[Sakhat]

I just wanna know what is better to buy Intel P-4 3.2 GHZ or AMD Athlon 3200+ 64 FX. And why? Somebody saing Athlon is good b/c he has it, another who has intel even he doesnt know he says that its better. What is better: By Perfomance, Price. If i will buy new PC i dunno what to buy.

P.S. - Another Topic, b/c that topic has alot posts, so nobody will see my post.


Keyboard Not Found. Press F1 To Continue...

[XtremeMaC]

athlon simply bc its 64bit!
and still cheaper....
as I read @some places has not much heating issues...

[R600]

I think it all depends on what you want to use it for really. Intel is better if you're using the machine for graphics designing or apps that have intensive graphics demand (CAD, 3D games etc).

However, AMD and AMD64 will match Intel of similar specs (AMD 3200+; Intel 3.2Ghz) and beat them on many apps.
But remember, AMD chips run at a lower speed than Intel, while giving just as much power, and costing less than its rival.

[Bachus]

AMD all the way.

[mendipjohn]

Quote

AMD all the way.

I agree. The Athlon 64 is fully backward compatible with 32-bit applications. Unlike the P4 you have that future proofing and you will be able to move to total 64-bit computing more cheaply in future.
Especially when all that new PCI Express stuff comes out, i expect that it will designed and implemented on mainly 64-bit mobos and we will see the real big beginning of mainstream 64-bit PCs in the home.

[R600]

Nice to know there are AMD fans here

[prathapml]

All I know is that Intel is not one to let you down (whether on performance or on honoring warranties). I also know that I wouldn't turn down (a hypothetical if ;-) an offer by an uncle to get me a new AthlonFX-51 or 53.

AMD is extremely good at the mid-end. I have an Athlon XP 2400+ (not 64-bit) and see no reason at all to complain (very good performance).
Do see that you don't get sucked in and get emotional about the AMD/Intel drama that will inevitably get played out on this thread as everywhere. Its no use to become blind fans of either company just as its no use having a bias/prejudice against either one of the two companies. Currently, both the processors you've mentioned are very costly, so price might more than likely settle the issue for you if you are going to pay from your own pocket.

When you're buying a new processor, its important to study the situation as a whole. Because, you need compatible HDs, RAM, graphics cards, MoBo, etc. Also, it makes sense to upgrade those components to take advantage of the new processor. Presently, the situation at the top is very fluid, so wait a bit before going for either of those top-end components.

All other factors being the same, the P4 3.2 would outperform the AthlonFX in all of today's apps, and still cost lower. You'd buy the AthlonFX to future-proof yourself, but by the time the future you've been preparing for arrives, your AthlonFX-53 would be insufficient.

Best config available today to take advantage of your 2 choices:
1. P4 3.2 GHz + i875 PBZ MoBo + 1 GB DDR400 RAM + your choice of gfx card.
OR
2. AthlonFX-51 + nForce3 Pro 150 + same as above.

The FX-53 chip and nForce3 Pro 250 chipset is to be launched soon, and the P4 3.4 GHz too. In another 2 months, you'll regret your decision to buy these HW, because the Prescott-core based P4 processors and i915/i925 are on their way to the IT market.

------------------------
Due to all those reasons, unless you're Bill Gates, buying into top-end is a loss of money. Do you really want to spend hundreds of dollars just so that your friends' jaw drop when they are told your computer's config? I'd rather spend my money well, on what gives me good value without too much loss of performance. I'd rather settle for an AthlonXP (32-bit, whichever speed you can afford)+nForce2 MoBo combo, than any outrageously priced 64-bit combo.
Spend the money you would have paid as a premium on that high-end hardware on these - an 8x DVD writer, 200 GB HDD, a good AGP8x graphics card and so on.



This then, is my take on the current scenario. It's a bit too long (like most of my posts), but I hope it helps people to make an informed decision.

[mendipjohn]

Your right prathapml, theres no point spending loads of money for the sake of it. People call me "obsessive" with my computer. Like you recommended, I use an Athlon XP/nForce 2 option. (Athlon XP 2500+ Barton, Asus A7N8X-D)

This performs really well for the cost. I would never consider buying the very latest technology at what I call extortionate prices.
I won't be getting an Athlon 64 for at least another year yet (just the price) and vow not to ever get a new Intel unless I happen to win one - so for the meantime, I will stick with a trusty Athlon XP.

[XtremeMaC]

obsessive u are
I was; until I bought a laptop, no more upgrades .
anyways if u buy these components get a fast hdd more than 7200rpm, well scsi
or get the new 10.000rpm ones if price is not important

[TomcaT]

I have had both Intel and AMD machines. Both performed well for what I wanted them to do at the time, if I had any real gripe about AMD (XP2200+) it would be the fan noise from the cpu cooler, even with a Coolmaster fan it makes a lot of noise, the P4 1.9 with its fan is a lot quieter.

Buy what you can afford, choose carefully and build it yourself. You will never ever have the fastest machine for long as Mr Intel and Mrs AMD keep improving their technology.