Page 5 of 22 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 215
  1. #41
    Moderator Clements's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,510
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    The graphics card is playing more and more of a major factor in PC games now anyway. My system still scores nigh-on 6000 in 3DMark05 and I still use a "crummy" Barton.


  2. #42
    Nintendo Zealot cooliscool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by generalplot
    In case you can't tell the joke behind the name I use for the Celeron "Celery", it's to suggest that this chip has no beef and is strictly for the rabbits(just like the vegetable, BTW, other users on hardware forums call it the same thing). But we've all had a laugh at you in here. BTW, I should also note that I possess a Bachelor's degree in computer science (which I got at the University of Washington in Seattle, Seattle is Microsoft country in case you didn't know). Not to mention that I am also A+ certified in both hardware and software. So I'm pretty sure I'm more qualified to put up an arguement than you thought. And that 7 years difference means I was building my first 386 machine when you were in 6th grade. And I wrote my first program on a Commodore 64 (in BASIC) when you were barely out of diapers.

    cooliscool, it's an Abit IC7, had the highest review of the i875 chipset boards when I bought it, and I've generally always liked Abit. Anyways, there's a softmenu setup on the bios for adjusting cpu clock, voltage and also dram voltage and ratio (5:4 and 3:2, 1:1 is the default, but I'm probably better off at 5:4 I take it?) I've never actually taken this system over it's factory defaults, so I'm not sure where the safe limits are. Matter of fact, I haven't OC'd since my old Coppermine P3 about 5 years ago.
    1:1 is best, but I doubt your PC3200 could run at 500MHz. :p So yeah, 5:4 would be your best option. The IC7 is a great overclocker.. go for it!

    Redah: Um.. what? Totally wrong. Both of your figures are exact opposites. For 800MHZ FSB P4s, that would be the other way around, big time.

    Clements: Yeah. If you put your 6800U in an XP 2000+ rig you'd still score around 6K points. 3DMark is definitely not a good app for CPU/Memory testing. Lately it's become purely a GPU test, that's all. Get PCMark 05.
    Last edited by cooliscool; July 12th, 2005 at 06:25.

  3. #43
    Moderator Knuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Floating Island
    Posts
    1,782
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Intel CPUs: using a CISC system. Using base operations for the operations it makes ( + - x / ). All other "complex" operations are made via 2 and + combinations of the base ones. using more than 1 CPU cycle to execute it. What happens with those CPUs is that they are limited to the cycles/sec (Hz) they are working on. means that to make the CPU to be faster, you need it to be clocked higher. also, what comes with faster means more power and also means more heat.

    AMD CPUs: A mix of both CISC and RISC systems. Means that it uses both the base operations ( + - x / ) and also go a part for executing complex instructions ( square, exponentials, square root , etc) . It means that the CPU will not use much cycles to excute all complex instructions. it can easily make some in only 1 cycle instead of 2 or more for CISC ones. That will make them to be able to works faster at a lower clock speed than only CISC CPUs for the same instruction. So the CPUs don't have to be clocked higher, means they are needed less power and are normally giving less heat.


    If a program uses a LOT of complex instructions, it will preform way faster/better over a RISC CPU (AMD, apple before) . If a program uses more basic instructions, it will perform better on a CISC CPU (intel, amd , apple now?). That's why in most benchmarks, a AMD CPU , clocked at a lower speed than an Intel one will perform better than this one 'cause it will be able to do more complex instructions faster. Clock speed <> Speed the program will go.

    Basicly, I don't mean that intel CPUs are bad, I don't say AMD are the best thing ever. What I want to say is that AMD CPUs are more optimized using a more next gen architecture. In fact, 8080/8086 -> 286 -> 386 -> 486 -> P1 ( 2x486) -> P2 (faster P1 with mmx) -> P3 (faster P1 with more stuff) -> P4 ( faster P1 with even more stuff) -> etc. Pentium 4 are simply 486 boosted as hell with a bunch of more "specific" sets of instructions (mmx(1/2)/3dnow(1/2), sse(1/2),etc.)

    Now, over my personnal experience. I prefer way much an AMD over an Intel CPU (apart from the K6 I/II/III serie) . I hate when some n00bs are saying "my intel 3Ghz pc can beat you AMD 2.17Ghz cpu 'cause mine as a bigger number and goes faster".

    So plot, stop saying AMD are crap and intel owns. You are yourself an intel fanboy with that. I don't have and intel system and I prefer an AMD system. wtf do u have to do with that? no ****, it's not because you think something is better that it has to be true. It's not because someone has smth else that you that he sucks.I don't give a f*cking **** that you are diplomed by tatatata from tatidada and a+ in this or that. You're like everyone else, learn from experience, and true facts and not from what other says or what you think. You just make yourself sound more stupid each time. read documentations, go look at benchmark. You may still want to think what you want but ffs, we don't give a ****. Stay with the system you want, I don't ****ing care. I will keep what I have and you don't have to care at all of that.

    do I have anything else to say? I hope not. now go back to your normal activities and stop making prejudices on everything you see....

