Since the introduction of the K7 (Athlon & Duron) I've always favoured AMD. I've gone through a Duron 700, Athlon 850 and an Athlon XP 1600+. But, recently, I've been using a Pentium 4 1800. Now, I haven't tweaked it much, but I've been giving it a road-test, "straight out of the box" as it were.

Performance is absolutely terrible. I'd never had a problem running UT at high resolutions (around 1600x1200), always in 32 bit colour with settings tweaked to quality. But the new Pentium 4 system (which has the same memory and graphics card) can't seem to do anything in 32 bit colour, and doesn't like going over 1024x768. I haven't run any benchmarks yet, I'll save those for reviews of the motherboards I was sent.

On top of this, the system is rather unstable. None of the components are overheating, yet I still get hardware crashes in games, and "kernel 32 has performed an illegal operation" in windows. I plan to try a fresh install, but after having gone through so many other motherboards based on the KT133, KT133a, ALi Magik and KT266a without resorting to a reinstall, I shouldn't really have to.

This is not a question, just a general comment. Despite all the negative reception AMD have had over using a P rating rather than clock cycles, their products STILL outperform Intel's in normal usage, and on top of that they are less expensive.

You are crazy

Intel systems not stable?? hahahahahahah..

Dude, I like both products and think they are both great. I have had products from both companies.

But, your comments are kinda crazy.. For one think, Intel chips are more reliable. That is not an opinion, it's a fact. AMD chips are extremely prone to overheating, which we all know. You can run an Intel chip without the heatsink, and not kill it.

You are ALWAYS supposed to reformat when changing motherboards. Especially when changing platforms. That goes without saying. Also, it depends on which chipset you are using. An Intel chipset along with their processors are proven to be the most reliable systems.
My opinion:

If I was building a server, it would ONLY be INTEL.
Gaming machine, it depends on performance/price. Right now, it's tough to beat a P4 1.6a.

Price-vs-Value

That's not "exactly" true ace, sorta out of context. AMD has strict thermal requirements, AMD Thermal Solutions
& P4's have a overheat protection circuit. P4's, like AMD, need a high quality HSFP4 Thermal Management

What Bobes is saying has been quoted in many reviews.

What I was sayinh

I was simply commenting on the remarks about Intel being so called "unstable". I do agree with Rick strongly, he does make valid points. Although, you cannot ignore the fact that AMD cihps are frying all over the place. I was at a friends house a couple of months ago, and watched a 1.4 TBIRD go up in flames my self.

And as far as performance, the Northwood closed the gap tremendously. As for tweakers like myself, you can make the Northwood extremely fast (1.6a). The P4 needs bandwidth, and running a P4 at 133mhz with the memory ratio at 3:4 really speeds things up.

Now that we are on the subject, about the clock think. It all depends on what applications you are running to which system is faster. AMD's tests that they run have found to be "optimized" (the ones they determin what the call the chip). I agree that AMD chips look very fast on some games, but then again, Intel shines on the Quake 3 engine (which is used by many great games).

I would buy either product, jus depends when I buy. I just bought a system, and right now, you can do no wrong with the 1.6a. If AMD had a cost efficient package for me at this time, I would have bought AMD. If I built a system 2 months ago before Northwood, I would have built an AMD system.

Athlons simply do not fry by themselves. Recommended HSF & quality thermal compound must be used. Directions must be followed & care exercised in placement of the HSF unit.

Money being no object, I'd love to build a P4 system. I can't afford to even build a Athy XP/DDR rig right now. My Abit KT7 & T-Bird 1.2GHz is already behind the curve. However AMD offers great value-to-cost & furthermore prevents intel from being a monopoly.

I'm not so sure about temperatures even. In my current P4 system, CPU temperatures are usually 60+ celcius. They never got above 40 with minimal cooling on Athlon XPs.

Granted, I've only skimmed through the bios using "sensible" (if slower) settings, but freshly built I am not impressed with the Penium 4/SiS chipset compbination. Maybe its the chipset, both P4 motherboards I've tested are using the SiS DDR alternative. But at least I expected stability.

The issue of third part components has been rased - well all the components bar the CPU and the motherboard remain the same. Well, actually I had to upgrade the PSU to a Pentium 4 approved one (350W) because the old 250W one I had used for so long (with many other AMD systems) wouldn't power up the P4 systems.

But I stongly disagree with heat. Like I say, I used minimal cooling on my Athlon XP (I sometimes used to switch the fan off at night to get rid of the noise). As long as I wasn't doing anything demanding, I could get away with just passive cooling (just the heatsink).

Athlons 1-1.4 Ghz did generate a lot of heat, but I was using an Athlon XP

Again I stress I've only been using the P4 for a short while and I'm saying how I find it thus far. I'm sure once I've gone about tweaking everything it'll be better. The CPU itself has been tested independantly and was running for four hours before it crashed. I haven't really been so lucky.

I'm not crazy Paul, and I'm sorry my experiances with this CPU/chipset combination has enflamed you. I have been through quite a few systems based on numerous chipsets and CPUs. I've had a lot worse than this (Cyrix 300 was awful), and I'm being as fair as I can. If you think there's something obvious I'm looking over, please feel free to tell me, although I'm going to use my usual methods to try to get the best out of this processor as a whole.

Re: What I was sayinh

Small correction, the P4 shines on Q3 period. In RTCW the AthlonXP outperforms the P4.

Anandtech Review : AthlonXP 1900+

I think the P4 NorthWood outperforms the AthlonXP in RTCW but onlmy by a slight margin. Yet the AthlonXP performs pretty much on par with the P4 when it comes to Q3 based games (except Q3 itself).

Protection Against Thermal Death

Protection Against Thermal Death :dead:
Athy XP has an improved design, incorporating a thermal diode in the processor's core for overheat protection.

ahh

the INTEL vs AMD debate will continue forever, and BOBES, your right about one thing. The competition is awsome!

I am still ticked off by 3DFX going belly up!

As far as the P4, yours sounds like its not a northwood. My Northwood is at 40c, and that is overclocked.

The situation is a little different though. P4's can handle heat much better than AMD chips, which is fact. As far as performance go, that debate will go on forever.

Northwood 1.6a cost me $150.. But remember this: It comes with a heatsink which would probobly run about $25.

I'm using a northwood Pentium 4 system with the stock HSF. I did order an additional HSF but after seeing the size of the stock one (almost twice the size of the FOP38) I sent the additional one back.

I'm STILL having problems with the system despite driver installation & a general tweaking of BIOS settings. I'll probably try a Windows 2000 installation and see if it likes that better.

Make your mind up....
RTCW is a Q3 based game.
"Yet"?
Maybe bad wording...

Actually, RtCW is a Quake III: Team Arena based game. It could be that the Q3A engine and that are different...Likely not, just AMD may have some more compatibility with the different code.

That's what I was trying to say. On many occasions I've heard people say that because the P4 works very well with Q3A, all games using that engine ( or the Q3TA ) will always be faster on a P4. I was just trying to show that's it not the case.

I play Quake 3 Arena all the time, and I haven't had any unexplained problems with it whatsoever. I would say both CPU's are just fine for that game.
I'm an AMD guy...I just don't have the money for a 500$ processor, and my A XP was half that.

Re: You are crazy

Wow am I dreaming or what? Running an Intel Chip without heatsink, you must be kidding me. The faster the chip, the hotter it gets!

To tell you there truth, if i have the $$$$ to spare, i would take a look at Intel first.