Post your PC specs...

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Status
Not open for further replies.
G-Lite

G-Lite

ftw
Jul 25, 2000
1,777
0
0
37
g-lite.kochen.nl
Current rig (my brother's):
Customized
Some VIA based m0board from MicroStar
AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1,2 ghz
256 mb ram
geforce 2 mx 32mb
cd-rom 52x
cd-burner 12x cdr, 8x cdrw, reads @ 32x
SoundBlaster Live! 1024
something called a floppy drive
30 gb hd
Philips ToU webcam
Olympus C-820L digital camera
Logitech Cordless keyboard&mouse
Damn old SMILE 15" monitor
2 partitions:
#1 = Windows XP (FAT)
#2 = Windows 98 setup files (FAT)
guess... that's all...

My rig:
Compaq Presario 5130
dunno what m0board. :D
Pentium II 355 mhz
Ati Rage 3D LT Pro (ph34r, lol, oldy... 4mb I think)
ESS... dunno what type, supports goner A3D :D
64 mb ram
6 gb hd
some dvd drive, forgot the speed, too lazy to go and check.
some cd burner, think it's 4x cdr, and cdrws? beats me :D
another one of those floppy drive thingies
Iomega Zip 250mb
standard US 105 keyboard, Logitech Optical mouse
15" compaq presario monitor
4 partitions:
#1: Linux /boot (ext2, both linuxes use it)
#2: Mandrake 8.1 (ext2)
#3: 250mb linux swap
#4: Linux From Scratch (ext3)

Fried comp:
Used to be a Macintosh Performa 630
4x cdrom and heck, another floppy drive
think it was a 15" monitor
standard mac keyboard&mouse
somehow b0rked Iomega zip 100mb
250mb scsi hd, later upgraded to 2.1 gb scsi
videocard? soundcard? m0board? no idea...
ram? think it was 8 or 12 mb

And be4 the performa I used to have two Mac Classics, and a Mac ED. We got a Mac LD from relatives after the performa got fried, but it wouldn't b00t for some reason. (screen just remained black, nothing)
I'll let y'all know when I get my new comp, prolly in january. And ph34r, it's gonna be a mac, mUhAhA. :p
 
&

"Sp!ke"

Guest
"AMD's cost less and are just as fast and even faster then higher clocked P4's"

Simply put: No. P4s are faster much much faster, trust me Ive tried and tested 7 computers(athlon XPs) vs my trusty ol P4 1,8(OCed to around 1999mhz and NONE have gotten better performance than mine(ok,it cost a bit more,And that was game tests only)

P4s are more stable, more OC'able , slightly more expensive but better than AMD chips.
 
Clayeth

Clayeth

Classic
Apr 10, 2000
5,602
0
0
41
Kentucky
With DDR coming for P4's now they are closer, but when you had to go with rambus AMD's were a considerably better value. They're still a better value, but not as much. And you missed something in his post. don't forget that even the 1.9 Athlon is only like 1600mhz (actually I think it's 1566). It is equal (or at least very close to) a P4 1800. The bottom line is if you have extra money to spend go with the P4, but if you want the best value, Athlons are the only way to go right now. Athlons ARE faster than a P4 at the same clock speed.

If you compare the top of the line of both, yes. The P4 is faster, but it's not "Much, Much faster" and a P4 2ghz is going to cost you about $150 more than a Athlon 1.9+
 
Last edited:
&

"Sp!ke"

Guest
"Athlons ARE faster than a P4 at the same clock speed."

And youre point being what? It dosnt exist a 2ghz athlon so we cant get that comparison. And clock speed isnt everything you know...its the chip architecture or whatever its called in English(i think ill let somebody else explain that..)

If 50fps in Q3 isn "Much" then oh well...(its in Norwegian but youll only need the numbers so:
http://www.hardware.no/nyheter/desember01/northwood_bench.html
 
Lizard Of Oz

Lizard Of Oz

Demented Avenger
Oct 25, 1998
10,593
16
38
In a cave & grooving with a Pict
www.nsa.gov
image005.gif

image008.gif

image017.gif

image020.gif

image021.gif


Toms Hardware AMD Vs. Intel:
We've got our performance winner in this extensive CPU test - the AMD Athlon XP 1800+
tops the Intel Pentium 4/2000 in most of the applications benchmarks we selected. The
Athlon XP's strengths really lie with 3D games that use DirectX 7 or DirectX 8.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much, but I think I'll stick with the vastly superior and less
expensive AMD chips.
 
