Interesting...

[Kjazlaw]

I've got a P4 1.5 (OCed to 1.65) w/ 384 MB DDR RAM on an Intel i845 chipset with an ATi Radeon 8500 and a Tbird 1.33 (Non-OCed) w/ 256 MB DDR RAM on a VT266 and a Geforce 2 GTS. I just installed Unreal Tournament on both of these and oddly enough, the Tbird system runs it noticeably better at 1280x1024 16bit color. (By better I mean the P4 is not extrememly choppy whereas the Tbird is smoother and overall much more playable at this resolution.)I am just curious as to WHY this is even possible. Both systems are more or less identical software-wise, running a fresh install of WinXP pro. Is there some weird configuration I'm missing? Even though the P4 is slower clock to clock, I'd think they would be more or less equal since it is over 300 MHz faster?

 

[Colt45]

its my understanding that the athlon has a much better FPU, which is quite important in games?

other than that there is some memory bandwidth differences (P4 has alot more latency if i recall)

 

[splice]

no, way. Athlon systems have always run UT better than the P4. UT is more dependant on the CPU's FPU than other FPS.

 

[Daovonnaex]

<< I've got a P4 1.5 (OCed to 1.65) w/ 384 MB DDR RAM on an Intel i845 chipset with an ATi Radeon 8500 and a Tbird 1.33 (Non-OCed) w/ 256 MB DDR RAM on a VT266 and a Geforce 2 GTS. I just installed Unreal Tournament on both of these and oddly enough, the Tbird system runs it noticeably better at 1280x1024 16bit color. (By better I mean the P4 is not extrememly choppy whereas the Tbird is smoother and overall much more playable at this resolution.)I am just curious as to WHY this is even possible. Both systems are more or less identical software-wise, running a fresh install of WinXP pro. Is there some weird configuration I'm missing? Even though the P4 is slower clock to clock, I'd think they would be more or less equal since it is over 300 MHz faster? >>

Not really...sadly, 1.4GHz Athlons are often equal to 2GHz P4s.

 

[renorocks]

I'll take a stab at your question, but I'm just guessing. Based on my reseller / system builder experience with both intel and amd cpu's I have noticed that Intel has a very confusing cpu line up as far as pin configuration and architectiure. AMD on the other hand has two basic configs for their Athlon class chips (XP and non XP). The AMD XP chips do have considerably better performance compared to the non xp chips. Intel has several flavors of the same GHZ speed, some considerably faster than others due to different architecture.
I'm guessing that you may be using an AMD XP chip and comparing it to an intel chip, which may have a faster GHZ speed, but slower architecture.

Hey, I'm just guessing....at least it's something to ponder for a minute or two.
The reason I'm questioning the cpu as opposed to the video cards is that one would think the ATI 8500 is superior to the GEforce2.
Something else that may bear some thought is the fact that some Intel motherboards in the past have been known to be verrry picky about what video cards are installed. You only stated you were using an intel chipset, but is it also an intel mobo?

I'm looking forward to hearing additional responses to the question

 

[Kjazlaw]

It's a non-XP Athlon... Tbird core. I would've thought that my putsy VT266 (non-A) would compensate for SOMETHING, but apparently not. (It's the original Soyo Dragon.) The other mobo is the new MSI 845 Ultra. I didn't realize UT was so processor dependent. Think I should swap the video cards if I'm going to be gaming much?

 

[sandorski]

Couple things:

1) the TBird 1.33 is faster than the P4 1.5 even if it's overclocked to 1.65.
2) that said, the Geforce2 is faster in UT than the Radeon 8500. At least that's what I've seen in tests on various websites.

 

[Kjazlaw]

That's kind of annoying... but thanks for the info so far. I hate this meaningless MHz thing... Intel might as well give their processors a PR rating too... except downrating them to realistic numbers. Maybe I'll sell both these systems and get a Mac. Or not...