Pentium 4 2.8GHz

DigitaBiscuit writes "The new 2.8GHz Pentium 4 has been officially launched by Intel today. Sporting a 533MHz System Bus, this new P4 looks to put the hurt on AMD's new Athlon XP 2600+. Benchmarks and a full review with performance versus AMD's new chip, can be found here." The NDAs must be expiring today, since we already have another review submitted as well.

Comments

Who cares?

[Newer Guy]

I'm typing this on a homemade computer that uses an AMD K6-3/350 overclocked to 392 Mhz. For what I do (web browsing, word processing, email, simple games like Tetris and listening to streams and MP3's) it works great! Why would I want to buy one of these? I'd much rather take a trip to Hawaii with my honey then blow a couple of grand on a Pentium 4 computer. Besides, let's get real...in about three months this will be obsolete...replaced by the newest whiz bang 3.0 GHZ processor that works about 7% faster then this one does. I think I'll wait until a real reason comes along to justify my spending a lot of $$ on a processor this powerful. For what I do, I simply don't need this much power. Do you?

Re:Who cares?

[tconnors]

fyi, gentoo packages are actually source based and are compilied automatically when installed to avoid rpm hell. Hmm lets upgrade to gcc31?.. this took litterally 2 days on my pIII.

Crickeys! You sure you are not running out of memory? I have a 500MHz AMD, (but with 384 megs RAM) and have never complained (I did when I only had 128 megs)! Of course, I used debian, and so don't have to compile from source often, but still, 2 days? Mozilla only took me a couple of hours, last time I tried it.

Hell, I would get sick of things after a day and kill the compilation -- the kernel didn't even take a day to compile on my 486 with 8 megs RAM.

I'm sure most peoples speed problems would be neutralised by them installing a decent window manager instead of the KDE or GNOME crap. I don't beleieve it takes ~30 seconds to start KDE on a top of the line workstation these days. FVWM took about 3 seconds on my 486 (and is there instantly on my ~500MHz laptop and desktop)!

Putting the hurt on AMD?

[Chicane-UK]

Well if I was going to put together a fast desktop system, I can tell you it wouldn't be built around an Intel Pentium 4 Processor (insert jingle here) - as far as I am concered, Intel price their CPU's so far off the scale it isn't true. Add to that the fact that AMD's processors no longer have issues with stability or floating point speed (like the old K6/K6-2) - I cant see any reason to buy such a top of the line Intel chip unless you were absolutely *desperate* to eek every last drip of performance out of a system. But at 2.6GHz and beyond, people aren't really counting - right?

The thing that bugs me is still the stigma attached to AMD.. its similar to the old 'No one got fired for buying IBM' - it is the same with Microsoft, and the same with Intel. People still avoid AMD because they consider them to be inferior..

Surprise Surprise - P4 Optimizations

[euphline]

Surprise, surprise, the reviewer comments that, In closing, once again it seems as though Intel has one upped AMD in their clash for the PC processor performance superiority. The edge goes decidedly to Intel's 2.8GHz flagship, in most all areas of performance, with perhaps the rare exception of older legacy code based applications.

According to them, "older legacy code based applications" are applications without Pentium 4 optimizations.

Will we ever get reviewers that aren't incredibly biased... and stupid? Of course P4s do better on software with P4 optimization! And software w/o it isn't "older legacy software"... it's software that isn't written to favor a particular chip in the marketplace...

Gotta love it.

-jbn