What's a good motherboard?

Post by **Kills On Site** » Tue May 03, 2005 11:46 am

Well I do not truly understand the workings of a processor, but I think the faster speed of Intel's allow them for more burst data usage, like Windows because there is no way of telling what you will click next. As where AMD's more robust, if you will, structure allow it to run better when it is in constant, like a video.

I mean a video game as a constant because it is constantly pulling from the same files and running the same things

I could be wrong about this, but that is what it seems like to me

sys0p · Post by **sys0p** » Tue May 03, 2005 1:32 pm

Hmm, now I'm considering cancelling my order and getting another p4, instead.. If the performance difference in games isn't drastic, and general windows usage is faster with a p4, then is there really any point in going to amd?

Post by **SOAPboy** » Tue May 03, 2005 1:47 pm

sys0p wrote:Hmm, now I'm considering cancelling my order and getting another p4, instead.. If the performance difference in games isn't drastic, and general windows usage is faster with a p4, then is there really any point in going to amd?

Gaming

Personally, id wait for the Intel64s

but hey, thats me..

sys0p · Post by **sys0p** » Tue May 03, 2005 1:54 pm

Ok, if it's just gaming I'm going to cancel and get a p4 instead.

Post by **Psyche911** » Tue May 03, 2005 2:05 pm

sys0p wrote:Ok, if it's just gaming I'm going to cancel and get a p4 instead.

Go look at some reviews for more the numbers:
http://anandtech.com/
http://techreport.com/
http://www.tomshardware.com/index.html

And SOAP, I believe the P4s with the 64-bit extensions have been shipping for some time but who cares? The fact they have 64-bits will probably not provide any performance improvements for 10 fucking years. It's just fucking marketing, now AMD can't say they're more advanced...

What will help every day usage now and in the future are dual cores, which Intel is the only one with a consumer chip available. But there are ways a single core Athlon 64 greatly outperforms it. Games is one of the big ones, but not the only one.

Post by **Kills On Site** » Tue May 03, 2005 2:28 pm

Well I thought the new Intel 64s needed the new chipsets, which are not yet available. Also aren't the new Intel 64s dual cores and isn't AMD dual core soon?

Post by **Psyche911** » Tue May 03, 2005 2:37 pm

Um.
Dual cores need the 955 chipset. The rest work back on the 915/925 or 955. AMD is releasing their Opteron dual cores....but those are Socket 940, not a mainstream product. Their Athlon 64 X2 processors aren't supposed to be available 'till late this year, and it looks like they will cost at least two times what some of the cheaper Intel dual core processors will.

Post by **Tormentius** » Tue May 03, 2005 6:38 pm

Psyche911 wrote: And SOAP, I believe the P4s with the 64-bit extensions have been shipping for some time but who cares? The fact they have 64-bits will probably not provide any performance improvements for 10 fucking years. It's just fucking marketing, now AMD can't say they're more advanced...

The new Xeon dual-cores are insanely fast and IMO its definitely not going to take years to be useful.
A friend of mine was at an Intel partner conference recently and saw them in action. They are a truly impressive chip.

64 bit processors even on AMD32 vs AMD64 systems already realize a performance difference. When applications start coming out (which isn't going to be a decade, more like under a year) there will be a noticeable difference in performance.

Post by **Psyche911** » Wed May 04, 2005 4:22 am

Tormentius wrote:
Psyche911 wrote: And SOAP, I believe the P4s with the 64-bit extensions have been shipping for some time but who cares? The fact they have 64-bits will probably not provide any performance improvements for 10 fucking years. It's just fucking marketing, now AMD can't say they're more advanced...
The new Xeon dual-cores are insanely fast and IMO its definitely not going to take years to be useful.
A friend of mine was at an Intel partner conference recently and saw them in action. They are a truly impressive chip.

64 bit processors even on AMD32 vs AMD64 systems already realize a performance difference. When applications start coming out (which isn't going to be a decade, more like under a year) there will be a noticeable difference in performance.

Yes, but are those performance improvements due to using 64-bit OS & programs? Or just an improved CPU?

From what I've read, it seems the biggest area we'll see improvements are in 64-bit drivers.

Post by **Kills On Site** » Wed May 04, 2005 4:33 am

No doubt we will see a good improvement with 64-bit drivers and programs, but the hardware has to be fairly mainstream before programmers will sell 64-bit only proggies and drivers, drivers will msot likely come before the proggies tho

Post by **Tormentius** » Wed May 04, 2005 5:08 am

Psyche911 wrote: Yes, but are those performance improvements due to using 64-bit OS & programs? Or just an improved CPU?

From what I've read, it seems the biggest area we'll see improvements are in 64-bit drivers.

All of the above will help. Its just gonna take a year or two to start seeing all of those components in place.

Post by **Tormentius** » Wed May 04, 2005 5:08 am

Psyche911 wrote: Yes, but are those performance improvements due to using 64-bit OS & programs? Or just an improved CPU?

From what I've read, it seems the biggest area we'll see improvements are in 64-bit drivers.

All of the above will help. Its just gonna take a year or two to start seeing all of those components in place.