| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Comments:
<0> but
<1> cours dual cores instead of dual HT its better
<1> when u recover files
<0> i can do all kinds of **** on my athlon64 signle core w/o lag
<1> usin par files on suenet
<1> its extra heavy
<0> hm
<0> i bet my cpu can handle it just fine
<0> and still multitask
<1> now i can put that to maxium priority
<1> and i can still use the pc
<0> it sounds memory intensive to
<1> it ll autobalance
<0> too
<1> with ht
<0> put it at normal priority the OS will autobalance it
<0> or lower priority
<0> :p
<0> of course my cpu has an advantage anyway
<1> but it ll be slower on recovery
<1> anyway it think amd duals are the top
<0> OMNITEL, no it wont
<1> thats no doubt
<0> its goona slow down when the hyperthreading kicks in
<1> but i had thse cpus and mobos for free
<0> how? :P
<0> i want some
<0> heh
<0> then i can benchmark my box side by side
<0> intel has the disadvantage anyway
<1> no m really debating if it worths now to re***emble all
<0> their memory controllers arent built into the CPU die like AMD's
<1> i know i know
<1> anyway amd itsa doing a big mistake
<0> my cpu talks to my memory controller on the hypertransport bus at 1GHz
<1> dual amd cpus cost too much still
<0> fast memory access low latancy
<0> OMNITEL, any new technology will cost $$
<0> amd is still cheaper than intel by a long shot
<1> if i had to sepnd money i wouldnt have liked to buy a x2 4400+
<1> but i wouldnt at the end coz with less then half i could buy lets say a 920
<0> what do you think a dual core p4 would cost? :P
<0> well
<0> the dual cores from intel **** from what I've heard
<1> Intel PD 920 2.8Ghz FSB800 2x2Mb EM64T 775 Boxed 209,00 250,80
<0> very buggy and hackishly put together
<1> Amd Athlon 64 X2 4200+ Sk939 2x512Kb Cache Boxed 295,00 354,00
<0> and that 4400+ will double performance of that intel
<1> 4400+ would be even more
<0> and its not _that_ much more
<0> well
<1> yeah but thats too much anyway
<1> 500 for just the cpu
<1> no way
<0> if its *that* much more its not worth it
<1> for me even 250 is too much
<0> i woudlnt spend 500 on a 4400+ when 295 will get me a 4200+
<1> still havent figure out anyway what the p4 920 has mpore compared with this 820d that has just few months
<1> but 4200+
<1> has less cache
<1> hasnt it ?
<0> not necessairly
<0> that depends on the core
<1> i would buy directly a 2MB cpu
<1> it is
<0> the 4200+ is just the speed factor
<0> and
<0> amds have less cache than intels
<1> i mean if i have to fork out that money ll duirectly go for the 1mb per core
<0> they dont need that much because they can access memory a lot faster
<1> version and now just the 4400+
<1> is the minimum for that
<0> p4's have to pack in the cahce because its a lot more latancy to talk to the memory
<1> i now they have controller on die
<1> but..
<0> i think its something like 3 times slower to access memory on a p4 than it is from an athlon
<0> so theres not as much need for cache on amd
<0> CPU cache: L1:64 KB L2:512 KB L3:
<0> ^ 512KB cache on my core, and it works great
<0> but what?
<2> that x2 in my office BARLEY out preforms this P4 BAF
<0> its also a lot slower than your p4
<0> what is it a 3800+?
<1> but i have to spend all that money on a cpu
<2> how can it be slower
<2> if its faster
<0> slower clock
<1> i would aim for the 1mb per core
<2> BAF!
<0> outperform doesnt mean its faster
<1> coz on 3d it ll be faster then then
<1> the 512k one
<0> no it wont
<0> with 3d games it comes down to the video card
<1> and m not buyin a cpu to keep it for 6 months and then change
<1> that why i would have bought the 4400+
<0> you wont notice a difference between 512k and 1m core especially on AMD
<1> but before the amd was the top for price per perfo
<0> Jefreymon, you got 3800+?
<2> today
<1> now its crazy thats precier
<2> I do
<1> altho better
<1> but damn 350 for a cpu
<0> alright one sec
<0> OMNITEL, dual core isnt cheap
<0> but i def. wouldn't waste the money on intel dual core
<0> go with a single core amd, a slightly slower dual core, or even a p4 w/ HT
<1> damn a p4 single emt64 maybe found for 170
<0> i bet the p4 w/ ht outperforms the dual :P
<1> what do u think most of the people would buy
<0> depends
<1> altho athlon 64
<1> are faster
<1> and now days cheap too
<2> buy a 64 bit chip
<0> Jef
<0> the 3800+ dual core
<0> runs at 2.0GHz
<2> 2.2
<0> and it outpreforms your p4 at 3.8GHz :P
<0> whats that say
<0> k
<0> 2.2
<1> but what i hate is that amd is havin pricier cpus particulary on the dual core part
<1> course
<0> your p4 is 1.6ghz faster
<0> almost twice as fast
<2> it dosnt out preform in some tests tho
<2> others it does
<0> yea
<0> so whats that say about AMD :P
<2> so..its the same for alot more money
<0> if they stepped up and put out a 3.8ghz amd cpu
<0> it would pound your p4 into the ground :>
<0> OMNITEL, its new technology
<0> its goona be expensive for a little while
<2> if
<2> pigs could fly?
<2> wtf baf!
<0> they wont tho
<0> they dont need to spend the money
<0> their 2.2ghz can keep up with your 3.8
<2> I duno with it at 3.8
<2> thats was at 3.6 :]
<0> oh
<0> well OC the amd :P
<1> i always buy the best for the
<1> i had celeron 300@450
<1> 366@550
<1> amd 1600+
Return to
#dsl
or
Go to some related
logs:
#heroin
#beginner
#gentoo
nagafooki
fracnce football
PTSC kramer
#politics
#unixhelp
PCIMCI Slot
#mirc
|
|