Amd To Intell

Mu online season 21 - grand opening

Elijah

Crystal Dev
Developer
Jul 21, 2004
1,806
18
265
what is a 3500+ in intel??

as in what is AMD 3500+ equilivent to???

3.0 ghz? or more?? or wot???

could i also have what these are equal to:

AMD 3800+
AMD 4000+


Thanx In Advance

(i really have no clue with amd as i usual have intel but everyone says get amd so im going amd)
 

Wittin

Ex-Δdministrator
VIP
May 7, 2003
1,341
1
244
295
Much better than a P4 3.0, take a look at the new AMD dual-core CPUs ;)
 

Shard

LOMCN Veteran
Veteran
Loyal Member
Jul 12, 2003
1,267
1
174
3000+ = 1.8ghz
3200+ = 2.0ghz
3400+ = 2.2ghz
3500+ = 2.3ghz
3700+ = 2.5ghz
4000+ = 2.7ghz

But then some of them are Socket 939, and they're better than the Socket 754 processors. I think they have better caches or a better FSB speed. A 2mb cache is better than a 1mb cache, and 1mb is better than a 512kb cache. But as Wittin said, look at the new AthlonX2 processors *drools*
 

Elijah

Crystal Dev
Developer
Jul 21, 2004
1,806
18
265
so if u had a speed test or somet between a 3.2 ghz intel ht to a AMD 3500+


which would turn of fastest?
 
Last edited:

urbanfox

No Brag, Just Fact
Legendary
Shard said:
3000+ = 1.8ghz
3200+ = 2.0ghz
3400+ = 2.2ghz
3500+ = 2.3ghz
3700+ = 2.5ghz
4000+ = 2.7ghz

But then some of them are Socket 939, and they're better than the Socket 754 processors. I think they have better caches or a better FSB speed. A 2mb cache is better than a 1mb cache, and 1mb is better than a 512kb cache. But as Wittin said, look at the new AthlonX2 processors *drools*

:spoke:

All depends on which core and socket they are.

s939 - all 200 HTT (fsb)

Clawhammer = 512kb or 1mb cache depending on model
venice/newcastle/winchester = 512kb cache
san diego = 1mb cache

3000+ = 1.8ghz 512kb
3200+ = 2.0ghz 512kb
3500+ = 2.2ghz 512kb
3700+ = 2.2ghz 1mb
3800+ = 2.4ghz 512kb
4000+ = 2.4ghz 1mb
FX55 = 2.6ghz 1mb
FX57 = 2.8ghz 1mb

X2 4200+ = 2x 2.2ghz 2x 512kb
X2 4400+ = 2x 2.2ghz 2x 1mb
x2 4600+ = 2x 2.4ghz 2x 512kb
x2 4800+ = 2x 2.4ghz 2x 1mb


If I were you I would get the X2 4400+.

If you don't want to spend that much, then 3500+ venice or 3700+ san diego.
 

Shard

LOMCN Veteran
Veteran
Loyal Member
Jul 12, 2003
1,267
1
174
You can't really compare AMD to Intel as they have different technology. AMD Athlon 64 in general are faster because of the 64 bit they have. Urban needs to back me up on this one aswell, I have no clue about Pentium processors.
 

Elijah

Crystal Dev
Developer
Jul 21, 2004
1,806
18
265
i didnt think the 64 actualy did anythin intill all the new software and **** started using 64?

and i dont know **** all bout AMD really, im used to knowing how fast intel pentiums are

so hey
 

urbanfox

No Brag, Just Fact
Legendary
Shard said:
You can't really compare AMD to Intel as they have different technology. AMD Athlon 64 in general are faster because of the 64 bit they have. Urban needs to back me up on this one aswell, I have no clue about Pentium processors.


Of course you can compare them, PERFORMANCE.

AMD's speed has nothing to do with 64bit extensions, as intel has them too. AMD's integrated memory controller helps a lot.
 

XeroX

Dedicated Member
Dedicated Member
Mar 8, 2005
160
0
43
i couldn't really tell u anythin technical bout AMD to Intel but in my experiance AMD are the fastest. I've got atm an AMD athlonXP 2400+ and it (seems to me) faster than my bros Pentium4 3.2Ghz. but i have got 1Gb DDR RAM and hes only got 512Mb DDR RAM.