Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 07:46:58 05/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
Just a point of math: if x is 70% higher than y, then y is about 58.8% lower than x. (Earlier you said that the K7 was 70% faster than the P4. If that's true, then it cannot also be true that the P4 is 70% slower than the K7.) BTW, I am making NO statement in the Intel vs. AMD war, only a math comment. On May 09, 2002 at 01:08:49, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On May 07, 2002 at 19:30:41, Chritopher A. Morgan wrote: > >who believes such crap in a CCC forum. > >the intel p4s are 70% slower for the average chessprogram than a K7. >note both do not scale lineair upwards. P4s worst. > >>Tom’s Hardware ran extensive tests comparing the AMD 2100+ with the new Intel >>Pent 4/2533. Results were published May 6. Intel was superior in all tests. >>Their summary follows: >> >> >>The results of this test don't leave much room for doubt, while also not >>offering a lot of surprise. In all 25 benchmark disciplines, the Intel Pentium >>4/2533 is well ahead of the AMD Athlon XP 2100+. Together with 533 MHz RDRAM, >>the P4 gains accordingly in performance through an FSB clock that has been >>increased from 100 MHz to 133 MHz. The overclocking benchmarks show how far the >>processors can be pushed. Not even an overclocked AMD Athlon XP 2100+ with a >>water-cooling system can offer serious competition for the tuned Pentium 4/2800. >>Here, it should be noted that the P4/2533 ran stably at 2800 MHz with a standard >>CPU cooler. >> >>Times are getting tougher for AMD if they want to stay on top of things. The new >>Thoroughbred core needs to be released soon and then we need to see some hefty >>clock speed to keep up with Intel's Pentium 4. >> >>Christopher
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.