Will AMD Ever Catch Up????

This is the place where all heated debates shall reside. Non-tech topics allowed. Personal attacks will not be tolerated. "Enter at your own Risk".

Moderator: The Mod Squad

Postby Johnny Mnemonic » Mon Feb 24, 2003 8:35 pm

I find it amusing to discuss 600 dollar CPU's. Yes it's a neat technology, but you won't find much practical application right now. Another point is that it is exceedingly difficult to benchmark multithreaded application. Sure it may be handy if you are burning a CD, while converting a MP3 to WAV, and tooling around in Photoshop. But how would YOU test this?

All I saying is that before you invalidate a review, you might want to look at your interpretation of what the review represents.
0100101001001101
Image
Johnny Mnemonic
Black Belt 1st Degree
Black Belt 1st Degree
 
Posts: 1903
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 1:01 am
Location: McKinney, Tx

Postby undying fenix » Mon Feb 24, 2003 8:47 pm

Well I guess you could just test it as any other processor. Why not?
Hold that thought.
undying fenix
Green Belt
Green Belt
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 12:36 pm
Location: Texa$$

Postby Vyrux » Mon Feb 24, 2003 9:48 pm

If I compared a Ferrari and a Porsche Turbo, yet handicapped the Porsche by disabling its turbo, would anyone take my review and its conclusion seriously?

What I critique here is the reviewer's methodology of the comparison. HT is part of the Intel P4 3.06 GHz processor, part of its price, part of its performance just as the turbo is part of that Porsche. HT should not be disabled. Intel sells "P4 3.06 HT" but no "P4 3.06". In my opinion, disabling HT invalidates the comparison.
Vyrux
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 3:26 pm

Postby gamepyrate » Mon Feb 24, 2003 10:26 pm

I can't find the similarity in comparing a Porsche Turbo without its turbo and the Pentium 4 HT without HT on. HT won't make any difference in 3dmark, and testing in multitasking environments isn't yet done. Maybe Doc should redo the review with HT on though, even though the results may only change up or down by a few points (due mostly to scientific error).
- http://www.motherboards.org/forums/view ... hp?t=17513 if you want to pick on the HT thing.
But I sure in hell could care less about the 600 dollar sector in the CPU market. That's more than I spent for my computer.
gamepyrate
Black Belt 1st Degree
Black Belt 1st Degree
 
Posts: 1359
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 12:00 am

Postby knif_00 » Tue Feb 25, 2003 4:14 am

Good point there Gamypyrate. As far as fighting back and forth between the speed wars, lets just drop it already.
The real answers will be unearthed once the 64-bit Processors are out by years end.
Asus A7V333 Raid w/ AMD Athlon XP 1700+ DLT3C 0319@ 2.16 cooled via Thermalright AX-7 and an 80mm crystal led fan from SVC, 512 MB Corsair XMS PC3200 'LL' DDR, ATi Radeon 9800XT 256MB
knif_00
Green Belt
Green Belt
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 11:12 am
Location: Southern Illinois

Postby Vyrux » Tue Feb 25, 2003 7:01 am

Well I posted in the forum suggested by gamepyrate, but there's very little traffic there. So I am back. I do not care about the speed war. Intel and AMD will take turns being on top. My frustration stems from the premise of the comparison, which is flawed from the get-go.

Doc Overclock wrote:Performance wise there is no disputing that the Athlon 3000+ is a fast chip and it beat the P4 3.06GHz in almost every test here in the lab."

Unfortunately, Intel does not sell "P4 3.06", it sells "P4 3.06 HT". It is biased to entirely disregard HT in the comparison and then second guess what the test would have been like with HT enabled. Instead just compare the AMD 3000+ and with the P4 3.06 HT enabled. Even Doc himself referred to HT as "the real gusto of [intel's] new line of CPUs". So where is the consistency here? Why does comparing a 3000+ and a castraded P4 seem fair to most people here?
Vyrux
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 3:26 pm

Postby evasive » Tue Feb 25, 2003 2:29 pm

Maybe, just maybe because there are VERY little OS/application combos that will actually benefit from HT. This may change in the coming months but for NOW there isn't any use for it.
We hate rut, but we fear change.
********************************
System error, strike any user to continue...
evasive
Mobo-fu Master
Mobo-fu Master
 
Posts: 37389
Joined: Sun May 06, 2001 12:01 am
Location: Netherlands

Postby undying fenix » Tue Feb 25, 2003 2:32 pm

Then why do they bother selling processors with HT??? Sounds like a waste of money to me.
Hold that thought.
undying fenix
Green Belt
Green Belt
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 12:36 pm
Location: Texa$$

Postby evasive » Tue Feb 25, 2003 3:18 pm

Because once the OSs and apps are optimized and capable of using it, it will greatly increase the speed of computing. We have seen it with MMX, SSE, 3DNow! and whatnot...

Part of it is marketing hype as usual, but part is indeed a real improvement. Time will tell...
We hate rut, but we fear change.
********************************
System error, strike any user to continue...
evasive
Mobo-fu Master
Mobo-fu Master
 
Posts: 37389
Joined: Sun May 06, 2001 12:01 am
Location: Netherlands

Postby knif_00 » Sat Mar 01, 2003 3:38 am

good lord, dont make me say it again

knif_00 wrote:The real answers will be unearthed once the 64-bit Processors are out by years end.
Asus A7V333 Raid w/ AMD Athlon XP 1700+ DLT3C 0319@ 2.16 cooled via Thermalright AX-7 and an 80mm crystal led fan from SVC, 512 MB Corsair XMS PC3200 'LL' DDR, ATi Radeon 9800XT 256MB
knif_00
Green Belt
Green Belt
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 11:12 am
Location: Southern Illinois

PreviousNext

Return to The Hundred Year War

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest