Interesting review
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...doom3-cpu.html
If your looking for value per buck then i think AMD is the way to go. It would be interesting to see how the San Diego Chip gets on against the P4?
Cheers all
D
Interesting review
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...doom3-cpu.html
If your looking for value per buck then i think AMD is the way to go. It would be interesting to see how the San Diego Chip gets on against the P4?
Cheers all
D
no
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
What an intelligent answer - I can't even work out what that is a reply to. If you have nothing useful to say, don't say it.Originally Posted by nvening
@ darrensen. Most benchmarks show A64's to be better than similarly priced P4's for games (with the possible exception on the pentium-m). Doesn't mean that that P4's are bad, just not quite as good. Can't go wrong with either TBH.
Don't seem to be many SD/venice reviews around for some reason...
P4 being better that A64, Just never gunna happen
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
xbitlabs have been rather more reserved on the A64 ever since its launch.
their benchmarks show small gaps [if any] between the performance of a p4 againts an a64 while reviews on the rest of the web shows significant performance advantages for the a64 in most cases.
nvening, the p4 does beat the a64...
in media encoding/decoding
Thats not wat the monkeys told me!
Nothings gunna beat A64 in gaming untill mabe unreal3 which will use dual core and dual cpus, so there may be differences.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
AMD motherboards have a completely different bus architecture hence why it's better in some aspects. AMD aren't just "better" they can do certain tasks a lot more efficiently than others
Its not up to date, there isn't a benchmark for the FX-55, which is the top AMD gaming cpu anyway...
You got itOriginally Posted by nvening
Lol guys .........Thought it was an interesting review and tought i'd better share it with you lot.
Now i tell you what would be a good head to head.......FX vs the P4E!!!!
na, pointless, the A64 would win (the monkeys dont allow video editing cause it is a fantacy made up by society)
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
I'll second thatOriginally Posted by nvening
After reading the whole article I think they are clutching at straws re: P4 being quicker. Really.
AMD 64 3500+ | Asus A32 SLi Deluxe | 2 x Corsair 512MB PC4400 Overclockers RAM| 1 x XFX 6800GT | Nexus Vantec Fan Controller | 1 x 74GB Western Digital Raptor )Boot + backup & 2x 200gb Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 (RAID 0) | Plextor 716A Black 16 x16±,x4+ Dual Layer DVD | Tagan 480W | ThermalRight XP-120 with Delta Screamer | 2x120mm YS TECH| Black Akasa Eclipse 62 | L1980U 19" TFT 12ms 500:1 DVI Ultra Slim Black & Silver | Phillips 5.1 Surround Sound| Razer Diamondback Mouse | ExactMat mousemat | Black Cherry Keyboard | WinXP Pro
Hmmm.... Does it really matter lol.
lol nvening..turning into an AMD fanboy there
The different CPU architechtures mean that one will always be better than the other for certain tasks. P4s are better for video editing/rendering - while current A64's tend to perform better in a wide range of games - although this could easily be down to the motherboard chipset and components..
Either way the difference in both aspects (gameing and video stuff) is so small that it doesnt really matter, unless your a benchmark phreak
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)