Comparing Processors: Intel Pentium 4 1.3 GHz vs AMD Athlon XP 3000+ 2.1 GHz

N

needhelpinnz

Posts: 50   +0
I'm trying to figure out if one of these is more powerful than the other or if they're both about the same (JUST from a performance standpoint). Any help would be much appreciated!

-Intel Pentium 4 1.3GHz, 512 MB RAMBUS
-AMD Athlon XP 3000+ (Barton) 2.167 GHz
 
Tick Tock...Said the Buss Clock....That is When it got Good and Ready...

Wow, they actually made a P4 with a 1.3 GHz clock speed.....?

Contemporary wisdom and performance comparisons have it that they still really suck even when running well in excess of 3 GHz.

I have an Emachines T-5026 with a P4 @ 3.06 GHz, at long last I have something to look down my "performance" nose at.
 
Okay stupid question:

Isn't there a huge difference between the P4 1.3 GHz and the P4 3.06 GHz? Shouldn't the 3.06 GHz be almost 3 times as fast????
 
Presumably. This supposes that they perform the same amount of operations per clock cycle.

I learned Photoshop on computers running the "very latest" versions of the Pentium 3. (533 >>MHz<< or such ?) It scarred me deeply. And if you think that's funny, you should have tried to run Adobe "Premier" with 256MB of RAM on the same machines. I've never fully recovered from that either.

And although there's probably a discreet, correct, answer to the question, it does seem a comical paradox to discuss CPU comparitive performance over what, (at this time), might as well be a flea market table.

Since machines running these CPUs are probably available for 20 bucks or so, I say, "buy one of each", and run some tests of your own device.

Was that too harsh?
 
Not at all. I'm just trying to have a "why" answer. I'm comparing the hardware for some software at work (these would be the min specs) and I'm trying to figure out if they are actually comparable or if these are waaaay different than each other (and why)
 
The article that Ritwik7 pointed you to compares the X-3000 to a P-4 running @ 3.06 Ghz. There really isn't any ambiguity or doubt that a Prescott P-4 @3.06 will eat the earlier P-4 @1.4 GHz you mention for breakfast, By extension, that should give you your answer.

As to the absolute "why", AMD's architecture (in that time period) performs more operations per clock cycle than does a P-4. Thus you must run the P-4 faster to achieve the same result.

Beyond that the Prescott P-4 and the AMD Barton's motherboards are possibly SATA hard drive enabled. A P-4 1.4GHz would almost certainly be PATA. In short, the attendant hardware for the slower P-4 is likely "more obsolete" also.

Although I don't actually know if "obsolete" actually presents itself as part of a superlative sequence. "Obsoleter", now you see my point?
 
Okay that makes sense. But if I can't run that P4 faster (trying to not factor in overclocking, just off-the-line specs for the average home user), then what would be the most similar P4 CPU available from that time period?

There is a bit of a dispute right now as to why we're using such old hardware in our specs, but such is life currently...
 
needhelpinnz said:
Okay that makes sense. But if I can't run that P4 faster (trying to not factor in overclocking, just off-the-line specs for the average home user), then what would be the most similar P4 CPU available from that time period?

There is a bit of a dispute right now as to why we're using such old hardware in our specs, but such is life currently...
Click to expand...

There was a sequence of P-4 in socket 478 that ran up to about 2.8GHz. Every once in a while these were listed @ "Newegg". Haven't checked lately.

You know, CPUs come and go rather rapidly, and the mobos change to accomodate them. Sometimes you can't even update the boards to utilize a later CPU. (This is even when it seems like you should be able to do that, IE the same board chipset number).

Pent 4's codenamed "Northwood" are the most recent that utilize the 478 socket.

Here, this Wiki page should slake your thirst for knowledge in all things Pentium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_microprocessors
 
Okay. So then from what you said earlier, "As to the absolute "why", AMD's architecture (in that time period) performs more operations per clock cycle than does a P-4. Thus you must run the P-4 faster to achieve the same result," then it's safe to say that these two are nowhere close to each other in terms of performance without OCing, right?

If that's the case, then something like the Prescott P-4 @ 3.06 would be closer to the AMD? And the P4 1.3 is pretty much a dinosaur that doesn't have an AMD equal?

Thanks again btw for all the help thus-far.
 
needhelpinnz said:
Okay. So then from what you said earlier, "As to the absolute "why", AMD's architecture (in that time period) performs more operations per clock cycle than does a P-4. Thus you must run the P-4 faster to achieve the same result," then it's safe to say that these two are nowhere close to each other in terms of performance without OCing, right?
Click to expand...
Bingo...!

needhelpinnz said:
If that's the case, then something like the Prescott P-4 @ 3.06 would be closer to the AMD? And the P4 1.3 is pretty much a dinosaur that doesn't have an AMD equal?
Click to expand...
The faster Northwood P-4s would also be reasonably comparable. But, they are 478 sockets and run in boards (8xx series Intel chipsets) that are PATA Hard drive enabled. The Prescott CPUs began the era of SATA HDDs and PCI-E express Video cards, in Intel 9xx series boards with the "new" LGA775 CPU socket. (Believe it or not, that's as close to English as I could say that).

needhelpinnz said:
Thanks again btw for all the help thus-far.
Click to expand...
You're quite welcome.
 
One more thing. Do you know of any online resources or websites that compare the performance of CPUs? I already have a benchmark website but something in addition to that would be awesome. Thanks!
 

Similar threads

Scorpus
AMD launches the "$350" Radeon RX 9060 XT with 16GB of VRAM
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
amicusjose
A
Scorpus
AMD reveals RDNA 4 architecture, Radeon RX 9070 GPUs, and Ryzen 9000 X3D CPUs
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
m3tavision
m3tavision
Scorpus
Intel unveils Core Ultra 200 desktop CPUs, Arrow Lake brings architecture overhaul
Replies
24
Views
1K
Porkous
P

Latest posts

Back