Hi,
Don't laugh, I just want to know what processor is faster, Athlon XP or Pentium 4. The Pentium 4 I'm talking about is the Pentium 4 with the Prescott core and Hyper-Threading technology.
Printable View
Hi,
Don't laugh, I just want to know what processor is faster, Athlon XP or Pentium 4. The Pentium 4 I'm talking about is the Pentium 4 with the Prescott core and Hyper-Threading technology.
It depends on the clock speed, but I would say P4s are generally considered faster. To continue up the line, the A64s are generally considered superior to P4s.
This should help out:
http://www23.tomshardware.com
yup. that link is also in the "Best of Cpus" sticky.
Best of CPU's and Overclocking
Don't forget to vote on the poll! I chose to put a poll in this thread for a reason.
Well, the fastest Barton, the 3200+ is about as fast as a P4 2.8C, maybe a bit slower... So the P4's win that battle if we're comparing them to XP's.
Its pretty much accepted the P4s can beat out the Barton XPs, until you start looking at the AMD64 lines. Although looking at prices the Bartons can still make a strong case.
I put this as an Athlon XP vs. Pentium 4 and now the Athlon 64 is coming into the scene! This isn't a place for Athlon 64 chat! Maybe I will make a new thread that is called "Athlon 64 vs. Pentium 4", then the Athlon 64 chat can begin! The Athlon XP Bartons do make a strong performer in the value market now. Well, there is a link to THG's website that will show a Pentium 4 3.2GHz processor will run a lot faster than a comparable Athlon XP 3200+ in benchmarks.
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030623/index.html
Easy killer....most forum threads roam aimlessly at some point. This one just happened to early in the run. You are talking about a comparison of cpu's that came out over 18 months ago... :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie2
You sir, have found the answer to your own post question. Well done! :tQuote:
Originally Posted by NEWBIE2
i guess it's just a matter of "cost".
from about the 2.8C Ghz P4 (and prescotts) up, the P4's are faster than ANY Athlon XP. But if you hit the Athlon 64's, the game swaps sides. :t
A64's new on the scene? Huh? Well then you should toss the Prescott out and throw in the older Northwood core going by that logic.
Personally, I would rather have a Northwood than a prescott, but that's just my take on what I've heard and seen from those processors....Quote:
Originally Posted by Someone Stupid
And what are you talking about? :t
Read the thread again if you missed my reference to the "new on the scene bit." Your comparing Intel's current solution against AMD's past solution. You ever picked up an auto mag and had them saying that Ford had a winner on their hands against Chevy when the Chevy they were comparing it to was made in 1988 while the Ford was made yesterday? No. That's like pitting a 9800 Pro vs. a 6800GT. It doesn't make sense and the outcome should be fairly obvious to begin with. Being fabbed and being marketed as your main solution are two different things.
Personally I'd rather have a Prescott now than a Northwood. Clocks higer with a lot less fuss. Just look around at all the Prescotts sitting above 4 GHz compared to the amount of Northwoods out there that reached that mark. The Prescotts reached it much more often and with much less effort generally than Northwoods.
Prescott was designed to scale higher (thus the longer pipeline). You really don't have a choice anymore, so it's a moot point.
As SS implied, the Athlon XP is a dead end architecture. It is more relevent to compare a Pentium versus an A64 now. That's why you are getting references to A64 in your thread.