1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Advice/ideas/info please CPUs Athlon64 v P4

Discussion in 'AMD Thunderbird' started by Bruce M. Whealton, Aug 27, 2004.

  1. Hi all,
    I've been approved for funding to start a web design and hosting
    business. It's a good thing I have gotten assistance as the costs of
    startup are higher and the growth of opportunities, i.e. income, is slow in
    coming. Anyway, part of what was approved, and I am lucky in this matter
    was a computer upgrade of the MB and CPU. Having been using an Athlon XP
    1700+, I've had to put on hold some opportunities that my system could not
    keep handle, that is unless I shutdown everything else besides one app and
    then let it go on its own. But that is the issue of concern in my choice.
    I had been thinking that the Athlon64 was the best choice, with the better
    performance on 32 bit apps then Intel's 64 bit CPUs. It's been a little
    while since I did the Computer Engineering type work and designing systems
    but my training was enough to suggest that a Athlon64 versus a Pentium 4 at
    the same speed or comparable speeds would show the Athlon64 to be a greater
    Then it was pointed out by a computer dealer who I use often that
    since I do multitask that the hyper-threading would be best for me. In
    fact I do, as a web designer multitask, in so far as I'd have perhaps,
    Flash, Dreamweaver, and Photoshop open at once and other applications in
    the background such as an apache server, mysql and php. That I use mainly
    to test applications before uploading them.
    Anyway, I had thought that I had read that the Athlon XP and Athlon64 both
    offered multithreading. In fact it is multitransport on the Athlon64
    versus the 32 bit Athlons, such as Athlon XP CPUs. So, I did some research
    trying to figure out which would best meet my needs or offer the best
    performance in relation to my typical use of the system. Some reports say
    that the P4 with Hyperthreading beats the Athlon64 with hypter-transport (
    I recognize these are different concepts). So, I could use some advice, or
    web links to make informed decisions, to make comparisions... My research
    so far has left me vacilating between the best choice being the P4 and the
    Athlon64. One factor is the relatively or seemingly small different in
    multitasking performance that the P4 might have in any reports I have read,
    or reviews. For Streaming media, video editing, audio/video/multimedia or
    other I/O issues the Athlon64 at comparable speeds does win out. The
    Athlon64 3200 (should there be a + there as in the Athlon XP?) and the P4
    3.06GHz. I beleive the onboard memory controller does have an impact on
    the I/O because I/O will be going into memory and the access to memory for
    the Athlon64 is faster with the onboard memory controller.
    Any advice, feedback, refrences to pursue, i.e. web sites, would be
    greatly appreciated, along with of course some explanations to clarify my
    thinking and understanding,
    Bruce Whealton
    Triangle Web Hosting and Web Design
    or http://TriangleWebHosting.net

    Bruce M. Whealton, Aug 27, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Bruce M. Whealton

    Wes Newell Guest

    Good luck, you'll need it.
    Hypertheading only speeds up apps that take advantage of it. It's not the
    same as multitasking, which to me is running more than one app at a time.
    Each app has to support Ht or there is no gain from it. So figure out if
    the apps you are going to use make heavy use of HT. If not, forget it.

    There's lots of comparisons on the web between AMD and Intel, so all you
    need to do is find one that compares apps like you use.
    Wes Newell, Aug 27, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Bruce M. Whealton

    Ed Guest

    In a world in which hype and counterclaim are increasingly used to
    disguise lack of real innovation, it's a relief to get down to real
    data. Our indefatigable colleague Kai Schmerer from ZDNet Germany has
    taken AMD and Intel's fastest desktop processors and put them through
    exhaustive tests. The results are clear -- in almost every way, bar
    intensive multi-tasking, AMD wins.

    Ed, Aug 28, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.