benchmarks plus heat

[jprophet420]

i have a problem. every time i post a thread it turns into intel vs amd.i do not want this! i like intel better, but this does not mean i hate amd, bash amd, write anti amd grafitti on churches, etc. what i want to know is simple. please only post to a reply if you have a legitimate answer. the xp benchmarks higher than the p4, ok. i got that down pat. now i want to add an aspect no one is looking at:
HEAT
has anyone benchmarked the heat of the cpu?
example: you run a game, lets say half life. you run it for more than a couple minutes. you benckmark fps. amd beats intel by x%
all fine and dandy. now benchmark the heat of the cpu. if anyone has unbiased results i would like to see them. does the % fps that the athalon is faster match the % temp difference? i cant wait to see the replies to this one...
thanks in advance for not b*****ng.

[Ultima]

Well JProphet420,

My XP1800+ overclocked to 1.73Ghz, is running at about 43C after 3 hours of Wolfenstein, and rc5 running in the background.

I think you'll already know that I do not have a P4 to measure the temps of.

But you are right about the heat thing, P4's stay cooler then XP's.
But that is because Athlons handle quite a bit more per clockcycle.

If the P4 would do as much per cycle as the XP does, then it would be running quite a bit hotter, trust me.

And about being biased, if you say you're not, I'll believe you, but I am about as biased as you.
I just like Amd more then Intel, as you prefer Intel over Amd.

If Intel were making the better chips at the moment, I'd be running an Intel rig, so....

I'll keep off the AMD rules stuff in yer post, cause ya already know how I feel, mine never says Amd rules, it always says:

AMD rules @ the moment. :D

Ultima

PS Merry christmas and a happy new year

[jprophet420]

cool.
happy holidays no matter what proc you run!!!

[Ultima]

And before I forget, the benchmark ofcourse:

http://www.techimo.com/photo/index.pl?photo=866


Scores quite a bit higher, but the P4 beats me in mem bench ofcourse, due to Rdram. :D

Ahh well, can't have em all, right??

Ultima

[Apemantus]

The temperature of any given CPU, be it AMD or INTEL is dependant of the stress applied to that CPU.

INTEL does seem to run with less given heat than the comparable AMD cpu, but simply stating it as being because of less or more operations performed is unrealistic.

The Intel CPU can beat the AMD CPU under certain situations, mainly because of SSE2 instructions which are present on the CPU and are optimized for by a limited amount of software.

The Athlon only contains the instructions nessecary for compatibility with SSE not SSE2, but it does contain it's own 3DNow! instructions to boost performance.

Certain games are also geared towards one processor or another, one example being Quake III which is optimized for the P4.

Although benchmarks are a measure of theoretical performance, there is usually a bias to one platform or another.

However, it cannot be denied that the AMD CPU certainly gives the P4 a run for it's money at the moment, regardless of heat generated.

However seeing as Intel appears to be in Microsoft's pocket, you can guarrantee that future Microsoft products will only be optimized towards the Intel platform as confirmed by the Microsoft CEO in a recent interview. When he was asked whether windows XP had any optimizations for the AMD chip, the answer was a definate negative.

Public perception is the only thing that is selling Intel CPU's at the moment, this combined with Intel's long standing deals with people like Dell & other tier one manufacturers means that the ranks of people who buy for business and less informed home users will continue to be fooled into believing that the Intel is the better option.

Regards,

Ape.

[jprophet420]

so in other words you dont have the benchmrks i asked for. gotcha.

[Ultima]

JProphet420,

didn't ya look at the benchmark I posted??

Okay, it is overclocked to 1.73Ghz, so what?? That is still 266Mhz slower then the P4 that is getting it's @$$ kicked.

If you'd like, I can also bench my XP1800+ at default, but still it will beat the P4 2.0Ghz, be it by only a small margin.

Fact remains, XP's are waayyy more powerfull then an equally clocked P4, but indeed produce more heat.

Ya can't have it both ya know, I'll just say it out loud, so you will see it too:

YES, INTEL RUNS COOLER!!!

and

YES, AMD IS MORE POWERFULL PER MHZ

So ya see, we are both right.

Now let us stop this bickering and all be happy with the cpu we got, okay??

Ultima

[jprophet420]

i wasnt grittin on you ultima, you are the only one who isnt completely biased. i just wanted to know the % difference between the two. as a matter of fact, you are the only person who the question directly. thank you.

[jprophet420]

btw APE, quake 3 cant be optimized for p4, it was written before p4 was on drawing board.

[Ultima]

Thanks JProphet420.

It may not be able to be optimized for teh P4 itself, but it can be optimized for SSE and SSE2, through which the P4 would benifite greatly.

But optimizing for SSE would benifit the XP too, since it supports it.

