Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computer Certification > A+ Certification > Re: Athlon 2000+ ?????????

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Athlon 2000+ ?????????

 
 
AG
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-24-2003

"SBFan2000" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> on the side of the retail box it says, "operates at 1667Mhz" does that

mean
> that it is only a 1.6G chip? Seems like false advertising!
>
> Glenn


It's a P rating. It operates as fast as a Pentium 2000 and costs a whole
lot less.
They've been doing it for a long time.
AG


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Peter B
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-24-2003

"RussS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Ay2Ka.48545$(E-Mail Removed)...
> haha - nah, AMD wants to boast that their 1.6 is a fast as a 2.0 pentium

so
> they use bogus figures. I have a couple AMD machines in my lab, but stick
> to Intel when I am building retail machines for a customer who is looking
> for performance and reliability.
> My bitch with AMD heat is not that the chip fails, but you need a whole
> bunch of noisy fans to keep everything else running for a reasonable

length
> of time. No good having to replace a clients modem/sound card etc. after
> 12/18 months because it is affected by excess heat - bad for my rep.
>


Nope you just need the right sort of fans. Mine are very quiet, I have 3 in
total. Two of them are adjustable speeds. Ok I paid a bit more for them,
but when it comes to that sort of performance you have to pay that little
bit extra for it.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Peter B
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-24-2003

"SBFan2000" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I wondered if that wasn't the case, I use to deal with nothing but AMD but

I
> abandoned them during the Athlon T-bird because they ran hot and because
> their FSB was falling way behind Intel! I guess I should have paid more
> attention to what they were doing! I would still say that leans

towards
> false advertising!


It is the buying public that has drawn that conclusion. AMD have never
stated that that is why they are numbered in that fashion. If you ask them
why, they will tell you that they are trying to steer consumers away from
thinking of MHz or GHz when buying a chip. Because at the speeds they are
running at now it is getting ridiculous. What matters now is the amount of
data that can be shifted in one go. Think of it as a motorway. In 1 hour,
a motorway with 6 lanes (AMD) that has cars travelling on it at 50mph, will
allow more cars to travel along it than a 4 lane motorway with cars
travelling at 60mph (Intel).

The speed soon will not matter as much as bandwidth will do.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Firebird81
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-25-2003
Exactly wher the hell you get your information I'd like to know, Russ. You
would be hard-pressed to find an experienced tech that would agree with you
on this. AMD processors have outperformed similar Intel processors for the
past 3 years. Your problems with heat show nothing more than your ineptitude
as I have built countless AMD-based machines ( I will NOT touch Intel) and
have never had problems with peripherals because of heat. In fact every tech
I know now recommends AMD over Intel. It is just as stable and outperforms
Intel by leaps and bounds.

SB--no it's not false advertising. Read Peter's response. Only thing I would
add is a cautionary statement about calling it a PR rating as tha tdenotes a
negative connotation because of PR ratings' history. Basically, tho--an AMD
2000+ generally outperforms a Pentium 4 2ghz, even as far as a P4 2.2 GHZ.
The Athlon line was designed by the same people who made the Alpha
processor, which is still considered one of the greats. That is the big AMD
secret. That technology allows a lower clocked CPU to outperform one that is
far higher megahertz-wise.


RussS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Ay2Ka.48545$(E-Mail Removed)...
> haha - nah, AMD wants to boast that their 1.6 is a fast as a 2.0 pentium

so
> they use bogus figures. I have a couple AMD machines in my lab, but stick
> to Intel when I am building retail machines for a customer who is looking
> for performance and reliability.
> My bitch with AMD heat is not that the chip fails, but you need a whole
> bunch of noisy fans to keep everything else running for a reasonable

length
> of time. No good having to replace a clients modem/sound card etc. after
> 12/18 months because it is affected by excess heat - bad for my rep.
>
> --
> RussS
> MCP W2K Pro & Server, A+, Net+
>
> http://www.techexams.net/
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
RussS
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-25-2003
Hmmm - I must be imagining the box of AMD processors I have under my bench
that are toasted .... nope, i subbed my toe on them again and will continue
to do so until they are taken away by the insurance company.
AMD vs Intel is much like Linux vs Microsoft - if you are anti the big guy
you will always find ways to justify yourself. I prefer to let my own
experiments and benchmarking prove or disprove what I hear and read. When I
build for a client I demand 100% reliability and from my way of thinking I
get that with Intel. If a client asks for an AMD system I will build it
without slagging off at AMD, but currently I would not suggest one as a
first choice.
Oh Firebird - I can find many techs who feel exactly the same. In fact I
know a few who will stand and plead with a customer to change their mind. I
personally think that is counter productive, but it surely is a sentiment
that is out there.

--
RussS
MCP W2K Pro & Server, A+, Net+

http://www.techexams.net/


 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter B
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-25-2003

"RussS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ihdKa.49567$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hmmm - I must be imagining the box of AMD processors I have under my bench
> that are toasted ....


Surely that tells you something about the way you are building your systems.

>nope, i subbed my toe on them again and will continue
> to do so until they are taken away by the insurance company.
> AMD vs Intel is much like Linux vs Microsoft - if you are anti the big guy
> you will always find ways to justify yourself. I prefer to let my own
> experiments and benchmarking prove or disprove what I hear and read.


