Motherboard Forums


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

People still talking MHZ

 
 
BF
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-09-2003, 06:55 PM
I still hear people talking about Intel (MHZ) and
AMD (+) ratings. The bottom line is AMD processors
run faster (get more work done) at a given MHZ
than Intel and that is a advantage. Especially
when it costs less.
I have a 5.0L '87 Mustang. Back then I use to beat
the crap out of 5.0L Camaros and did pretty well
against the 5.7L Camaros. Why? I don't know my
Mustang was just faster. It must have been doing
something better than the Camaro with the same
size engine and it cost less too. I know, not an
exact comparison. I am sure there was an
engineering explanation for why but I really don't
care.
It is called "Bang for the Buck". AMD has the best
"Bang for the Buck."


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Courseyauto
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-09-2003, 07:05 PM

I still hear people talking about Intel (MHZ) and
AMD (+) ratings. The bottom line is AMD processors
run faster (get more work done) at a given MHZ
than Intel and that is a advantage. Especially
when it costs less.
I have a 5.0L '87 Mustang. Back then I use to beat
the crap out of 5.0L Camaros and did pretty well
against the 5.7L Camaros. Why? I don't know my
Mustang was just faster. It must have been doing
something better than the Camaro with the same
size engine and it cost less too. I know, not an
exact comparison. I am sure there was an
engineering explanation for why but I really don't
care.
It is called "Bang for the Buck". AMD has the best
"Bang for the Buck."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>.........................>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>


Actualy the new P4 2.4 800 FSB has the most bang for the buck,it will
overclock to 2.8 or 3.0 fairly easy on the stock HS and fan. But then you
wouldn't know that screwing with AMD. Plus it has twice the memory bandwidth
as AMD.
P4 2.4 the new bang for the buck king..............
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
rstlne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-09-2003, 08:01 PM
> Actualy the new P4 2.4 800 FSB has the most bang for the buck,it will
> overclock to 2.8 or 3.0 fairly easy on the stock HS and fan. But then

you
> wouldn't know that screwing with AMD. Plus it has twice the memory

bandwidth
> as AMD.
> P4 2.4 the new bang for the buck king..............


that chip cost 120£
for that you could buy 2 AMD 2500+'s..


 
Reply With Quote
 
\(\) |\\/| 3 G /-\\
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-09-2003, 08:11 PM
>have a 5.0L '87 Mustang. Back then I use to beat
the crap out of 5.0L Camaros and did pretty well
against the 5.7L Camaros. Why? I don't know my
Mustang was just faster. It must have been doing
something better than the Camaro with the same
size engine and it cost less too.

power 2 weight ratio, engine torque, vehicle weight are the main issues.
then things like aerodynamics, fuel quality, tyre drag etc

tim


 
Reply With Quote
 
Courseyauto
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-09-2003, 08:44 PM
> Actualy the new P4 2.4 800 FSB has the most bang for the buck,it will
> overclock to 2.8 or 3.0 fairly easy on the stock HS and fan. But then

you
> wouldn't know that screwing with AMD. Plus it has twice the memory

bandwidth
> as AMD.
> P4 2.4 the new bang for the buck king..............


that chip cost 120£
for that you could buy 2 AMD 2500+'s..
<<<<<<<<<<<<<................................<<<<< <<<<<<<<<

It would take 2 to equal the P4 2.4 in performance.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-09-2003, 09:31 PM
Courseyauto wrote:
>> Actualy the new P4 2.4 800 FSB has the most bang for the buck,it
>> will overclock to 2.8 or 3.0 fairly easy on the stock HS and fan.
>> But then you wouldn't know that screwing with AMD. Plus it has
>> twice the memory bandwidth as AMD.
>> P4 2.4 the new bang for the buck king..............

>
> that chip cost 120£
> for that you could buy 2 AMD 2500+'s..
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<................................<<<<< <<<<<<<<<
>
> It would take 2 to equal the P4 2.4 in performance.


OK, how about your overclocked 2.4C against my (OC'd) XP2500 duallie in
POVRay Lessee, 14:42 (min:sec) for me, and 27:48 for a 3340 MHz P4 ...

