Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 00:12:45 06/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 23, 2003 at 22:09:09, Terry McCracken wrote: >Ah-huh...ok... > >Tom's Hardware has it's faults but it's a reasonable source. > >Tom is also an AMD fan!:o) > >BTW I thought Intel worked with low voltage, less heat, and tighter circuits? >Also, yes greater sophistication then AMD...not saying AMD isn't complex of >course it is! > >486 cycles.....that I doubt...very much.. I'll have to look into this:o) Test RC5 and OGR to start with, do it on a 486 and then on a P4.. MHz for MHz they're nearly identical in speed. Those two programs aren't the only things that are like that either. Intel chips run hotter, actually. The P4-3GHz is around 105 watts now I believe. 3200+ is about 70 watts. The reason you'd think that the P4 runs cooler is because almost every place that compares wattages compares the maximum wattage from an Athlon to the P4s average wattage instead of using the P4s maximum wattage. They use the wattage ratings out of the tech docs, which are the averages, but I guess they can't read too well because Intel even says.... "ICC. Refer to loadline specifications in Chapter 2.2. The numbers in this column reflect Intel’s recommended design point and are not indicative of the maximum power the processor can dissipate under worst case conditions. For more details refer to the Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor in the 478-Pin Package Thermal Design Guidelines." As far as tighter circuits go, AMD and Intel use the same micron size, which is 0.13. The Athlon XP 3200+ has a higher voltage (1.65v) than the P4-3GHz (1.500-1.525v I think), but since the P4-3GHz is 105 watts vs the 3200+'s 70 watts, the P4 runs 50% hotter.
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.