P4 you could get a 3200+ Winchester. Stock it would eat your 3.0 GHz P4 alive. Overclocked, well let's just say that it is pretty common knowledge that P4's don't scale nearly as well as an A64.
Sorry man, but Intel doesn't provide value. They provide name recognition. AMD has and always will provide the best value (unless something happens to change AMD or Intel's relative positions).
Long pipes and MHz are the only reasons to go Intel. Personally I prefer value and performance. My FX-55 may not appear to be a good value but compare it to the only Intel CPU that can get close to it (3.4 GHz P4 EE, and not very close actually) and even it is quite a bargain.
Last edited by StormPC; 09-03-2005 at 12:59 AM.
Im not sure how you have come to the conclusion that Athlon are better in this respect. The divx chart is the most relevant to me (xvid too but not quite so much). In those charts the pentium 3.0e is 14 percent faster than the best 3200+. And i have specificlly got a processor that overclocks well. Initial tests gave me 3.75ghz with the stock cooler with no problems. i will be pushing it further when i have a case, some decent ram and a proper cooler of some sort.
As for value, i got the motherboard (pcp800-e deluxe) and the processor brand new for only £135 through a friend. I doubt i could have got a 3200+ and motherboard for that.
Believe me i am a huge AMD fan and realise they are superior in every other way, but i still think they are the best for media encoding.
Last edited by Scarlet Infidel; 09-03-2005 at 06:07 PM.
A P4 at 3.75 GHz is no match for a Winchester at 2500 MHz, and some Winchesters will run 2600MHz+ on stock volts. Also, clock for clock the Winchester is much faster than the Newcastles and S754 chips tested in that old chart.
Don't kid yourself, if you go Intel it's because you want to. It has nothing to do with any kind of actual ability possessed by the antiquated P4. If you wish to pay more for old technology of course that's your call. Just wanted to make sure those who care about getting the most for their money didn't actually believe the myth that Intel is better at video editing. That was true at one time, but like the myth that Intel is more reliable or the one about AMDs running hotter, these things are fantasy.
Well time will tell, i decided to take risk moving from AMD to intel, ill report back when i have finished my system. Even if it isnt the greatest cpu in the world it will give me a sizable performance increase on my current 2600+ barton (which is irritatingly poor at overclocking too). Out of interest how much does a 3200+ Winchester cost atm?
Btw i am very envious of your fx-55, whats the max stable clock speed you have got? Did i read 2.9ghz correctly or was that something else?
Last edited by Scarlet Infidel; 09-03-2005 at 06:23 PM.
I think it can be slightly cheaper on the telephone...
Maybe a pound or two more than the P4 but well worth it when you consider how well they run. Also 64 bit is definitely coming soon. I run Windows XP 64 bit on a couple of my A64 machines and it is MUCH snappier than the 32 bit version. The only thing that keeps me from running ONLY 64 bit is that some applications (like NAV) don't run under it. This is not because the A64 can't run them, but because the companies that make the programs are so greedy they think I need to buy another version of their AV software because I want to run a 64 bit OS. They programmed the 32 bit version NOT to run on 64 bit Windows.
Yes the FX-55's are very nice. I have 2 of them. I run my internet machine on air in a SFF Monarch Hornet case at 14x208 (allows 2-2-2-5 timings on stock volts) which works out to be 2912 MHz on air, 24/7. I can run over 3GHz but it's not SETI stable. It is at 2912 however. The other one is the rig in the sig. I haven't benched it for quite some time. It's a gamer mostly. It's an old ASUS A8V Rev 1.2. Though I have not benched it in some time I believe it is still the fastest ASUS system in 3DMark2001 regardless of platform. I think I'm still in the top 60 overall even after all this time. Not bad for a stock board and a roomtemp watercooled videocard with only a slight VGPU increase (1.6V).
Correction: Fallen to #62 in the world.May need to get an X850XT and fire up the phasechange!
Last edited by StormPC; 10-03-2005 at 02:39 AM.
Well, thats very impressive. When i finish school and UNI and get a real job ill be able to play around with these hgih end components. Its something to look forward to. For now ill have to start building a water cooling rig for fun and hope its usable.
It will be fine I'm sure. P4's do very well in your application. It could be argued that you could have spent your money better but if it's what you want then that's all that really counts. Besides, when your talking P4's over 3700MHz and A64's over 2500MHz the bottleneck is likely to be elsewhere anyway.
Good luck to you.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote