athlon "barton" chip vs intel p4 with HT

  no1ghoul 21:28 18 Aug 2003

Recently I have read in your good mag and others that for gaming performance the barton chips from amd are better than intels p4 with HT technology.
Whilst I am sure this is certainly true I still don't understand it :( surely with intels 800mhz fsb as compared with the barton chips only running at 333mhz fsb add to that the fact that in the 3ghz barton all you are actually getting is 2.1-2.2ghz and I don't understand how amd's chip can outperform a 3ghz monster from intel with HT.

  The Sack 21:35 18 Aug 2003

You are not taking in to account the fact that the Athlon performs more instructions per clock cycle than the P4 so it doesnt have to run as fast.

HT can sometimes make your PC slower BTW, it isnt always the god saviour intel would like you to think it is.

FSB figures look good but you have to remember they are just one part in a machine, they do have an impact on overall speed but it isnt the single most importaint factor

AMD chips are faster at somethings while Intel are faster at others, thats just the way it is.

  DieSse 21:36 18 Aug 2003

Read the tests click here

Howeever, as ever, the game is changing as the big boys start to switch to 64 bit product lines.

  no1ghoul 21:58 18 Aug 2003

So the fact that the athlon can perform more instructions per clock cycles means that allthough it runs slower than the p4 it suffers less in the way of bottle-necks right?

  no1ghoul 22:01 18 Aug 2003

Thanks for the link it would seem that the better performance comes from intels chip from this evidence.
Allthough I must confess most of the benchmarks baffled me.

  DieSse 22:10 18 Aug 2003

It means exactly what it says - for each clock cycle an Athlon does more things than a P4 does - bottlenecks don't enter into it.

But all that's just a question of the internal design of the processor - as are the number of pipelines, the on-die cache memory size, the FSB speed, and other aspects of the design.

The internal design of a processor is really irrelevant, as long as it's as compatible as it needs to be to the outside world - ie it will run your programs - and as fast as you want it to go.

After that it's all down to price, reliabilty, ease of use and other factors.

  DieSse 22:21 18 Aug 2003

You shouldn't judge a processors speed by it's clock speed - as far as speed is concerned the only sensible judgement is a test, comparing like systems with like systems.

So for instance, based on the specific tests Tom did - as an overall judgement, a P4C 2.6MHz based system performs about as well overall as an Athlon 3200XP based system - better in some tests, worse in others.

Other tests (particularly multi-tasking), might yield different results.

But, as I said before - there are other factors than speed, too, when choosing a processor.

  no1ghoul 22:46 18 Aug 2003

So I think based on what you've said and the info in the link that you provided for games performance the p4 would be the better option then?

  DieSse 22:54 18 Aug 2003

That would be my judgement - Ialso think that other less tangible factors are in favour of the P4 too:-

Ease of system configuration/setup

Possibly better system stability

Better temperature management

Company profitability.

  Jean-Luc Picard 23:15 18 Aug 2003

athlon "barton" chip vs intel p4 with HT'

No contest although I use a barton chip the latest p4 HT wins hands down. However as said earlier in the thread the goalposts are about to be changed both AMD and Intel will this autumn release heavily revised chips.

  woodchip 23:43 18 Aug 2003

Pound for Pound AMD are far superior to Intel they are designed better get more performance from less Mhz and a big Plus as far as I am concerned £££££££££ cheaper to buy

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Motorola Moto G6 review: Hands-on

The best smart speaker: Apple HomePod vs Google Home vs Amazon Echo

Les meilleurs jeux gratuits pour Mac (2018)