Going from AMD to INTEL?

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: EdipisReks

Originally posted by: mechBgon or unlock it and run the CPU/memory in sync at 166MHz for about a 6% performance boost at equivalent CPU MHz.

he wouldn't need to unlock it, as the nforce2 does that automatically to t-breds. otherwise, i agree with your post.

Could be a Palomino, too. I sure wish my 8RDA+ would allow multiplier manipulations on my own Palomino-core 1700+ but I should probably just save up for a 2500+ instead, since overclocking is sort of taboo for an office system.

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: EdipisReks

Originally posted by: mechBgon or unlock it and run the CPU/memory in sync at 166MHz for about a 6% performance boost at equivalent CPU MHz.

he wouldn't need to unlock it, as the nforce2 does that automatically to t-breds. otherwise, i agree with your post.

Could be a Palomino, too. I sure wish my 8RDA+ would allow multiplier manipulations on my own Palomino-core 1700+ but I should probably just save up for a 2500+ instead, since overclocking is sort of taboo for an office system.

The last office PC I overclocked was a P100 that I was able to run at 200MHz. Everyone was jealous and couldn't figure out why my system was so much faster than theirs. (~1997ish)

 

[human2k]

Originally posted by: SinfulWeeper
..................

Who cares if you can OC that XP2100 to XP2600 speeds and say it performs just as well if not better than the Intel @ 2.6GHz speeds. Just OC that 2.6 and sit back and Laugh @ AMD's stupid PR rating. The PR rating is just a way to get prime dollar for their MHz since AMD lacks the ability to crank out high MHz CPU's.

Thats nice. You deserve a cookie. /me gives cookie to sinfulweeper

 

[kadajawi]

well, for the record: My P133 with 16 MB EDO-RAM, ultra slow Quantum Bigfoot hdd kicks the crap out of my Celeron 366@458 with 416 MB SD-RAM CL2, and a Seagate Barracuda and IBM 120 GXP. I start both systems at the same time, when the old one has finished shut down and start up again... and it comes up faster than the Celeron. Its all about the OS, the age of the installation, the software in the autostart etc.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: human2k

Originally posted by: gizbug
Buddy of mine upgraded from an athlon xp 2100 to an intel 2.6 ghz, and he says I should upgrade to intel. He says intel jumps hoops over amd, quicker bootup, quicker loading of apps/games.

From reviews I see of the xp 3000, it seems on par with some top intels out there. I have a 2100xp, with 1 gig ram. I am finding it hard to justify upgrading to an intel system, which would require a complete overall.

Anyone have any comments on this? Thanks

Tell your buddy he's an Idiot. He payed for an insanely expensive 2.6GHZ cpu, when he could have gotten a Xp2100 for $93 which almost guarantees XP2600 with a decent Nforce 2 + DDR333 combo.

I'd bet that he did a complete OS and driver reinstall when he moved to Intel - of course that's going to give a boost. Did he get a whole new system? New operating system?
An XP2100 to a 2.6GHz P4 is a pretty small boost, though the extra memory bandwidth of RDRAM and the FSB could give a little more performance.

Oh, the word is "overhaul," not "overall."

 

[Texun]

Originally posted by: gizbug
Buddy of mine upgraded from an athlon xp 2100 to an intel 2.6 ghz, and he says I should upgrade to intel. He says intel jumps hoops over amd, quicker bootup, quicker loading of apps/games.

The CPU is only a small part of this. Chipset, RAM, FSB and how many apps load with Windows all have an impact on boot time.

I have a P4-1.6 and an XP1700, both with the same HD and RAM. Both are good but I use the XP 98% of the time. Stability? I am still using the VIA KT266A chipset for the XP and I can't remember ever having a problem that wasn't related to crappy software or an error on my part, and I haven't even mentioned the cost | Performance ratio. I've used AMD for years and I am to a point where I don't even price Intels now because there is simply no reason forme to do so. In the end it's still a Ford Vs. Chevy thing. There are some who will always like one over the other.

 

[Instigator]

Speaking of quicker load times. You guys should really check out www.tweakxp.com. I'm always looking for quicker boot times and they have some great tips. Here are 2 tips that dropped my boot times by 24 seconds!!! :Q I went from 39 seconds to 15 seconds.

