AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

[[Setting the Scene]]

The controversy has been there for a while. Find out how the complete range of AMD and Intel processors have faired when compared to each other under Windows XP. The extensive tests measured various aspects of processor performance, including: Open GL, Direct 3D and Audio/Video.
Both Intel and AMD have many devoted fans, ready to defend their favourite manufacturer, to the bitter end. The recent release of the Athlon XP range has however, further sparked the controversy, leading to such classic questions as "is clock speed the most important aspect of a chip?".
AMD has set out to prove that clock speed is not as important as an efficient and well thought out design, while Intel is trying to force its way into the market with pure and unique core speeds.

Follow the link below and to the right to view further details and results of the various tests carried out.

[[Open GL]]

In Quake 3 Arena (demo 001) Intel's big boys, the 1.9 and 2 GHz models, performed better than the XP 1800+, which in turn was better than the Intel 1.8 GHZ. The Athlon XP 1700+ was better than the Intel 1.7 GHz the XP 1600+ than the 1.6 GHz and so on.

On Quake 3 (demoNV15) the 1800+ and 1700+ XP's where better than even the 2GHz Intel CPU's.
In many ways this unprecedented feat of the Athlons is due to the nVidia nForce chipset, which makes the difference when using high resolutions.

Press below and to the right for Direct 3D performance tests

[[Direst 3D]]

Surprisingly the full Athlon XP range and the Athlon 1.4 GHz outperform the Intel's (including the 2 GHz Pentium 4) on 3D Mark 2000 DirectX 7, Direct 3D performance.

While it can be claimed that directX 7 was not optimized for Pentium 4's there is less of an excuse for the Intel losses on DirectX 8's Direct 3D performance. XP's from the 1800+ to the 1600+ fair better than the Pentium 4 2 GHz model.

Read on to compare audio and video encoding speeds of the processors under Windows XP.

[[Audio/Video]]

Intel's Pentium 4 2 Ghz finally comes out on top, if only just, of the 1800+ in MPEG layer 3 audio encoding using Lame MP3 encoder. In the same test the Pentium 4 1.9 GHz outperforms the Athlon XP 1700+ and the Pentium 4 1.8 GHz handles the task better than the XP 1600+.

The picture changes when Divx encoding, using Flask 0.6, is carried out. The Athlon XP'S 1800+ through to 1600+ perform considerably better than the Pentium 4 2 GHz model.

[[Who Is Better?]]

It is obvious, from the tests, that AMD has managed to produce processors that can rival and in many cases better the faster, as far as clock speed is concerned, Pentium 4's. These results add an extra boost to AMD'S efforts to stress that GHz don't necessarily mean speed.
It is still possible that many applications need to be further optimized in order to use Intel CPU'S at their full potential. Examples such as the expected release of a new divx codec, could mean that benchmark results may be completely reversed.

This however, has been the main line of defense adopted by Intel advocates, in order to explain decreased performance, for quite some time now. If these application changes take much longer, they will arrive too late to save Intel's already damaged reputation.

Add new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

(45)

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

Ok, answer me this. Why would you test a processor using Graphics API's? Direct3D almost entirely uses the video card for it's processing. The same with OpenGL. Also, why would you compare processors using an operating system as a benchmark? The programs that were used would give the same result no matter what version of windows would be used. I would think that MegaGames would be a little more critical over the articles they post to their site, and read them carefully to judge if they are valid or not. I can only guess that this article was written by an AMD fanatic. You can tell that the information presented in this article is fake because there are no actual numbers mentioned, just "exceptionally better"'s and the like. Now I used both Intel and AMD processors, Intels for my home computers and AMD for my business computers. Even if I preferred one over the other, it's no excuse to forge false statistics.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

"This however, has been the main line of defense adopted by Intel advocates, in order to explain decrased performance, for quite some time now."What the hell is decrased? Who ever wrote this needs to use SPELL CHECK!