Clayeth

Clayeth

Classic
Apr 10, 2000
5,602
0
0
41
Kentucky
"And clock speed isnt everything you know"
my point exactly. If AMD really wanted to they could run up the speeds on their chips more, but they're offering equal performance at substantially lower speeds. The chip can do more in each cycle and costs less to boot. Don't get me wrong, both kick ass. You can't make a wrong choice between the two. I also think that AMD has the capability to raise their mhz more than they have, but don't because they're keeping up with intel this way. I just hope that Intel has figured out that they really do have competition now and need to do more than just raise the mhz of their chips to be dominant. More and more people are learning that mhz isn't everything, and that's bad for intel.
 
&

"Sp!ke"

Guest
"Thank you very much, but I think I'll stick with the vastly superior and less
expensive AMD chips."

Vastly superior? What the hell are you talking about? Oh, you meant the P4 over the Athlon did you? Well yes you are right there as my link can prove.

And to you there claiming that AMD can make a 2ghz tomorrow: No they couldnt. If they could, they would, they cant so they dont. Instead they try abolishing Mhz as a way of measuring the speed of the chip, unsuccesfully because of Intel..
 
&

"Sp!ke"

Guest
Before you get all over excited: That is Willamette tests.:rolleyes:

I suggest you now try clicking on my link one more time:
http://www.hardware.no/nyheter/desember01/northwood_bench.html

"Whats this? Is it a vastly superior chip to my Athlon?" Yes, it is! Huzzah! The world is once again saved from bargain bin chips!!!

"Miss quote"? What the hell are you talking about? its called miss interpitation(spelled wrong of course). and i think it was understandable too see my point...:rolleyes:
 
Lizard Of Oz

Lizard Of Oz

Demented Avenger
Oct 25, 1998
10,593
16
38
In a cave & grooving with a Pict
www.nsa.gov
Originally posted by "Sp!ke"
Before you get all over excited: That is Willamette tests.:rolleyes:

I suggest you now try clicking on my link...
Click to expand...

What you see picture above is...

Quake 3 test
3DMark Test
Cinema 4D XL test
Sysmark Office Test
Suse Linux Kernel compiling test.

. . . Not one simple Willamette test.

There are other test I could post, but there is no point in it
because you appear to be afflicted with the "if it's more expensive
it must be better" syndrome, and would, as you have the above test,
ignore them.

In each of the test the AMD chip simply out-performed the Intel chips.

The only areas where the Intel chips excelled was in application that took
advantage of the P4's SSE instruction set. Very few application do this,
and by the time most application do, AMD chips will include the same or
probably an enhanced version of the SSE instruction set.

I visited the link you posted, but the site might as well be written in
Martian. Post more (if you can find one), preferably in English.
 
Clayeth

Clayeth

Classic
Apr 10, 2000
5,602
0
0
41
Kentucky
Originally posted by DexterII


Ouch, hope ya got a good fan on that puppy. ;)
Click to expand...
I had been running it at 850 for about 1 and a half years. Bumped it up the other day. Works fine w/ everything but UT. Backed it down to around 880 to get rid of the GPF's. Nothing else bothered it though. And yes, the GlobalWin FOP32 is a nice HS/F

Spike: Please explain how a chip running at a slower clockspeed giving comperable performance is inferior? I always thought it took a better design to get more from less in anything, not just CPU's. In that link you posted: Aside from Q3A (which is historically great on intel CPU's) the Athlon 1900 is very close to the 2gig P4. Neither chip is superior, they are both very good. The arguments are pretty much useless, it's an opinion. I'm just saying that I think it's a GOOD thing to get more performance out of fewer mhz. And to say that AMD is trying to destroy mhz as a way of measuring CPU speed, isn't exactly fair to them. They create a more efficient processor, then the average consumer things it's an inferior ship because it's lower mhz. Different brand processors will always be different at a given clockspeed. I would have preferred AMD just stay with the mhz labeling myself, but not everyone knows about that stuff.
 
Last edited:
&

"Sp!ke"

Guest
"I visited the link you posted, but the site might as well be written in Martian"

Your first encounter with Norwegian? :D Sorry about that but it was all i could find at the moment unless you speak frencH?

But the numbers are clear: The Northwood chipset is pretty darn good...better than xp at least...

Clayeth: The P4 IS superior because of the 0,13 micron archi-thing...requireing less power(=less heat), and it can be overclocked,errr, a lot... and it can give you 300fps in Q3...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom