Hyperthreading is sweet

Quote from axeman:

I liked the AMD 64bit chip too. 64 bit is the future.

But I approached this objectively, and all the performance
comparisons I saw clearly put the P4 in the performance lead.

AMD has a sweet chip, but its still slower.
Further, its even slower on the new 64bit version of WinXP.

64bit WinXP is still too new. It made virtually no difference.
I bet the peformance will increase once they get well past the
beta stage, a few production versions later.


peace

axeman

this review seems to favor the AMD 64, unless I'm eading it wrong....http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,114546,00.asp

why not spice it up even more and add a apple power mac g5 (also 64 bit) to the mix! http://www.apple.com/powermac/
 
Yes it favors the AMD chip, but that article SUCKS compared
to the other articles I have read which went into a lot of
the benchmarking details.

I dont trust their SINGLE nebulous benchmark number.
I have 20+ other benchmarks that show the opposite results.
Including benchmarks specific to the type of processing I do.

The techies who did the more in depth benchmarking seemed
a lot more competent than the guys in that article.


peace

axeman



Quote from spyderman:

this review seems to favor the AMD 64, unless I'm eading it wrong....http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,114546,00.asp

why not spice it up even more and add a apple power mac g5 (also 64 bit) to the mix! http://www.apple.com/powermac/
 
I'm sorry, I believe that I mispoke when I stated a couple of threads back that the Dell's on the Dimension 8300 at 3.0 and 3.2 are Prescotts. They are most likely Northwoods.

Anything that has 512kb of cache is a Northwood, and the Prescott versions are the ones that carry L2 caches with 1MB and L3 caches with 2MB. These are the latest Pentium 4 microprocessors that are just now being released.

Northwood processors = 0.13 micron process

Prescott processors = 0.09 micron process

Hyperthreading occurs on all of the above as long as there is an 800 Mghrz front side bus. Some older Northwoods run on a 533Mhz front side bus like the P4's at 2.8B

So, Intel uses a B designation for their Northwood processors with a 533 MHz front side bus, and a C designation for Northwoods that run on a 800 MHz front side bus. Both of which get an L2 cache of 512k.

The E and EE designation is for the new Prescott processors with a 800 MHz front side bus that get the L2 cache of 1MB and L3 cache of 2MB.

:)
 
In any case.... I doubt you can go wrong with either the
newer P4 or AMD chips.

Especially the newest P4 and AMD FX chips. They are neck
and neck.

I would love to test an AMD though. The P4 hyperthreading
really makes a usability difference.

I would like to see how an AMD feels when you spike it 100%.


peace

axeman
 
Right now, I have the Northwood P4 at 2.60 on my Intel 875P chipset board in my Dell Dimension 8300.

I think that I am gonna purchase the Northwood P4 at 3.0C for $226.00 at www.newegg.com

This way I will get the Hyperthreading and I will stay away from the new Prescott microprocessor at .090 microns which from what I have heard in many many reviews, runs super hot!

Besides, Tomshardware also says that the Northwood still kicks ass in most applications vs the Prescott as long as it has Hyperthreading.
 
Axe, How would it compare with a scsi 320? I have to make the decision about wether to go scsi or raid sata. Seems a lot cheaper to go for raid sata.



Quote from axeman:

Actuallty its not "fully loaded", but its effectively fully loaded.
I have it tuned to my backtesting.

I could have added faster harddrives, but it would not
have helped at all since im CPU bound, not IO bound.

Even with average SATA drives (7200 rpm), I benchmarked these drives
in raid 0 configuration to run at:

Average: 43 megs/sec
Top speed: 86 megs/sec
Random seek time: 13.1 ms

Compared to my high performance 15,000 RPM SCSI II drive:

Average: 54 megs/sec
Top speed: 57/megs/sec
Random seek time: 6ms

As you can see, two average drives striped/raid 0, can really
perform well. Since candle data file is sequential, they
can actually outperform my expensive drive in read mode.



Benchmark your harddrives with: http://www.simplisoftware.com


peace

axeman
 
I doubt we'd ever need 64-bit CPU, it only doubles memory space, not speed. I think 32-bit with 4G memory is good enough for tradeing softwares.
For the heat issue, is water cooling going to become the standard?
 
Back
Top