AMD-XP or INTEL ?

[kv5]

Thinking of upgrading..... However not too sure which route to take..... AMD-XP or INTEL 4 processor !

Gonna aim around the 1800 MHZ speed... basically, what would be the best of the two for 'Rendering Video' and playing the odd game ?

[DiViNeLeFT]

does an AMD intel debate have to happen every week??

i would go with AMD... check out hardware sites... usually AMD outperforms intel in benchmarks and tests.

[tinycorkscrew]

I have a dual-processor AMD setup and I love it. If you're going to buy a processor right now, buy an AMD XP. I believe the 1900s are already out.

Right now, one of the only reasons you should consider a Pentium 4 is TMPGEnc. TMPGEnc uses the SSE2 instruction set, so it's optimized for P4s. If you plan to use TMPGEnc all the time, then I guess it would make sense to buy a P4.

As for games, the 1900 blows away the 2ghz P4 at everything. It even beats the P4 at Quake 3, which has long been a benchmark that the P4 owned.

[chickenbeast]

If you plan on installing windows xp. I would go with p4, because windows xp gives the p4 around 80% performance increas. Which it is lacking using win 9x os. otherwise, go with AMD, and save yourself some money. You will get a cheaper system that is as fast or faster. Really anything in the 1.4 ghz range or higher will do really well for what you are asking.

[kv5]

Thanks for all the advice... very much appreciated ! - I shall be running XP and have taken the advice and gone for a P4 1700 MHZ system.... God is this quick !!!!!!!! - It renders a ripped DVD in TMPGenc to VCD in 'Real-Time' - 90 minute movie.... 90 minute render time! Amazing ! - Thanks again for all your advice.

Regards,

Paul -

[d4n13l]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-11-12 10:36:25, chickenbeast wrote:
If you plan on installing windows xp. I would go with p4, because windows xp gives the p4 around 80% performance increas. Which it is lacking using win 9x os. otherwise, go with AMD, and save yourself some money. You will get a cheaper system that is as fast or faster. Really anything in the 1.4 ghz range or higher will do really well for what you are asking.

</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>
Athlons still outperform the P4 under XP. They are better value for money.

[djvirus]

The Amd, Intel thing is getting old. I myself own 2 sys. 1 amd and 1 dual p3 machine. I like them both. I say as long as your computer works it's fine. tired of these benchmark test things. OH well this cpu boots xp, 1.3 secs faster, or that cpu gives quake 5 more frames a sec. when your talkin about secs who cares. Just enjoy the fact that you have a computer!!!! Some people don't. (But amd is more bang for the buck if you ask me). More money left over for memory!!!!!!

[TIbrO]

Hmmm... I have a 1.4Ghz AMD athlon Thunderbird here on my EPoX 8KTA3+ with 1.5GB of PC133 SDRAM here...
The manual of the motherboard says it supports up to 1.2Ghz processors, but that is because that was the fastest Athlon out when this mobo came out. Do you guys think I could use an Athlon XP 1900 in this very same motherboard? If so, I will upgrade when they get to like 2400 or something around there.

[d4n13l]

T... dude... I am dissapointed in you - No dual CPU system on the cards?