    This turns out in a thread like the ATi vs. nVidia duel....


    I would have replied that from the start if I saw it earlier, but still, that stay in the topic.

  4. #44
    Nintendo Zealot cooliscool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Isn't what Redah's saying is that AMD rules and Intel sucks? Looks like you're playing the power game Knuckles.. don't try to tell someone off because you're afraid of Redah. You bet!

    The P4 makes up for its low IPC with high memory bandwidth nad just raw clockspeed. P4 is a totally different architecture than P6 (Pentium 1-3), Netburst. Not at all the same (large 21 NW/31 Prescott pipeline stages for high clock scaling, etc).. you can't say it's a fast P1 with more instructions.

    Fact is, the P4C/E series totally demolish the Athlon XP. Don't take my word? Then go look at some of your trusty benchmarks. No way am I biased towards Intel, because I admit the Socket 939 A64's are damn badass, and I'd definitely take one over a P4 this point in life.
    Last edited by cooliscool; July 12th, 2005 at 06:06.

  5. #45
    Moderator Knuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Floating Island
    Posts
    1,782
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    learn the facts, intel didn't change anything from the 486 . The 486 is the base of every intel CPUs after. They had to keep the old stuff for compatibilities. they had to keep the 16 bits stuff in the CPU to be sure old stuff would run on it.

  6. #46
    Nintendo Zealot cooliscool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    You're referring to the fact that Intel kept x86 alive for so long.. well well, big difference between that and completely keeping the CPU the same and adding instructions. What choice did they have? AMD, while they did release the first consumer 64-bit CPU, aren't alone. The P4 6xx series CPUs and after, are all 64-bit CPUs. AMD also kept x86 alive in consumer processing for the same reason, compatibility. Until recently, both companies realized that raising clockspeeds isn't doing much and that something had to give, so they add 64-bit addressing. No immediate affect for the average user, and in my opinion, when 64-bit processing really takes off, current Athlon 64s will be quite outdated. AMD did it to start the revolution, that's all.

    I don't think there's any use in trying to combat me Knuckles, not gonna get anywhere.
    Last edited by cooliscool; July 12th, 2005 at 07:36.

  7. #47
    Emulator Developer ShizZy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    RI, USA
    Posts
    758
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    For the record, at least you have good taste in cases cooliscool I have that same one I believe, or a similiar model. But being an owner of two Athlon XP 2800's and an Athlon 64 3200, I'd have to say I'm an AMD guy. (Then again, I'm comparing to my two Celerons, so I guess I'm not giving the Intel guys too much credit here).

    Speaking of which... why the hell is the computer spec stuff no longer here in the new forum software? That was pretty sweet
    ~****Zy

    6Bit.net Emulation & Gaming | Forums
    Gekko GameCube Emulator

  8. #48
    Nintendo Zealot cooliscool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Hehe, yep, Aspire X-Dreamer II.. IIRC you have green? I've got the black one.. Great case.. but it shows fingerprints and dust like nothing I've ever seen before.

  9. #49
    Britchie Crazy General Plot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Plymouth, UK
    Posts
    778
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Knuckles
    So plot, stop saying AMD are crap and intel owns.
    Care to show me where I ever said this knuckles? I reacted to a person comparing the performance of my HT P4 to that of a Celeron clocked @ 533. Maybe you can show me otherwise? Check the first post in this thread, you'll find that's exactly what your buddy did.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knuckles
    learn the facts, intel didn't change anything from the 486 . The 486 is the base of every intel CPUs after. They had to keep the old stuff for compatibilities. they had to keep the 16 bits stuff in the CPU to be sure old stuff would run on it.
    Doesn't this make sense? Otherwise throw away all legacy apps.
    Last edited by General Plot; July 12th, 2005 at 07:44.

    Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.4 Ghz | 6 GB DDR3 RAM in Triple Channel | GeForce GTX 285
    2.5 TB Hard Drive Space | Windows 7 Ultimate x64

    Official betatester of PCSX2

  10. #50
    Nintendo Zealot cooliscool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Since I get the feeling not many people trusts my words..

    http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.html?i=1834

    The P4C Hammers the XP to bits in all but one (integer) test.
    Last edited by cooliscool; July 12th, 2005 at 07:52.

Page 5 of 22 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 23rd, 2004, 22:07
  2. LoNg TiMe No PoSt
    By DaRK-_DrAgOn in forum nSX2
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 26th, 2003, 22:35
  3. introductory post
    By Corak in forum Project64
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: May 19th, 2002, 07:38
  4. Flow's Post on ZD vs N
    By Azimer in forum Talk of the Town
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: February 22nd, 2002, 10:58

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •