FX-57 @ 3.6Ghz vs. Conroe @ 2.66Ghz vs. X2 4400+ @ 2.66Ghz: PCMark05 CPU Suite

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

04-29-2006, 12:41 AM
Athens[2004]

Here's mine 805@3.6g

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/2987/pcmark6yu.th.jpg
04-29-2006, 01:05 AM
[XC] riptide

Quote:

Originally Posted by Circaflex

I hate going offtopic in thread, espcially a thread like this one. But 9 years is a little strong of a statement, im pretty sure the northwoods > athlon xp range, amd took it back with a64

Hell the northwoods even held there own with precott too.
04-29-2006, 03:34 AM
Kinc

Thanks for the comparison, good job!
04-29-2006, 03:56 AM
IamAnoobieCheez

Quote:

Originally Posted by mesyn191

IIRC this is at least the 2nd time you posted something like this, which is totally false and you know it...

Heres a review from late Sept. 1999:

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=1041&p=1

500Mhz Slot A Athlon classic vs 500Mhz PIII vs 500Mhz Celeron tests are almost a clean sweep in favor of the Athlon classic, it only loses 1 or 2 tests, and in almost every other test it leads by significant margins.

"At 560/585MHz, the business/office performance of the Pentium III is closer to that of the Athlon with a slight 2% - 5% advantage in favor of the Athlon. Additionally, the gaming performance of the overclocked Pentium III still lags behind the default clocked Athlon 500 as well and the raw FPU performance (i.e. 3D Rendering) of the overclocked Pentium III still takes a back seat to the unoverclocked Athlon. The overall system performance of an overclocked Pentium III (560/585MHz) is about a few percent slower than that of the default clocked Athlon 500, so even if you overclock the Pentium III 500 the Athlon still holds a pretty hefty performance advantage."

The 500Mhz Slot A Athlon was also the first one available ever too, there were no Athlons ever released that were slower than that...

The only time since the intro. of the Athlon that AMD has not held the performance lead over Intel was during the Thoroughbred/Barton vs. Northwood P4 days, and comes to what? About a year or so?

Those were Katmai P3's. Those P3's had on-board 512kb L2, not directly integegrated to the chip, also the instruction set was not as optimized as P3 "copper". That review you posted is biased, and favored toward AMD. Of course you would get better numbers on AMD side. I remember those old P3 copper 700@ 1072 easily outperforming 1100~ 1200mhz oc'ed(& tweaked) AMD Athlon Classic systems at Tomshardware. Even my own bench outperform AMD overclockers back then. Was so much fun "wupping" AMD.:clap:

Don't... even try to argue with me about P3 vs AMD dinky poo. I know how the game works. ;)

Wait a min...

Quote:

IIRC this is at least the 2nd time you posted something like this, which is totally false and you know it...

I will gladly say the same thing again, and again, and again. Like I'm suppose to be getting permission??!!?
04-29-2006, 08:13 AM
mesyn191

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAnoobieCheez

Those were Katmai P3's. Those P3's had on-board 512kb L2, not directly integegrated to the chip,

Same for the Athlon Slot A classic, they were evenly matched.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAnoobieCheez

also the instruction set was not as optimized as P3 "copper". That review you posted is biased, and favored toward AMD.

OK, pretty clear you don't know what you're talking about now. FYI an instruction set is not the same thing as an arch. improvement, which was what Coppermine was (they fixed some of the major pipeline stalls and improved clockspeed scaling vs. Katmai)... An instruction set is x86, MIPS, EPIC, etc.

Coppermine PIII's weren't available at the time of that review (which was done in Sept. 1999), they didn't even get launched until late Oct. 1999.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_III

Anand tested the best PIII against the best Athlon available at that time and the PIII got totally outclassed, no if, ands,or buts about it.

Also, calling Anand biased when you hold up reviews from Tom's Hardware as "proof" (hahah, thats about the same time Tom's started to go downhill and became the POS that it is today) without backing it up with links shows you to be a fool and a hypocrite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAnoobieCheez

I remember those old P3 copper 700@ 1072 easily outperforming 1100~ 1200mhz oc'ed(& tweaked) AMD Athlon Classic systems at Tomshardware.

Post links then.

I recall the 1Ghz PIII and a 1Ghz Athlon Classic being neck and neck performance wise, with the PIII usually edging out the Athlon in Q3A.

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=1191&p=1

I really doubt that a 1.05Ghz PIII would've beat a 1.2Ghz Athlon Classic in anything besides Q3A, for some reason that game loved the PIII.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAnoobieCheez

Don't... even try to argue with me about P3 vs AMD dinky poo. I know how the game works. ;)

Based on what you've posted so far I don't think its out of line it say that you don't know how much of anything works.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAnoobieCheez

Wait a min...

I will gladly say the same thing again, and again, and again. Like I'm suppose to be getting permission??!!?

You need to work on your reading comprehension skills...
04-29-2006, 08:19 AM
dnottis

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dagalidis

But what about Real 3D Benches (GAMES) ?

My sentiments exactly. We all know that the DC chips are nice, but cannot outrun an expertly overclocked single core in gaming. So let's see some game benchmarks now!!
04-29-2006, 08:24 AM
ORCBEAST

Man this thread took a U TURN :p:

Hey FCG how about some GAME BENCHIES ? Or is your rig not powerfull enough :rolleyes:

hehe ;)
04-29-2006, 08:40 AM
mesyn191

Yea sorry about that...

I'll delete my posts if OP asks.
04-29-2006, 09:09 AM
IamAnoobieCheez

Quote:

Originally Posted by mesyn191

OK, pretty clear you don't know what you're talking about now. FYI an instruction set is not the same thing as an arch. improvement, which was what Coppermine was (they fixed some of the major pipeline stalls and improved clockspeed scaling vs. Katmai)... An instruction set is x86, MIPS, EPIC, etc.

wrong.... it's more to it than "just" pipleline stalls and improved clockspeed scaling. I was speaking of "Instruction set" in terms of "Extensions". SIMD-Instruction, which contains: MMX & SSE instructions. The Coppermines have extra SSE SIMD-instructions added to it, which enables increased performance on a wide variety of multimedia and communications applications. Nope, I'm not just talking about Internet Streaming part. I wasn't just talking about "Architecture core design" of the P3, what the hell were you thinking...

Quote:

Also, calling Anand biased when you hold up reviews from Tom's Hardware as "proof" (hahah, thats about the same time Tom's started to go downhill and became the POS that it is today) without backing it up with links shows you to be a fool and a hypocrite.

Based on what you've posted so far I don't think its out of line it say that you don't know how much of anything works.

Sounds like the only thing you've been reading up is wikipedia for information source.:stick: You don't seem to have enough experience with the Pentium processors. You also seem to depend on few sources and quickly jumping into conclusions. Ignorant people like you is what I find disappointing.

Quote:

You need to work on your reading comprehension skills...

Yep... now I see your true color. Low class people.. :rolleyes:

Quote:

Yea sorry about that...

I'll delete my posts if OP asks.

Now, that would be a smart move. ;)
04-29-2006, 09:38 AM
mesyn191

Nice to see that you have done nothing to prove your points and just spout character attacks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by noobie.cheez

Sounds like the only thing you've been reading up is wikipedia for information source.

Wow, so I can't use links to back up what I say then huh? So you don't believe a word I say and ignore the info. I post to back it up, just no reasoning with you then?

Those added SSE instructions didn't do much to improve performance either BTW, the clockspeed increases and pipleline stall fix are what has been attributed to the major performance improvments for Coppermine....

Quote:

Originally Posted by noobie.cheez

Now, that would be a smart move.

That apology was meant for OP and other posters in this thread looking for info. not you.
04-29-2006, 10:38 AM
IamAnoobieCheez

Quote:

Originally Posted by mesyn191

Wow, so I can't use links to back up what I say then huh? So you don't believe a word I say and ignore the info. I post to back it up, just no reasoning with you then?

yeah but.... That site doesn't have much of information.. Not a best site to rely on..

Quote:

That apology was meant for OP and other posters in this thread looking for info. not you.

I know.

but I said it anyway. I kinda did it to provoke you but.....

How about we kiss and make up. :D
04-29-2006, 11:45 AM
Nanometer

You compared a Northwood to a Prescott ;). :) lol. Prescott was a joke, we all admit it.
04-30-2006, 10:01 AM
mesyn191

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAnoobieCheez

How about we kiss and make up. :D

:toast:
04-30-2006, 10:10 AM
maratus

Quote:

Originally Posted by ORCBEAST

Man this thread took a U TURN :p:

Hey FCG how about some GAME BENCHIES ? Or is your rig not powerfull enough :rolleyes:

hehe ;)

Yeah ppl're waiting for GAME :explode: performance info ;)
04-30-2006, 01:09 PM
dnottis

I would like to even see some comparison in Oblivion to a single core overclocked opty. I'm just curious to see if all the theoretical gains will be seen real world - in other words is my 3 Ghz Opty really obsolete ;)

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page