Speed up boot by disabling unused ports

and

Boot XP faster (updated)

I used bootvis to test my boot times. It's a great utility that breaks down your boot times into sections. For the first tip, I just disabled COM1, COM2, and IEEE 1394 firewire controller. That cut my boot times by 10 seconds. Then I tried the Boot XP Faster tip. That cut my boot time another 15 seconds. Oh, sorry about the subject changed. As far as going from an Intel 2.6ghz from an AMD XP 2100, it would not be worth the upgrade at all. They are both great cpus, but the cost vs performance ratio leans heavily towards AMD. Hope this helps.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: gizbug
Buddy of mine upgraded from an athlon xp 2100 to an intel 2.6 ghz, and he says I should upgrade to intel. He says intel jumps hoops over amd, quicker bootup, quicker loading of apps/games.

From reviews I see of the xp 3000, it seems on par with some top intels out there. I have a 2100xp, with 1 gig ram. I am finding it hard to justify upgrading to an intel system, which would require a complete overall.

Anyone have any comments on this? Thanks

that is true but unfortunately the 3000 seems to not manage to beat the 2800+ tbred a good percentage of the time...AMD blundered with the pr rating on these barton chips...if they would have had it have the same mhz as the 2800+ tbred it would have beat it....only company that can keep dropping its speed yet raising its pr rating....


That aside the pr rating is pretty comparable to p4s and there is lots of factors that slow down bootup times and it is certainly not related to cpu brand....

 

[kadajawi]

who the f*** cares about boot times anyway? Systems have to run 24h anyway (60 days uptime). Hehe

 

[Instigator]

who the f*** cares about boot times anyway? Systems have to run 24h anyway (60 days uptime). Hehe

Guess you don't overclock much. Having a quicker boot time is sweet if you are trying to find the right overclocking settings.

 

[EdipisReks]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: EdipisReks

Originally posted by: gizbug
Buddy of mine upgraded from an athlon xp 2100 to an intel 2.6 ghz, and he says I should upgrade to intel. He says intel jumps hoops over amd, quicker bootup, quicker loading of apps/games.

From reviews I see of the xp 3000, it seems on par with some top intels out there. I have a 2100xp, with 1 gig ram. I am finding it hard to justify upgrading to an intel system, which would require a complete overall.

Anyone have any comments on this? Thanks

um, i'm actually going in the reverse. i'm gonna dump my 1.6a@2.4/845D system for a 2100+@whatever i get it to/nforce2 system.

Edipus, old buddy old pal old buddy..... Can I have your dumped system?
hehe,
Keys

sure, but in my state you have to pay a hefty fee to recieve any items that are being dumped.

 

[EdipisReks]

Originally posted by: Instigator

who the f*** cares about boot times anyway? Systems have to run 24h anyway (60 days uptime). Hehe

Guess you don't overclock much. Having a quicker boot time is sweet if you are trying to find the right overclocking settings.

yeah, i wish my system booted faster when i was finding out what kinda speeds it would run at. i probably wasted rebooting after changing settings.

 

[kadajawi]

4 years ago I found the overclocking settings. As the system hasn't changed after that I don't think there is a lot of room to tweak...

 

[Instigator]

As the system hasn't changed after that I don't think there is a lot of room to tweak...

You must never have to install new hardware, software or any drivers where it requires you have to reboot. Man, that would be sweet!

 

[kadajawi]

Well, I hardly install new hardware as I'm too poor to afford hardware Software... ditto. Most software runs without restart anyway. And WinXP is a stable system... and I hardly update drivers anyway. Every driver is working fine, and nVidia isn't going to improve performance very much with new detonators. And I think once a while a reboot... hey, I can live with that

 

[human2k]

Originally posted by: Instigator

who the f*** cares about boot times anyway? Systems have to run 24h anyway (60 days uptime). Hehe

Guess you don't overclock much. Having a quicker boot time is sweet if you are trying to find the right overclocking settings.

 

[Bonesdad]

I briefly considered going from AMD to INtel. AMD as a whole is struggling...no one can deny. In the end, if AMD does not deliver...I will go to Intel, if that's what I have to do to keep upgrading. I HOPE AMD can turn it around and deliver more than the disappointing Barton. Athlon 64??? We'll see. For now, I am sticking with AMD...I'm a sucker for the little guy. Just upgraded to a 2100+ on an EPoX mobo (<$200). There is little doubt that the biggest bang for the buck is with AMD. I need a lot of bang, I ain't got much buck!