They have been benchmarked time and time again, by many impartial
organisations and if I remember correctly, the only thing that an Intel
2.2ghz out performed an AMD 2000 was in some video processing activities.

>When I
> build for a client I demand 100% reliability and from my way of thinking I
> get that with Intel. If a client asks for an AMD system I will build it
> without slagging off at AMD, but currently I would not suggest one as a
> first choice.
> Oh Firebird - I can find many techs who feel exactly the same. In fact I
> know a few who will stand and plead with a customer to change their mind.


Of course they would, Intel cost more.

> --
> RussS
> MCP W2K Pro & Server, A+, Net+



 
Reply With Quote
 
RussS
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-25-2003
Like I said ImhoTech - my personal preference based on past experiences. I
have never had an Intel box come back with the exception of a couple that
were hit with a power spike in a storm (all in the same building). A
friend builds nothing but AMD for his clients unless requested and I have no
problem with that, but it doesn't mean that I do as I have had excellent
results with Intel unlike my AMD experiences.

--
RussS
MCP W2K Pro & Server, A+, Net+

http://www.techexams.net/


 
Reply With Quote
 
Andrew Tang
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003
I've been building systems since 1989. Here are my take on AMD vs. Intel:

1. The PR rating for Athlon XP is at least at one time relative to the
original Athlon (Thunderbird). It is a marketing number but it is not an
unrealistic one when comparing it against Pentium 4s similarly numbered, at
least in business apps.

2. Intel has led AMD in fabrication by 6-12 months, and lower watts/GHz.

3. For boxed CPUs, Intel fans are more durable and quieter. I have had
more problems with AMD CPUs in the past (K6-2, and K5 ran very hot, one
486DX did some floating point wrong).

4. Athlon XP is definitely a better value (price vs. performance) than P4
Celeron. I generally suggest Athlon to my customers for your average $1000
PC. I think $250+ is too much to pay for a desktop CPU in this day and age.

5. A lot of geeks are anti-Intel so they want to use AMD whenever possible.

6. GHz really is not meaningful when comparing CPUs of different
architecture.
See that the Pentium-M 1.60 GHz beats the Pentium 4-M 2.2 GHz in one app,
http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/...ntrino-13.html
and they are similar in others in the same article.

Andy

"Navin R. Johnson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:31:22 +1200, "RussS" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> >haha - nah, AMD wants to boast that their 1.6 is a fast as a 2.0 pentium

so
> >they use bogus figures. I have a couple AMD machines in my lab, but

stick
> >to Intel when I am building retail machines for a customer who is looking
> >for performance and reliability.
> >My bitch with AMD heat is not that the chip fails, but you need a whole
> >bunch of noisy fans to keep everything else running for a reasonable

length
> >of time. No good having to replace a clients modem/sound card etc. after
> >12/18 months because it is affected by excess heat - bad for my rep.

>
> Russ, sorry but you're totally wrong about AMD. In 99% of all the
> published benchmark tests the AthlonXP 2000+ is just as fast as the P-4
> 2.0 - and costs roughly $100 less. Maybe you should check your
> information a little better before making blanket statements. And where
> are these 'bogus figures' you're talking about? AMD's explanation of
> their processor performance figures make perfect sense - at least to a
> person with a little technical knowledge. That, along with all the
> numerous published benchmark tests between P-4's and AthlonXP's tell me
> that AMD's 'bogus figures' are definitely not bogus. And what's this
> crap about a whole bunch of noisy fans? Have you ever even built an
> Athlon box? I'm sitting beside one right now and the only noise I hear
> is coming from the whining IBM 80GB hard drive.
>
> I've been building AMD boxes exclusively since '94 and honestly don't
> remember ever seeing a bad processor. When Athlons first came out there
> was a lot of talk about heat problems. Most of that talk came from
> tekkie wannabes who thought it was okay to run an Athlon CPU for a short
> time without the heat sink - just to see if they got video. There's also
> been lots of talk about Athlon processors being damaged or cracked while
> installing the heat sink. I suspect most of that talk came from the
> 14-year-old kid down the street who builds computers for his friends.
> Bottom line - AMD processors, when installed properly by intelligent
> competent technicians are as good or better than Intel processors and a
> helluva lot cheaper. That 'Intel Inside' sticker costs a bundle.
>
>
> NRJ
>
>
>
>
>
> "Very funny Scotty..... Now beam down my clothes!"






 
Reply With Quote
 
RussS
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003
Very good Andrew - logical and correct.

--
RussS
MCP W2K Pro & Server, A+, Net+

http://www.techexams.net/


 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter B
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003

"RussS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:BUuKa.51041$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Very good Andrew - logical and correct.
>
> --
> RussS


^^^^^^^^ LOL, just had to get his bit in.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Athlon/Athlon XP/Duron??? Jerry Computer Support 5 03-13-2006 03:28 AM
All Athlon 64 Models Silverstrand Front Page News 0 01-10-2006 12:34 AM
AMD Athlon 64, 64 FX, x2 dual-core, Sempron processor guide Silverstrand Front Page News 0 07-25-2005 01:28 PM
with a athlon venice core can you mix 32 and 64 bit drivers ? VIA athlon 64 - 64 bit win pro Swan Windows 64bit 2 07-25-2005 12:53 PM
HEXUS.review - AMD Athlon 64 FX-57 Silverstrand Front Page News 2 06-29-2005 09:43 AM



Advertisments