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

It's a simple matter of logic...Amd makes great processorsIntel makes great processorsAmd charges lessIntel charges moreAmd meets or beats all intel processors and they cost less...Not to mention added cost of RDRAM, Power supply adaptor, and more expensive motherboards, and having to upgrade motherboard every 6 months cause intel swiches chip design and thus requires different socket.It's not hard to figure out guys...If you have a processor that costs much less, and doesn't have added cost of different parts, and has the same or better performance, at a lower clock speed no doubt. You have a better technology, design, and all around performance for a chip than Intel.Don't get me wrong, Intel has great stuff, but I'd rather get more bang for my buck, than over pay for something that is the same.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

AMD is faster but P4 is more stable and dosent crash as much.P4 is has also a better cooling system and it is less likely to fry your hardware. P4 FOREVER.XP is also better stable on P4 AMD CAN SUCK MY d**k AHHHHH.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

Intel have only managed to keep ahead of AMD with the P4 in terms of clock speed and not perfomance. Most of us know that clock for clock the P4 is not competetive. It has to run some 500mhz faster than the AMD Athlon to compete! So in essence a 1.2Ghz AMD is generally as fast as a 1.7Ghz P4! Now AMD have there XP version. AMD have again pushed there noses in front. Intel will have to bring out there northwood version of the P4 to save some face.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA it's amazing how many MORONS are replying to this claiming AMD to be better. 22 yrs experience now with computers...trust me when I say AMD does in fact blow. What's funny is so many of you fall for the bs hype posted in reviews in magazines or ads or online sites claiming better test results. Oh yeah run a simple benchmark program that takes 10-30 mins IF THAT! Try testing an Intel system against an AMD system for at LEAST 12 hrs of pounding it in every aspect of the system. I guarantee you the Intel will win. So for all those babbling that AMD is better...learn how to properly test a system before running your mouths you ignorant, infantile, pre-pubescent thinks-they-know-it-all kiddies.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

whats funny is I would love to see the moronic replies from the obviously novice people here claiming AMD rules, when Intel releases their next brand of processor. More or less they are re-releasing the Pentium III class processors redesigned. And from inside sources, AMD AND Macintosh won't even compete in total performance to these new processors. And no, they are not being classified by clock speed alone, a processor isn't what makes a system fast, it's how the processor works with the rest of the quality parts within the system. And so far, I've seen more AMD processors go to shit because of numerous flaws in how well they work with various brands of parts that make up the system. Intel is by far more easily compatible & works well when put into a well built system with good quality equipment. Not some cheap Best Buy purchased hunk of junk brand name computer.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

The only reason an amd is unstable is if you dont know how to build a computer its as simple as that. my athlon 1.33ghz is on for 24 hours a day and never crashes, it is no doubt faster then the equally priced intel processor, but at such high speeds it doesnt really matter in every day apps such as games and office shit, who really cares which processor other people think is better, if you think either of them suck then try them cause i have and i have nothing to bag on either of them becasue they are both fine processors. thlough intel is overpriced.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

Im the owner of a PIII 1Ghz.My house-mate has a 1.1 Ghz AMD TBird (or something), were still going to school and sort stuff, so a PC is very needed.but here is my story:We made a deal which one of our PC will stop first or crash, has to pay our ADSL- connection for 3 months.And blablablablabla.....We disconnected our coolers and heatsinks.And we started the benchmark.Day 1: AMD is winning in performance against my PIII :(3 hours later: PIII is stil slower, but AMD is getting serious HOT! 8-OOuch!5 hours later: My PIII is now on top of performance, and AMD is stuttering a little bit.16 hours later: R.I.P AMD :-OBad quality? I dont know.My PIII still runs fine.AMD has taken my mates Geforce MX 400 to hell either. :-I didnt laugh.. it was sad for him seeing his AMD rip.I though we could hold on this for days, I said 3 days maximum until well stop.If your AMD is still winning then Ill pay the Internet for 3 months.And he will not join LAN-partys for the next 3 months ;)We had our arguments about AMD and Intel too like al of you guys.So beware what youre going to get.Playin a lot with performance, choose Intel. ;)Playin less but with a little bit more performance get AMD.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

