Slashdot Mirror
Intel "Northwood" vs. Athlon XP 2000+
Augustus writes: "LinuxHardware.org has just published their results in the Pentium 4 verses Athlon XP war. In this review, the new Pentium 4 'Northwood' 2.2GHz is pitted against the Athlon XP 2000+. To level the playing field, both platforms use DDR memory which make for some interesting results."
Take a look at
d ex .html
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q1/020107/in
They posted the results of their showdown 2weeks ago.
Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur
If RDRAM can get its prices down to closer to DDR, it might actually compete properly. Until then, AMDs lower prices and the lower price of DDR ram is going to wipe Intel's ass on value for money.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1574
sorry about that... above link is correct.
Neck_of_the_Woods
#/usr/local/surf/glassy/overhead
uh, the AlthonMP is _one_ speed grade (67Mhz) behind the top of the line XP
that's hardly 'ultra slow'
Read the damn faq once and shut the hell up. I see this quesion so many damn times. This is EXACTLY what the fact says: Slashdot should cache pages to prevent the Slashdot Effect!
Sure, it's a great idea, but it has a lot of implications. For example, commercial sites rely on their banner ads to generate revenue. If I cache one of their pages, this will mess with their statistics, and mess with their banner ads. In other words, this will piss them off.
Of course, most of the time, the commercial sites that actually have income from banner ads easily withstand the Slashdot Effect. So perhaps we could draw the line at sites that don't have ads. They are, after all, much more likely to buckle under the pressure of all those unexpected hits. But what happens if I cache the site, and they update themselves? Once again, I'm transmitting data that I shouldn't be, only this time my cache is out of date!
I could try asking permission, but do you want to wait 6 hours for a cool breaking story while we wait for permission to link someone?
So the quick answer is: "Sure, caching would be neat." It would make things a lot easier when servers go down, but it's a complicated issue that would need to be thought through in great detail before being implemented.
With processing power up at the level it is today, how much of a difference in these two chips' performances is really notable? Even if the Athlon "XP" outperformed the intel (as I am told is often), it probably wouldn't be much, at least not enough worth talking about, and it sure wouldn't negate the fact that there have been several AMD "bugs" which notably inflict Linux users. They are, however, much cheaper. So I guess for me, the comparison isn't "price/performance", it's "price/functionality". Just my .02
The XP is the same mask as the MP. The only difference is the AMD MP Seal of Approval(tm).
Just pointing that out.
The enemies of Democracy are
Really? It doesn't say so on the page you linked to, not that I could see anyway. It did list the XP as being supported for the board, but also said "Single only!" right next to it. Too bad, I almost got my hopes up there. ;^)
main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
As this highily informative post points out, AMD has already fixed the problem in the latest revision of the Athlon XP.
A comparison of the two top products from AMD and Intel reveals the astonishing: although the processors are as different from one another as apples and oranges, the difference is much less obvious in the benchmark results, when taken from an absolute standpoint.
In any case, one thing is visible: in the majority of performance tests, the new Pentium 4/2200 is ahead. After all, the top AMD processor has to make do with 1666 MHz, while its archenemy steps in with 2200 MHz. A closer look at the comprehensive benchmarks reveals that in Office performance as well as Linux Kernel compiling, the Athlon XP still takes the lead, despite its 32% clock speed disadvantage!
Yes, but AMD has the appaloosa in their pipeline.
:D
> It may mean that the highest performance x86 architecture this summer will be from Intel and will be able to command more of a premium in price than if AMD were breathing down their necks,
I think so...
> which has been the case over the past year and a half
Actually, for the last 3 years, since August 17th 1998 when the 500-650 mhz Athlon came out
The Athlon XP's will not fry themselves if you pull off the heatsink.... Well, kinda. Current Motherboards do not measure the thermister, or at least not well enough. So, when an abrupt change occurs in temp the processor can fry. However, AMD has since come up with plans to add a logic circuit to the mainboard which will cut off power to the processor and board if temperature goes too high. Check the actual story at Tom's Hardware.
I'm running a server with 2 Athlon XP 1700+ and havent noticed any problems yet. ;)
I'm using some Tyan MB, but too lazy to look up which
Before you email me, remember: "There is no god!"
Actually Appaloosa is the next core in the Duron line of CPU's from AMD. The next Athlon core, due in the 1st half of this year (so by the end of June) is Thoroughbred, which will be a 0.13 micron process, basically a die shrink from 0.18 micron for the current crop of Athlon's. This will allow AMD to again ramp up clock speeds because of the reduction in heat/power consumption. Appaloosa is also a 0.13 micron process btw.
The roadmap further indicates that in the second half of this year, another incarnation of Athlon will appear using a 0.13 micron Silicon-On-Insulator (SOI) process.
AMD Processor Roadmap
-Sokie
------
Where are the slash-groupies? I distinctly remember being promised slash-groupies!
overclockers, don't forget that the Athlon MP is "unlocked"...
That was classic intercourse!
That article always left a funny taste in my mouth.
Why was he comparing next-gen DDR (DDR333), which isn't officially out yet, to the OLD PC800 RDRAM? Wouldn't it make more sense to compare PC1066 RDRAM (see the AcesHardware benchmarks)?
PC1066 RDRAM and DDR333 will both come out officially around the same time in official chipset support.
In other words, next-gen DDR performance for the P4 is about 1.5 years behind the RDRAM performance. Tom didn't mention that part...
In other news, Samsung is sampling PC1200 RDRAM now, too. 4.8GB/s in a dual channel config.
How do the next few months look in terms of the ability of either Intel or AMD to improve upon these products?
.13 micron process, vs. the .18 micron process still being used to make the Athlon. When AMD starts selling Athlon chips made with the .13 micron process, they will once again be beating the Pentium 4 in benchmarks.
.13 micron process version out in a reasonable amount of time. If AMD takes too long getting their act together, Intel may be able to push the Pentium 4 to some ridiculous level (5 GHz or something) and win.
.13 micron chips should be out in "1H 2002", which presumably means June this year. That shouldn't be too late by any means; I doubt that Intel can do much with the Pentium 4 by that time.
.13 micron Duron chip, to use in low-heat/low-noise computers.
The Pentium 4 is now being made with a
That is, assuming AMD gets the
However, the Athlon will continue to rule in price/performance. Those of us who pay for their own computers will likely keep buying Athlons.
The latest I have seen on the AMD website is that the
P.S. Who among us really needs more performance than current Athlons? Even when Doom III comes out, current CPUs will have adequate performance (it's the 3D graphics card you will need to drop money on, not your CPU). I'm looking forward to buying a
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely