Go Back   Computer Forums > General Computing > Hardware
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-05-2004, 02:10 AM   #1
In Runtime
 
Barrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 223
Send a message via AIM to Barrett
Default Intel Prescott

Does anyone know Intel's goal in producing the Prescott. Who is it ment to be competing with. The AMD 64 3200 whoops up on it in most benchmarks, yet it is 150+ dollars cheaper. Excuse my ignorance if I'm missing something.
__________________

__________________
Compaq:
Windows XP Home
P4 1.6 GHZ
80gb Hardrive
nVIDIA GeForce 2 MX 200
CD-RW, DVD
Viewsonic 19" a90F CRT
I have had this rig since December 2001. I'm working on a new gaming machine that will dominate ALL!
Barrett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 10:12 AM   #2
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default

Lol!

Actually, the AMDs are not that high above the Prescotts in Performance (3.4Ghz HT EE knocks the socks off AMD in almost all benchmarks); and the Intel Prescott was only designed for battle against the AMD XPs; not the Claw- and Sledge-Hammer Range of AMD Processors.

Basically; Intel have always been best. In all due time they shall once more.
__________________

__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 02:17 PM   #3
In Runtime
 
killerdoberman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 286
Send a message via MSN to killerdoberman Send a message via Yahoo to killerdoberman
Default

Intel is the leader and AMD is the follower.

Intel has nothing to compete when they break new ground first.
__________________
Soyo Dragon Ultra Platinum Edition powered by a P4 3.06GHz w/HT @ 533FSB
ATI Radeon X800Pro 256DDR <---Yeah!!! I finally got it!!!
1024MB PC3200, Creative Audigy LS, 2 x 40GB = 80GB RAID 0
Windows XP Pro, DOOM 3, CS, UT2004, BF1942 RtoR, CNC Generals
Finished Half-Life 2!!!!!!!!!!
killerdoberman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 03:03 PM   #4
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default

Lol; yeah.

And I have totoal trust that when Intel 64-bits come out for Home PCs they will kick whatever AMD Processor is out in 2006 very hard.
__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 04:24 PM   #5
In Runtime
 
killerdoberman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 286
Send a message via MSN to killerdoberman Send a message via Yahoo to killerdoberman
Default

Intel's 64-bit chip kickass all over AMDs 64-bit chip.

AMD just went to the home user because it can't compete with Intel in a real application.

LOL...whatever.
__________________
Soyo Dragon Ultra Platinum Edition powered by a P4 3.06GHz w/HT @ 533FSB
ATI Radeon X800Pro 256DDR <---Yeah!!! I finally got it!!!
1024MB PC3200, Creative Audigy LS, 2 x 40GB = 80GB RAID 0
Windows XP Pro, DOOM 3, CS, UT2004, BF1942 RtoR, CNC Generals
Finished Half-Life 2!!!!!!!!!!
killerdoberman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 05:19 PM   #6
entity512
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Intel Prescott

When we actualy can use the 64bit to full use, maybe you can shut up about the 64 and italium in the mean time.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 06:19 PM   #7
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default

I'm not entirely sure what Doberman was trying to say; but I do doubt he was even reffering to the Itanium.

The point is; in this we are looking forward into a time where we can use the 64-bit to full use. It doesn't matter whether we can or cannot now - but in the time that we are discussing, we theorise that Intel will wallop AMDs arse in the matter.

But by all means, lets move on from that theoretical subject to which we cannot agree until the time when the stats will prove either of us right or wrong.

Point is; this is an ignorant (no offense to Barrett, I quite like him) thread flaming Intel and I think from such a title you can expect the opposite to counter it. Would you prefer or expect 'cheer's and 'yey's and 'down with Intel's? Not even is the main body of the original post correct; "AMD 64 3200 whoops up on it in most benchmarks" is not a correct statement - as in a majority, however close, the Intel beats the AMD. And when Intel is beaten - it is in no way by such a degree to classify as 'whoops up'. The only major stumbling point in the Prescott; which is the reason I did not buy it - is because AMD64s are, well, 64-bit. I needed this for Longhorn-Beta-2 and othersuch 64-bit Applications I may get between now and 2006 when I can get an Intel 64-bit instead.

If you want to battle out over the pros and cons of Intel versus AMD - come with an Army; not a Decain thanks.
__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 07:56 PM   #8
In Runtime
 
Barrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 223
Send a message via AIM to Barrett
Default

Thank you for the comliment Lord. After reading all of your posts I got to thinking... In my eyes the AMD 3400 would be better for gaming, but how do you guys feel? Do you think the Intel 3.4 could perform just as well. I look forward to your insight!
__________________
Compaq:
Windows XP Home
P4 1.6 GHZ
80gb Hardrive
nVIDIA GeForce 2 MX 200
CD-RW, DVD
Viewsonic 19" a90F CRT
I have had this rig since December 2001. I'm working on a new gaming machine that will dominate ALL!
Barrett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 08:03 PM   #9
entity512
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Intel Prescott

3400+ could be good but the 3.4 intel would be better. But.. 3400+ may be future proof a but more.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 10:54 AM   #10
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default

Yeah; AMD64 3400 will be more future proof in the sense of 64-bit. However, for gaming; unless you plan on going a little more out for a FX-53 then the Intel 3.4Ghz has a huge cache and will be far better in games because of it.

Really depends on whether you specifically want AMD or Intel; as most people will only buy one and not the other (myself included at one point). If you don't care eitherway and don't mind not having 64-bit - then the Intel 3.4Ghz will be better for gaming than the AMD64 3400+
__________________

__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0