Seriously though, as usual, that the P4 2.4 (OC'd to 3.2 GHz, say) and the
XP2500 (OC'd to XP3200, as most can) are about equal performance wise. The
P4 will win some, the XP will win others. If you need computational grunt
(eg: 3D rendering), the XP is what you want. If you need loads of memory
bandwidth (eg: video encoding) the P4 is what you want. All speaking
bang-for-the-buck wise of course.

--
Michael Brown
www.emboss.co.nz : OOS/RSI software and more
Add michael@ to emboss.co.nz - My inbox is always open


 
Reply With Quote
 
Wes Newell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-09-2003, 11:42 PM
On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 19:05:32 +0000, Courseyauto wrote:

> Actualy the new P4 2.4 800 FSB has the most bang for the buck,it will
> overclock to 2.8 or 3.0 fairly easy on the stock HS and fan. But then
> you wouldn't know that screwing with AMD. Plus it has twice the
> memory bandwidth as AMD.
> P4 2.4 the new bang for the buck king..............


Hmmm...
P4 2.4 clocked to 3.0Ghz cost $163.
AMD 2500+ clocked to 3200+ cost $83.

The amd is half the price and beats the P4 in more test at these speeds.
Now I'd like to know how you came up with your conclusion.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.html
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-09-2003, 11:56 PM

"Courseyauto" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Actualy the new P4 2.4 800 FSB has the most bang for the buck,it will
> > overclock to 2.8 or 3.0 fairly easy on the stock HS and fan. But then

> you
> > wouldn't know that screwing with AMD. Plus it has twice the memory

> bandwidth
> > as AMD.
> > P4 2.4 the new bang for the buck king..............

>
> that chip cost 120£
> for that you could buy 2 AMD 2500+'s..
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<................................<<<<< <<<<<<<<<
>
> It would take 2 to equal the P4 2.4 in performance.


That statement is totally untrue, mr troll.
If you could get that 2.4 to 3.2, then there might be some competition
against a 2500+ running as a 3200+. But can you get it there? At 2.8 or
even 3.0, the P4 is the loser at nearly twice the cost.

2500+ is currently the "bang for the buck king" & you helped to prove it.





 
Reply With Quote
 
Ed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-10-2003, 12:07 AM
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003 20:11:18 +0000 (UTC), "\(\) |\\/| 3 G /-\\"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >have a 5.0L '87 Mustang. Back then I use to beat

>the crap out of 5.0L Camaros and did pretty well
>against the 5.7L Camaros. Why? I don't know my
>Mustang was just faster. It must have been doing
>something better than the Camaro with the same
>size engine and it cost less too.
>
>power 2 weight ratio, engine torque, vehicle weight are the main issues.
>then things like aerodynamics, fuel quality, tyre drag etc
>
>tim
>


And drivers who don't know how/when to shift gears.

Cheers,
Ed
--
Red 1995 Mustang Cobra SVT

 
Reply With Quote
 
tHatDudeUK
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-10-2003, 11:40 AM

"Courseyauto" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> that chip cost 120£
> for that you could buy 2 AMD 2500+'s..
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<................................<<<<< <<<<<<<<<
>
> It would take 2 to equal the P4 2.4 in performance.


You can overclock unlocked 2500+'s to 3200+ which outperforms the p4 2.4 in
every respect and puts it to shame...


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
talking to CTK 571 synthesizer Allan Adler PC Hardware 48 12-04-2007 09:06 AM
OT: Holiday Shopping Idea .. Marguerite Penn Talking Bobblehead Lurking Rat in 'Da Hood® Abit 13 12-04-2005 08:42 PM
talking to an RFID chip via wire. Adam Kumpf Embedded 6 12-19-2004 01:33 AM
**always interested in talking to folks about hp 2000 F and 2000/access also need early hp 3000! ed sharpe HP 1 08-08-2004 02:58 AM
OT but I think I heard someone talking about this a few weeks ago George Fleagle AMD Overclocking 8 07-06-2004 08:48 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:18 AM.


Welcome!
Welcome to Motherboard Point
 

Advertisment