P4 3.0GHz vs. 3.2GHz

B

batman810

New Member
Im building my first system, atleast working on it and I am wondering how much differnce will I notice in a P4 3.0GHz and a 3.2, its like a 40-50 dollar price difference, and the money money I can save, I can use to put toward something else. Thanks
 
I doubt it's a huge performance boost, but if money's an issue, just shoot for the 3.0Ghz and spend the extra on a better vid card or more ram. Just my opinion!
 
yeah, the difference is small but if you want a 3.2 you can easily OC the 3.0 200MHz. For the Prescotts, the performance isn't linear for the speed increase so the difference is bigger than a 3.0 Northwood vs a 3.2 Northwood
 
Well if its a Socket478 prescott (not sure if they went to 3.2), id avoid it simply cuz of the heat output :)
 
I think he means a 3.4 prescott and 3.4EE in 478, the EE is easy enough to find listed but hard to find in stock
 
If it was up to me, I'd ditch the P4 EE (anyday) and go for the AMD 64 3400+ or 3500+ perhaps (socket 939). Tests show it is anywhere from 5-20% better then the P4 EE with HT. It has to do with the 64 having 8 pipelines (making it more efficient), whereas the P4 has 20.
 
It has to do with the 64 having 8 pipelines (making it more efficient), whereas the P4 has 20.
Click to expand...
Ok....but the k8 has a 12 stage integer pipeline and the p4e has a 31 stage...in any case pipeline length doesn't relate directly to efficiency the clock speed is a factor too.
 
You mean a 3.4EE or non EE NON-prescott?
Click to expand...
There is no 3.4EE "Prescott edition" :)

It has to do with the 64 having 8 pipelines (making it more efficient), whereas the P4 has 20.
Click to expand...
You mean its got one pipeline with multiple stages right? Until we have dual core procs, they only have one pipeline :)
 
Yeah you are right maybe I misspoke about that. Sorry. But at any rate, the AMD 64 IS BETTER performing then the Intel, and not to mention it is a better buy. You are preparing yourself for the future of 64-bit operating systems and programs. Sucks for me, I got socket 754... grrr... but that is still good. But still.. should of got socket 939.

BTW isn't the clock speed on the Athlon 64... 1600MHz while it is 800MHz on the P4? And the Athlon 64 is far more efficient, overheats far less, and has far more cache on it!
 
Praetor said:
Well Intel has 64bit support too... :)
Click to expand...

For servers yes, but not for personal computing users. Nice try really. I don't really like the Itanium (is that what they call it?). It isn't the most efficient processor to begin with.

And yes the AMD 64 is better performing in about 90% of the tests then Intel. Even in business benchmarks, which people claim Intel is better in, is not the case.
 
For servers yes, but not for personal computing users. Nice try really.
Click to expand...
Before you "nice-try" me, do your research :)

I don't really like the Itanium (is that what they call it?). It isn't the most efficient processor to begin with.
Click to expand...
If you're gonna be an AMD fanboy, at least know-thine-enemy. Anyone who knows anything about servergrade 64bit processing knows that the Itantium (which has hence been upgraded via Itanium2) is designed to work in memory intensive environments ... and as such, CPU efficiency means damn near phuck-all :)

And yes the AMD 64 is better performing in about 90% of the tests then Intel. Even in business benchmarks, which people claim Intel is better in, is not the case.
Click to expand...
The last time i checked, Premier was still Intel territory. Also, the last time i checked, processor scaling with Intel territory. Again, it helps to be open-minded


Oh and if i seem harsh, its only cuz we've had a whole wackload of close-minded AMD fanboys as of late....
 
Praetor said:
Before you "nice-try" me, do your research :)
Click to expand...

"Intel® Extended Memory 64 Technology is one of a number of innovations being added to Intel's IA-32 Server/Workstation platforms in 2004."

Thanks. Clearly this proves my point, as I said they had 64-bit for their Server platforms.

If you're gonna be an AMD fanboy, at least know-thine-enemy. Anyone who knows anything about servergrade 64bit processing knows that the Itantium (which has hence been upgraded via Itanium2) is designed to work in memory intensive environments ... and as such, CPU efficiency means damn near phuck-all :)
Click to expand...

I'm not a fanboy anything. I just go with what is best. I was once an Intel user too you know. I just go with who is best, and who is more efficient, better and faster. I'm also not operating a server.

Again, it helps to be open-minded
Click to expand...

Back at you.

Oh and if i seem harsh, its only cuz we've had a whole wackload of close-minded AMD fanboys as of late....
Click to expand...

You just need to get your brain checked out because I'm not a fanboy anything. Again, these AMD fanboys seem more open minded, then you Intel fanboys. I'm just a neutral observer.
 
Processors with Intel® EM64T will support 64-bit extended operating systems from Microsoft, Red Hat and SuSE
Click to expand...
And how do you think the processor supports 64bit OS and be 32bit simultaneously?have to spoon-feed the inf

Intel's IA-32 Server/Workstation platforms in 2004."
Click to expand...
I hope you're not suggesting that servers and workstations are the same.

I just go with who is best, and who is more efficient, better and faster
Click to expand...
Last time I checked Intel was faster. 'sides faster and efficient are often mutually exclusive.

You just need to get your brain checked out because I'm not a fanboy anything. Again, these AMD fanboys seem more open minded, then you Intel fanboys. I'm just a neutral observer.
Click to expand...
My job as an Admin here is to make sure things play smoothly and there isnt any closeminded arguments -- hence my example about Premier and processor scaling. And before you call me an Intel fanboy note that I run an AMD box -- yet am open-minded enough to argue for Intel

Back at you.
Click to expand...
yes, back at me -- but you failed to refute the point about Premier.
 
Praetor said:
Last time I checked Intel was faster. 'sides faster and efficient are often mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

Now you are just wrong...

My job as an Admin here is to make sure things play smoothly and there isnt any closeminded arguments -- hence my example about Premier and processor scaling. And before you call me an Intel fanboy note that I run an AMD box -- yet am open-minded enough to argue for Intel
Click to expand...

You just don't get it do you? Your arguments are just being completely foolish. You are not accepting the facts. The Athlon 64 is better and faster then the best P4 EE there is out. You are the one who is close minded and not following the FACTS. If you cannot follow the facts I will call you up on that point.

I refuted everything.
 
Now you are just wrong...
Click to expand...
Ok let me spoon-feed you:
1. Pentium4 ... top clocked at something like 3.8Ghz?
2. The Athlon64s ... top clocked at 2.6Ghz...
yet we know A64s are more effficient ... hence my comment that speed and efficient are usually mutually exclusive

You just don't get it do you? Your arguments are just being completely foolish. You are not accepting the facts. The Athlon 64 is better and faster then the best P4 EE there is out. You are the one who is close minded and not following the FACTS. If you cannot follow the facts I will call you up on that point.
Click to expand...
Child. I realize that AMD is better for gaming and in most cases better overall but that's just it -- overall. AMD, while very successful in the last year, does NOT own every benchmark, does NOT win everywhere. Whether the wins are significant or not is inconsequential because I was not commenting on their importance but rather the existance. If Intel was so crappy as you suggest ... they'd be on their way out of the processor business.

I refuted everything.
Click to expand...
So you refute my comment that Premier is intel territory? Where?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top