Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 13:25:49 12/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 08, 2003 at 14:32:15, Aaron Gordon wrote: >On December 08, 2003 at 13:08:41, Slater Wold wrote: > >>On December 08, 2003 at 12:55:36, Leen Ammeraal wrote: >> >>>I saw the Athlon 64 based >>>"PC Vobis Power 64 3200+ XD" (euro 1299). >>> >>>How does this compare with an Intel P4 3.2 EE ? >>>Which would you prefer for chess? >>>Leen >> >>According to http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/CCAM/a64fx_51_launch.shtml, the >>3.2EE would be faster. > >Shame they only tested (except for UT2k3) applications where the P4 does decent. >As I said in a previous post.. where is DVD2AVI (where an Athlon does best for >Mpeg encoding). It is much faster than XMpeg for me (on my XP). Also, in Povray >(a renderer a normal person would use, rather than drop $4000 for one of the >ones they use to test) the Athlon is a good 50%+ faster than the P4. In 64bit >mode it is something like 3 times faster. The Athlon FX is even faster than the >XP. Expecially for chess, which I believe what he was asking about in the first >place. Guess which system is the fastest for Povray? http://www.haveland.com/index.htm?povbench/index.php :-) Thanks, Eugene >Go test Fritz, Shredder, Crafty, etc. on a 2.2GHz FX. You'll see in 32bit mode >you'll gain 20-30% over an Athlon XP (which is already faster than a P4 for >chess). > >About PCMark and 3DMark (all made by madonion/futuremark).. they're all bunk. >PCMark is biased towards the P4 and now that ATI slapped them with some cash >they're biased towards ATI. If you don't believe me, try this. Get a Pentium 2 >400MHz (yes, 400MHz) and a Radeon 9700 pro, 9800, whatever. Now, put a Geforce4 >ti4600 in a P4-3.2EE, Athlon FX 2.8GHz, you name it.. doesn't matter. The >Pentium 2 400MHz will get a higher 3DMark. Why? Well, thats what happens when >you dump a ton of cash on a company.. they do what you want. > >The semi-technical reason why it is like this was something nvidia found out. >They found that the way futuremark did the pixel shaders was ridiculous. Adding >a specific loop (or something like that, you can search for it on google) that >only the ATI chips could do.. and the entire test setup was this crap. In real >life, and in any other 3D program the Geforce4 on the faster CPU would >absolutely kill the P2-400MHz with the 9700 Pro. This is an example of the crap >companies do to fool customers. > >I've done the testing (P4-2.53 @ 3.32ghz and limited testing at 3.5ghz) for >chess and other programs, my Athlon XP at 2.5GHz beat it in 95% of the tests and >ALL of the chess programs. An Athlon FX 2.2GHz is 20-30% faster than an XP at >2.2GHz, so you can figure it'd be equal to an XP 2.64-2.86GHz.. which is >definitely faster than any P4 (even if they clocked it up to 4GHz and more) to >date. If you want the fastest, go for this: >http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000268 > >Plus, if you get a P4-3.2EE what do you think you'll be doing when lots of the >chess programs go to 64bit, and most of everything else? You'll end up buying an >Athlon FX.. the P4 will get smoked even more when 64bit stuff hits the scene. >You can get one now and when everything switches over you won't have to upgrade >at all. If you do go with a P4-EE you'll just be one of many who wonder why it >isn't as fast as the 'review' pages say. > >If in doubt, test it yourself.. I did.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.