"In many ways this unprecedented feat of the Athlons is due to the nVidia nForce chipset, which makes the difference when using high resolutions."Uhm no. It's simply that the Athlons have a much better FPU and thats what the demo stresses.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

I build systems.Either brand of cpu has it's strenghs and weaknesses.But for bang for the buck, you simply can't get a better cpu than the XP's currently.Neither cpu "sucks".I don't believe for a moment either that P4 systems are more stable than Athlon's.If you know how to set up an AMD system you won't have that problem.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

I have a Pentium 4 1.4 ghz, and a Geforce II MX 400 64 meg... and as far as I can see running programs like 3d games doesn't really come down to just processing power which AMD claim to have more of, it relies heavily on your video cards power.. My MX struggles at higher resolutions simply because it doesn't have the processing power to boot, the amount of memory you have also affects either brand of cpu's performance. AMD's may be fast in benchmark utilities but who the hell runs their programs through it ? !! I will guarantee that a majority of programs and games are optimized for Intel processors simply because they are mainstream and controll over 90 percent of the totall PC market. Not to mention they are much more stable than the AMD systems, my friend bought a 1.4 ghz Athalon and has had serious overheating problems and has to turn it off after an hour or so or programs start to lock up or his warning alarm comes on !! And when processors overheat the motherboard slows the processor down so it doesn't melt which means less power !!! Intels are way more stable and effecient, AMD's are just a cheap gimmick to take away some of Intels hard earned reputation !! Intels RULE !!

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

so just sayin a particular processor sucks is an argument these days? Look AMD have lower clock speeds and faster FSB speeds while P4 have higher clock speeds and slower front side bus speeds. Now yes AMD run hot, solution... use a decent fan! now as for people saying not all pc parts are compatible with AMD blame pentium for that because they dominated the market for so long without competition so noone bothered to make there parts compatible with other cpu's because pentium said nothing else was gonna be able to compete with them. but the argument has been made well AMD is VERY cheap and in most cases out performs pentium provided that the tests are equal and even when the pentium has a higher clock speed AMD still out performs em at times. Even knowing this alot of people are willing to shell out ALOT more for a pentium processor when they get less performance just because they feel brand name is security. As for the people running tests without heat sinks and fans you truly are moronic, processors are built with the expectation that users wont be retarded enough to remove the ONLY thing keeping your CPU safe from degregrading and working effeciently a hot CPU makes crashing and destruction of parts inevitable! I wont push my opinions onto anyone but i ask you think about what you buy because money is hard to come by these days and there is absolutely need to spend money you could use elsewhere.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

omg, whos the idiot who says he disconnected his fan and heatsink from his CPU. According to OFFICIAL data, 1.2ghz tbird burns (totally out) in 8 seconds without heatsink or fan. Its similiar story with any high clocked cpu which is normal and thers nothin wrong with amd running hot, just get a decent fan and u'll be ok. AMD have produced much better chip, than intels p4 (or p3). Its cheaper, faster, got real nice features, fpu perfomance destroys p4, end of story. I work in IT services section and i know that all em stories of AMD bein unreliable are bull-crap, as long as the machine is being serviced properly it can run for long time. Our linux servers run on 1.3tbirds and they run for months and never crash so i dont know what you people are on about when u say that AMD cant run for long time (unless u kids tried to save some money and use some cheap heatsink and fan). Also to kids who say these banchmarks aint valid go to any major hardware testers site (tomshardware/sharky, etc) and they will tell you the same story.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

