Oh, is that a fact? Well, perhaps there's a pretty popular thread you should check out. Just a note: My P4C will run circles around your chessy little 2600+. But don't take my word for it, check out the thread.And be sure to check the ENTIRE thread, you won't want to miss any of it. Trust me, it makes for some very fun and and rather interesting reading.blue_fAng said:
Let me tell you something buddy, you sure seem to have something against P4's, and I'm not sure what it is. But this fucking noob saying that intel just plain sucks, well, quite personally fuck you if you don't like that I said something to him. And if your Pentium M is so bad ass, why didn't you put a screenie in that thread like we did, instead of just telling us the numbers? And that 3200+ at stock may not beat my chip, afterall, Clements' XP 3200+ was overclocked and only beat me on the 1M test by 2 seconds. And I don't really give a shit what you say, until you can back up your claims with some proof, your word means shit. You take your fair share at the noobs, don't get pissed that somebody other than you did this time.PsyMan said:
I have nothing against Pentium 4s but I know from personal experience that earlier models (below 3.06 GHz) perform generally worst than Athlon XPs with Barton core.generalplot said:
I don't care about what you said to him but I care that you keep bitching to any user that claims that his CPU is better than a Pentium 4.generalplot said:
In that case look at the pic I attached... I also have a Bitmap version of the screenshot if you want it.generalplot said:
At least I'm not the one who says that his P4 is teh r0x0rz every time someone says that AMD CPUs are better (which are indeed better unless Intel has some uber super secret dual core 64 bit P5 CPUs on the market right now).generalplot said:
As I already said... I don't f*cking care. You didn't think that the Pentium-M could do it, but it kicked you Pentium's ass.generalplot said:
Well, you're right about that. As an OC'd 3200 with twice as much memory than you have only beat me by a second. And let's not forget the RAM in that other system was Corsair XMS modules to my plain ol' Wintec Industries RAM with a higher latency.PsyMan said:
In my previous post (in the other thread) I've said that I scored 48.032s cause I was running some programs. It's very possible that Clements was running some other applications too during the test. Plus, we're talking about a difference of 100MHz which isn't THAT great...generalplot said:
But then, you even said you had that bad boy OC'd, where I was running at stock.Clements said:It was in fact two seconds
Also, a second in SuperPI terms is actually quite a large amount to be fair, since only about 14 seconds separates the FX-55s with a decent barton.
Branz_mf said:6ghzl?? MAKING MAGIC, HUH???! I know how to make a piece of junk (Pure P4 without HT, P4 1.4Ghz for example ) run faster.
You simply get a heat-sink pipe and place it over the cpu and overclock ur cpu to the max. :happy:
And then try all your desired games on your fireworks engine (cpu overclocked). Crank up the resolutions to 9998888x9999887. Play the game up to the point where you can jump into the water and you will see the water splash all the way from usa to japan. SSPPLLAASHHH!!!!!!!!!! SSPPLLAASHHH!!!!!!!!!! Enough to make fun of anybody???
AH! Don't forget to post some shots of ur superb cpu capabilities.
Stadsport said:
Intel's been using the aliens in their advertising campaigns since Pentium 1 if you remember right.greginnes9 said:
And P4C is what I am talking about (P4 w/HT). Since the P4B (before HT) did suck. Even I will admit that P4 didn't show it's power until the 800 bus.greginnes9 said:
