Hi,
I am building a new machine, and I don't know which to choose out of the AMD Athlon XP 2200+ or the Pentium 4 s478 2.0.

Basically I would like to know which is the best in it's stock/clocked state.

Thanks

Kris

I used to be of the Intel only mindset. I've built about 10 systems in the past two years. P3, P4 and Athlon. The last two I built for friends were a P4 1.6A@2 Ghz (bad luck of the draw on that 1.6A) and a cheaper XP1800@1600 Mhz box. They had identical hardware and the XP1800 was slightly faster for gaming and about equal to the P4 for all around use. I'd have OCed the 1800 more but the friend doesn't know much about computers and I thought I'd save myself some grief. It looked like it was going to be a very nice overclocker. They are both very stable platforms with the current drivers available.

I'd say the XP2200 would be good against Intel chips below 2.4 Ghz. Don't count on getting getting great overclocking. OC results vary and I usually don't wind up with the best chips or MBs of the litter. Just my luck I suppose.

I would choose the 2200+, simply because it's ALOT faster and ALOT cheaper than the P4.

Hey man . Your not waiting for the clawhammer then? Thought you said you were? The 2200+ is the better choice, but if u wait a couple of weeks then ull be able to get hold of a 2400+ for a little bit more! And this is running at 2ghz (200mhz faster than the 2200+) And with the new modifications to the core, they run alot cooler, and are far more overclockable!

Laters man

Chris

There's also the Barton scheduled to be out in October.

Barton = 512K of L2 cache & 166 ( 333 ) FSB.

The extra core size will also help cooling a lot.

Go with the XP2200 unless you want to go with the Clawhammer or Barton as already stated, but I love my XP1900 it runs great and would never trade it for a P4(bleagh)

This is still my first day at Techspot, but I see many of these responces to questions like "AMD or Intel?" being answered by the processors speed or price. Being in the market to possibly upgrade my processor, I am looking at an article from PC Magazine earlier this month (Sept. 06). Their answer fell more on the line of, "What do you intend to use your computer for?" to determine the better coprocessor for your computer.

Copying from their graphic (a very quick-and-dirty outline, with some tongue-in-cheek references) gives a reasonable idea of what an individual may need.

THE GAMER
Age: 20-something
Profession: Unemployed and living with parents
Favorite Applications: Quake 4, Call of Duty, Battlefield II
Chip recommendations: Intel Core 2 Extreme CPU, 2 GB RAM,
nVidia SLI chipset, two nVidia GeForce 7900 GPUs

THE ENGINEER
Age: 40-something
Profession: Database Guru
Favorite Applications: FoxPro, DB2, SQL Server
Chip Recommendations: AMD Athlon 64 FX_62, 2 GB RAM,
nVidia GeForce 6150 chipset with integrated graphics

THE VIDEO IPOD FANATIC
Age: 30-something
Profession: dot.com PR specialist
Favorite Applications: iTunes, Quick Time Pro
Chip recommendations: Intel Core 2 Extreme CPU, 1 GB RAM
ATI Crossfire chipset, ATI Radeon X1800 GPU

THE CODER
Age: 40-something
Profession: Software designer
Favorite Applications: VMware Workstation, Eclipse Workbench
Chip Recommendations: Intel Core 2 Duo, 1 GB RAM
Intel P965 Express chipset, nVidia GeForce 7600 GPU

As I said earlier this come from PC Magazine, I'm just the messenger!
But it indicates to me that we should upgrade for what uses we have, not by price. It will probably Save in the long run.

wow this thread is more than 4 yrs old. i remember when i had a skt 478 2.0g and a 2200+, still have both, i just didn't modify either system.