First, before any of you guys out there start ripping on anyone try to spell right (I love it when I see fpu). Secondly, I am no expert, but I have had over 2 years of professional experience. The AMD DOES produce more heat than an Intel Chip. With even a medium cpu fan the chip will not overheat. I have been running a file server with an AMD cpu non-stop for over a month with nary a problem (not to mention the 3D games I play on it). The over-heating described in earlier posts could be due to several other reasons (Cheap case ventilation, no case fan, IDE ribbon cables not tucked out of the way, room computer is in is not ventilated, ect.) Finally, comments like "suck my..." are not going to win anyone over in an argument, and they are inappropriate. If you agree or disagree with this post please post a response. Thx

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

What the feck is everyones problem? I mean, I don't see why there's an arguement about this.Statistics show that AMD produce faster chips then Intel - in quite a few cases also, an Intel chip with a higher clockspeed isn't as fast as an AMD chip with a lower.And to top that all off - AMD chips are CHEAPER as well.As for the overheating - I use my PC virtually 24/7 and I haven't had any problems with overheating. Heck, if it does overheat - just buy a bigger fan....Faster and Cheaper. Is there REALLY an arguement here?

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

OMFG what a retard, the bloke who tested it by removing the fan!Anyways, It has always been that Intel have consistently beaten the AMD's but now since AMD's latest releases, AMD have definately come out on top. I am saying this and i am a pentium user as well!!!The AMD's speed however does have a few disadvantages however although very little ones. AMD's take a LOT of power so the people who say it is unreliable and it crashes all the time, GET YOURSELF A BIGGER POWER SOURCE! Another one is that for the AMD to operate at its fullest potential, you must have DDR ram, (which does a lot for its speed) but on the other hand, with a pentium you need more expensive ram!I am with all the people that say "Faster and Cheaper" cos the AMD is just that!.... i think i'm gonna go buy one very soon....Joe

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

Lets face it, most systems these days do not have hardware crashes without a reason. My AMD system never crashes, EVER and it is put through absolute crap by me. It gets warm, but it never faulters. Get over it it can run at 90 degree if it wants

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

I would have to say this is one of the lamest articles that Megagames has produced.To say that a CPU does so much and the only components tests were graphics and audio. Nowadays the grfx cards do most of the work now, so I think the testing of the CPUs should have been done differently. Quake3 uses the graphic card for most of the processing, hence all graphic cards are tested in quake. If u were goin to run a game to test the CPU, should use a CPU based games like UT, or an RTS game.What about tests for network/server and other business apps. Im sure that including these tests would provide better results and discussions. What about time taken for programs to load/shut down. To me these are better tests than running a simple game FPS demo.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

The test itself is a bit misleading, but I've run test on both Pentium 4 2 GHz and Athlon XP 1900+ processors. Well let me put it like this I've always loved Intel processors but the new Athlon Xp processors is far better than the P4:s and that's a fact.I'm ready to leave Intel are you?

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

It's al about the configurate!!!Good processor + good graphics chip.The Pentium 4 1.9 Gb and my GF3 Ti500 64Mb-luxe Its a monster PC!!!Its bull-chit that AMD is faster then Intel, Both have 266fsb!!!And the Pentium 4 have a 400Mhz system bus and AMD not!!!Its all about the things you do with your PC!!!Second timeGood proccesor good motherbord and good Rimm and ofcorse a nice graphics chip!!!!!

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

It's a shame that most people think that Intel is better than AMD. Intel chose to boast a higher clock speed instead of working on better architecture for their CPU's. AMD on the other hand have made CPU's with architecture to help data flow. Intel has been luring people into their arena with their higher clock speeds. With the new Athlon XP's, AMD has surpassed Intel by far. Unless Intel starts to do things honestly, they will never gain the trust of trained professionals. Intel also requires you to use RDRAM (which is slower than DDR SDRAM), unless you have the newest SIS chipset motherboard. Even the Athlon K7 1.4GHz is better than the P4 1.8GHz. Go to [url removed] they know what's up. You can trust what I say, I've almost finished my training for my A+ certification and next year I'll have my MCSE (microsoft certified systems engineer).

