Your entire first paragraph is borderline ignorance. Let's start with.. What's the problem? Intel does more than R&D for CPUs, or weren't you aware?
"They also raised their FSB to do the same thing as AMD did"...? Intel has always been the first to raise the bar on front side bus speed, they sure as hell didn't follow anyone.
"but of course intel can not say the 3Ghz P4 with 800Mhz FSB is a 3200+." No of course not.. because Intel wasn't drop on their head as a child and can count clockspeed & names it as it is. Instead what they did was make an actual chip that is "truely" capable of performing at a level of 3.2GHz with an 800 MHz frontside bus. You would & everyone else would do well to remember that AMD's CPU naming structure was based off comparison to 400/533MHz frontside bus speeds, & now that AMD uses a 400MHz bus they can continue comparing it like that. If Intel had made a 3.2GHz CPU with 400-533MHz FSB, then AMD's new chip would pimp slap it three ways from the 26th digit of Pi. No one who's brain is worth it's wait in tap water would argue that AMD has a superior architecture. ..& No one who doesn't want a matter swung at their head and end up forced to undergo brain surgery at gunpoint would argue that dispite AMD's architecture, Intel still makes the best performing desktop CPU, period.
"for example a 2Ghz P4 Celeron isn't as fast as a 2Ghz P4 "Northwood"." ....Actually, it is, that's why they reduced the cache size on the Celeron chips, because if they didn't, their upcoming P4 line would've failed in place of the cheaper and rediculously overclockable Celerons. (By reducing the cache size they also opened another market to their chips, value CPUs. The lesser amount of cache brought down production costs & therefore retail value.)
"In fact if you look at the prices you'll see that an Ahtlon is slighty more expensive than a Celeron at the same speed except for the "top line Athlons"." I would like to state that comparing equal clockspeed chips between Intel and AMD would yield some good results in choosing a high performance, cheap CPU. If an AMD CPU is equal to an Intel one, and it's cheaper, it's a double whammy because if it's equal in clockspeed it means it actually surpasses it by 50% in the amount of work it does. If you DO NOT intend to overclock, AMD is the better choice. If you wanna overclock, Intel is the way to go due to the higher ceiling of added speed. Most AMD's only go another 2-4 hundred megahertz, almost all 1.0GHz+ Celerons can add another .8 to 1.2 gigahertz to em.
"That'll make intel sweat because they can't raise "Northwood"'s much higher anymore" I think they'll live.. considering the stopped making new Northwood designs & it's all about the Canterwood & Prescotts. Don't forget their huge line of mobile CPUs either.
"the thing is you can't sell them at those speeds yet." You're right, you can't sell them at all. That's the whole reason why CPUs are overclockable. They're sold under their potential so when they're used normally, they're used at clockrates which the design can sustain without 6 hundred dollar phase change cooling systems ;) So just remember anytime you look at an Intel CPU it's actually much faster than stated and could reach that speed providing it was safety that downclocked it before retail and not quality. Not every ####MHz CPU can overclock that same amount, it's a quality issue. Kinda like DDR-II being so hard to manufacture because it has to be of such high quality to sustain those speeds.
The morale of this story is to learn all points of view children :P
AMD is superior, only in it's architecture. Intel is superior everywhere else, being clever enough to compensate for an average grade architecture with enhancements to compliment it. AMD rarely compliments their architectures :( They make a design and then just keep trying to force it's speed up and occassionally modify cache, and here and there, FSB.
All hail Opteron! The first AMD CPU to possibly break that string. Obviously it's clockrate can be brought up on it's new architecture, BUT! It's all around improvements can be made via chipsets now, which is going to aid it dramatically if the market supplies it with enough steam.
[
Posted by: The Digital Diamond
|
Date: 06/22/03 10:46:30 AM]
Make Home Page
Add to Favorites
XbitLabs is using Twitter
Windows Live Alerts