Ultima

[Jimstep]

I'm oc an Athlon 1.4Ghz to 1529Mhz using a combination of 139fsb and multiplier of 11. My temps are round 57C. System is very stable and USB devices work.

[jprophet420]

well, its like i thought: amd is a fine product yes. is it faster than a p4? yes. if i ran a p4 at 57 degrees would it be faster? i think so but nobody has any benchmarks. well, i guess its better to be biased...

[Apemantus]

That doesn't mean a thing Prophet.

Games developers usually know which processors are going to be released ages before they are, besides which, Quake III runs better on a P4 than an Athlon, there are plenty of hardware sites around that prove this including Sharky Extreme.

Maybe i should of said Quake III is "Pentium platform optimised" but it proves that even though the Athlon is a powerful CPU, to make the most of any instructions on either CPU, software developers need to write to that given platform in order to benefit from the CPU's capabilities.

Regards,

Ape.

[Ultima]

Say JProphet420,

I prolly missed something, but I'm gonna ask anyway.

How do you recon that a P4 will be faster if ya run it at a higher temperature??

Ultima

[Kurylo]

I know that P4s eat nearly 35-40W of energy.
AMDs are more hungry: they are 65-75W.
So, if AMDs and P4s dissipate the same percantage of a heat (let it be 50%) then P4s dissipate ~20W, and AMDs ~35W.
P4s are cooler, but slower. ;).

[jprophet420]

by overclocking it.

[$1500-P4 gamer]

He has a point.Lower temp. means running more stable at a higher fsb/so you can increase the cpu voltage to get windows to load.You overclockers know what I mean when windows wont load from too low of vcore volts while over-clocking. But then there is the point that the p4 is cooler to start with so they arent running nearly the same temp at normal or same % over-clocked rates to start with.So the advantage actually comes from the lower temp at factory settings not at = temp to amd cause the p4 isnt made to run that hot!!!Meaning ,with the right cooling both are made to run within about the same temp% from default.The real advantage to this is not burning up chip if say the cpu fan cuts out or thermal paste dries out(cheap stuff) or is installed inproperly.Overclock ability is dependant highly on the pipeline structure of the cpu and how stable it is.Temp is a big factor to this stability but some is also due to signal radiation and such wich is way toooo- tech for me to understand.This is part why intel invented their longer pipeline of 20 stages as to increase the stability at the higher core speeds.And folks the L2 cache runs at twice the cpu speed to help compensate for the longer pipeline.So a 2gig's cache runs at 4gig.This is also helped by the ability to pass certain stages of the pipeline so all 20 are not always used(might be wrong on this last part so dont slam me,it was what I understood from reading).Thats why software optimization is a big thing.After games (like Aquanox)and such include optimizations for the P4's pipeline structure and new cpu instructions(wich go way beyond new sse instructions).We will see better results from the P4.This is not to say that it will be better than Amd but it will probably excell in those games and apps that are optimized.Just look at the geforce 3 when the drivers werent finished.The G2 ultra beat in certain tests.Then the G3 optimized drivers came out and BAM it whooped the G2 ultra!There is not too much P4 optimized yet but give it a while then we will see a better picture of whats going on in the benchmark,apps,and game world.By the way this was not intended as a flame-up type thing.I am just trying to state certain aspects.Im not saying one is better than the other or anything like that.So ppplease dont jump on me?!!?for anything.:D

[jprophet420]

thank you for the thouroghly unbiased and informative reply!

[or-g]

Amd's processors run much faster than p4's at the moment. A lot of people(except the general consumer) knows this. If intel could bump their processors to run even better than amd chips, why don't they? People would stop buying amd and switch over to intel.

Anyways, the point about "if intel ran their processors at a higher power rating like the amd chips , then intel chips could beat amd chips" doesn't apply, because intel isn't running better chips than amd's.

Maybe when they switch over to .13 micron, but till then, amd will probably stay in the lead. As long as amd is better, I'm buying amd. If intel was better, I'll buy intel.

[Apemantus]

The fact of the matter is, Intel's sales to business and the corporate sector has always been a bigger slice of the pie than consumer & OEM sales.

So for that fact standing as it does, whereby AMD has virtually no presence in the corporate market at ALL, Intel can rely on this revenue, without bothering too much if consumer uptake is lower.

If the corporate sector decided to adopt AMD, which won't happen, for many reasons, not least the fact that Intel has many long standing deals with this sector tying them to their CPU's, THEN we might see a worried Intel that actually worked at trying to close the gap.

However, AMD being smaller than Intel are also percieved by the geeks in suits to be inferior. This is a worrying situation, and Intel because of it's close knit ties with many corporate sectors can get away with making slower chips, then hiking the prices for them.

Everyone and their auntie *knows* the AMD chips are faster, but certain parts of the computing world are simply burying their heads in the sand over the issue.