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

two things, i konw 1 bloke, he has a 1.4 athlon with 512 mb of ram, and a p3 800, 512 mb of ram, both have 32 meg gf2 mx cards in them exactally the same, microsoft train sim (the only game he plays) chugs on the athlon and runs at over 100 frames per seccond on the intel, this could well be a crap mother board, but intel al the way. seccondly, i have a 1gig p3 2 mates have 1.4 athlons, same video card as i (asus v7700 delux gf2 32mb ddr) in 3d mark 2001 i get 2500, they both get under 2000, and game preformance quake 3. lucky to get a stable 100 frames on either athlons, p3 averages 200fps and peaks at over 300so i say it speaks for it self.also my mate who has a 900 athlon tbird, and a gforce 3 ti200, gets lower 3d mark scores than i do, and his game preformance is good, but mine is very close and better in some. someone else i know, got a 1.6+ xp and was going on haw winxp boots in under 30 secconds, p3 1000, boots into xp in 19 secconds.

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

ROFL ive just read some fool down there reconed that he disconnected the heat sink and fan on a P4 and an Athlon and they "Tested" to see which lasted longer, never have i seen such crap, you disconnect the fan (let alone the heat sink) and start your comp up, i GUARENTEE that by the time windows starts to load itll have welded itself to the motherboard, and im talking LITERALLY. Yet for some reason you say your P4 lasted 12 hours? ROFLMAO, see this is what makes everything so pathetic on the internet, those who come on and bullshit till they cant type no more, climing there experts just because they want everyone to believe there own ignorrance. Had Pentiums and Athlons, and my experience is they are exactly the same stabilty wise, as long as you use a 250/300 watt power supply with an athlon. The athlon is faster for games and cheaper, oh and not to mention eaiser and cheaper with more options to upgrade..Figure the rest out yourself

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

you intel newbies just need to see the light that is AMD.... i had stability problems too, when i was a NOOBIE.... lol. i sat there with my heatsink and watched it freeze cuz i put the thermal paste on too much. intel for newbies, AMD for professionals. if you are too ignorant to figure out that $2 heatsink=overheating, then go with intel.... what system do i have? well, its a DUAL athlon 1.67ghz with a radeon 8500, 1gb pc2100, and 240gb RAID 0 storage. i own all of your sorry intel asses in almost every benchmark.. you can HAVE quake 3, i hate that game.... for the price of ONE p4 2.2ghz i can get two athlonXPs. they are 100% stable, and i can own your intel ass in ANY multimedia bench i want. i am even faster than your dual 2ghz xeon systems. price does not become a factor, but speed does at this type of configuration. intel is NOT more stable, is NOT better. it is simply easier. that is all. did you ever stop to think that it isnt really all that hard to use AMD? you put the chip in socket. you put paste on chip core. you put heatsink on carefully. boot up. wow, that was hard... i have NEVER had any problems with compatibility. you people are just too stubborn to admit you cant CONFIGURE things. lol i am by no means an elite hardware technician, but i know my way around things. the new XPs dont fry, they shut OFF. they cannot be crushed AT ALL with the use of a 3 cent piece of aluminum called a SHIM. a $20 heatsink will keep that thing quite cool and with little noise at all. overclocking? both overclock to roughly the same performance level, p4 hits 3ghz athlon hits 2.5, they both perform the same still. as for the cpu weenie roast, that was stupid... OF COURSE THE OLD AMDS ARE GONNA TOAST, but who in f**ks name has their heatsink fall off in the middle of something?

AMD Vs Intel at XP Coral

I'm upgrading my pc and am stumped about wehter to get an AMD Athlon XP 1800+ or a P4... The prices are making me lean towards the AMD but that whole thing with the overheating has got me worried... If any of you guys can suggest a good fan that ur sure I wont have trouble with and that will keep my AMD nice and cool, I will be greatly appreciative...also gimme some reasons to go with the AMD... TY

Add new comment