Intel has a virtual monopoly in the business sector, much like MS has a virtual monopoly on the OS market. Worse still, Intel knows, that there isn't a **** thing AMD can do about it.

Regards,

Ape.

[$1500-P4 gamer]

Well I knew someone had to act like a ***.The last two posts were all about AMD being better and a stab at a flame up.We both said we didnt want this and I even said I wasent saying one was better than the other.Why do you have to make this into politics and be two faced.Leave the thread clean as it was intended or dont say anything at all.That was my point.Dont start this why Intel is evil thing,I seriously dont wanna hear it.The whole point is one is best for somethings and the other for other things.Thats why you can argue till your blue in the face and not win the arguemnet for one manufacturer or the other.They are both good chips,let it at that.This is just like when I started talking about how Intel's prices dropped big time and they are a lot more competitive in this area than ever before.But does anyone read that-nooooo.They start slammen about how AMD is sooo much better.How did that get in the conversation.I was talking about the new price drops and it turns into "my pc is better than yours"and"you paid too much"when they didnt know what I paid for it.I told them what I paid and once again no reply and the conversation changes on to bench results and how mine cant score what it does(while I've seen others with P4 scores higher).This all in all left me believeing that these people who go around"AMD this AMD that,I cant think anything but AMD"are sooo brain washed that they cant think of anything else other than I can beat you in a bench of this certain type.Since the new rambus has them wopped in memmory bandwidth now,all asuden bandwidth doesnt matter for games and such(thats their response to intel improveing)when we all know it is a big factor and always has been.When ever Intel does something better its the brand new BAD thing they say.Its been this way since the Pentium upgrade from 486's Intel got slammed for that but later when the software was written for it and not the 486 it kicked its but.The same happend with every intel release since and P4 is just another boil on these peoples but.So its time to start slamming them over the new stuff again.Come on people how many times do you have to repeat the same idiotic pattern before you realize you doing the same thing.And AMD nuts say us Intel fans are brainwashed---well atleast I can have a conversation without feeling I have to prove that I am better than you.When it comes to talking about new tech. like Intels new chip format and awsome hsf unit combined with software to control heat,or the shrunk die size,or the price drop,or anything that AMD is not better at and they get offended.So my advise is if you want a unbiased conversation or atleast one without wanting to find the guy who wrote the last thread and ripp his head off you should find another forum.I think most the guys on this one only care about how they can put a Intel box down!!!!Long live the KING INTEL,bow to no other,and you will not be left behind!This is what these amd people sound like every time they write in hear about something(I changed the word AMD to Intel-cause it sounded better but I think you get the point).................:D

[jprophet420]

wow. thanks for that last post. exactly what i thought would happen did. it turned into a bashing post, and not one person offered the information that i asked for in the first post (that is with the exeption of ultima, he said how hot his amd ran when he posted the benchmark. thanks doowd!)

so the song remains the same: nobody answered the question with facts, and the question remains "how much hotter does the xp run, and is it proportional the speed difference?"

i will STILL gladly accept an answer, if any one has the huevos to give an honest one.

[Kurylo]

Now, here is an answer:
I don't know exactly, but there were some results here at SysOpt. As I remember, XPs run 10-15C hotter being OCed 110-120% from their nominal speed, and it seems to be a linear dependancy.
It became interested for me to test the function of dependancy between PCU temp and its OC'ed and non-OC'ed speed, and when I'll do such experiment, I'll say you all, interesten in it, at the new thread named CPU Speed - TEMP dependancy in this forum location. So, check the new threads.

[Ultima]

I don't know for sure who originally posted this:
"if intel ran their processors at a higher power rating like the amd chips , then intel chips could beat amd chips"

But that would only apply if the Intel and AMD cpus are identical.

You are saying that if Intel puts a higher power outtage on their chips, it can beat AMD?? Think again, the only thing that helps by that is heating it up and getting it a little more stable when overclocking.

It will not make the P4 itself a better cpu, nor will it do that for any other cpu made by Intel or AMD or whoever.

Ultima

[wallie_x]

Here's crow chum straight off Tom's Hardware page. Lets see you upgrade now. You'll have to throw your illustrious junker in the trash before you can upgrade. Oh, well Intel suckers plenty of people. You aren't the first one, nor will you be the last.
Quote:
"Some final thoughts on investment safety: in a few months, Intel will introduce the P4 with 133 MHz FSB. In addition, there will be 533 MHz Rambus memory. It is impossible to upgrade a current system that is built on the Pentium 4 Northwood with 133 MHz. Current motherboards only support 100 MHz FSB, even though the BIOS might indicate the contrary. Furthermore, 533 MHz RDRAM modules are expected to be twice the price of conventional PC800 modules. In this case, it might well be better to wait a while, or to choose a P4-chipset with DDR SDRAM support in the first place." :cool: