Multitasking

[(cf)Eclipse]

i suppose you don't use maya or 3dsmax too often then
or try to encode movies either. a64's kick ass at that

 

[Jonsey]

i suppose you don't use maya or 3dsmax too often then
or try to encode movies either. a64's kick ass at that

Who's "ass" do A64's kick at movie encoding?

 

[burningrave101]

i suppose you don't use maya or 3dsmax too often then
or try to encode movies either. a64's kick ass at that

I dont know what planet you been living on but the Pentium 4's are faster at encodeing and in 3ds max. So the A64's are actually getting their ass kicked instead of doing the kicking thereof lol.

 

[Tazman2]

I dont know what planet you been living on but the Pentium 4's are faster at encodeing and in 3ds max. So the A64's are actually getting their ass kicked instead of doing the kicking thereof lol.

I believe thats from the sse3 which the 64s don't have yet. So thus technically the P4 is cheating!

 

[Josh_B]

I believe thats from the sse3 which the 64s don't have yet. So thus technically the P4 is cheating!

Not really. Both SSE2/3 and the x87 FPU can perform double precision floating point operations. Generally, however, SSE2/3 are faster than the x87 FPU, which is why they are so coveted in applications where raw FPU power is paramount.

 

[(cf)Eclipse]

you guys depress me. do your homework, a64's kick p4's ass in video encoding
look, even the 2400+ is slighty faster than the 2.4c

now for the rendering...
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/athlon64-fx55/index.x?pg=12
of course "oh no, pov-ray is optimized for amd!", so we look at cinebench.
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/athlon64-fx55/index.x?pg=11
amd ahead in single threading, but ht shows a very tangible improvement here, thus winning intel one of the benchmarks, amd gets the other two.

edit: lost for words, eh guys?

 

[NEVERLIFT]

Most people dont do encoding anymore, they just transcode when copying a DVD(DVD9 to DVD5). transcoding is super fast but does not always offer perfection.
If one wants perfection then they use CCE or TMPGEnc and do a dual pass encode or even a 5 pass encode in CCE... this can indeed take 2days or even longer depending the settings and filters used. And a DVDrip to XviD can take 3hrs or longer up to 8hrs with depending again on the settings and filters.
Bottom line is my Athlon64 is faster than the P4.


Edit:
As we all know the P4 is slower.. it's safe to say it gets even slower when multi-tasking. So what if it makes you think its smooth.

 

[thelostrican]

Most people dont do encoding anymore, they just transcode when copying a DVD(DVD9 to DVD5). transcoding is super fast but does not always offer perfection.
If one wants perfection then they use CCE or TMPGEnc and do a dual pass encode or even a 5 pass encode in CCE... this can indeed take 2days or even longer depending the settings and filters used. And a DVDrip to XviD can take 3hrs or longer up to 8hrs with depending again on the settings and filters.
Bottom line is my Athlon64 is faster than the P4.


Edit:
As we all know the P4 is slower.. it's safe to say it gets even slower when multi-tasking. So what if it makes you think its smooth.

dude your a !!!!!! of the worst kind, and i have an fx55 and old trusty p4c @3812 or so.
i think i am qualified to give an honest opinion, an truly you suck, i still love ya, but you suck
truly you dont understand that ht does make for a smoother, experience, smoother doesnt mean faster....think about it.
your processor rocks, there you go, is your e penis is feeling better?lol

why dont you admit that you hate burningrave101....

 

[rolo]

Where are the other dual proc whores when you need them?

My dually stomps any single processor for encoding

 

[Tazman2]

dude your a !!!!!! of the worst kind, and i have an fx55 and old trusty p4c @3812 or so.
i think i am qualified to give an honest opinion, an truly you suck, i still love ya, but you suck
truly you dont understand that ht does make for a smoother, experience, smoother doesnt mean faster....think about it.
your processor rocks, there you go, is your e penis is feeling better?lol

why dont you admit that you hate burningrave101....

Actually intel is like a bmw. Its more expensive but not really any better then a amd which to me is like a mazda. Its great when it runs! =D Thus its the intel that is a e-penis product!

 

[rolo]

Actually intel is like a bmw. Its more expensive but not really any better then a amd which to me is like a mazda. Its great when it runs! =D Thus its the intel that is a e-penis product!

Speaking as someone who's owned both (BMW and Mazda), you're sooooooo wrong The conclusion may be correct (Intel isn't really better than AMD, but costs more), but the analogy is completely wrong!

 

[burningrave101]

edit: lost for words, eh guys?

Not hardly lol.

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/pentium4-570j/index.x?pg=9

All told, the Pentium 4 570J is the fastest PC processor for video encoding. It stumbles a little in Adobe Premiere compared to the Athlon 64, but the 570J is fastest in the other three tests.

Cinebench is based on Maxon's Cinema 4D modeling, rendering, and animation app. This revision of Cinebench measures performance in a number of ways, including 3D rendering, software shading, and OpenGL shading with and without hardware acceleration. Cinema 4D's renderer is multithreaded, so it takes advantage of Hyper-Threading, as you can see in the results.

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/pentium4-570j/index.x?pg=13

Only the first benchmark is rendering performance. The rest are shading performance.

POV-Ray is the granddaddy of PC ray-tracing renderers, and it's not multithreaded in the least, because it's designed to be a cross-platform application. POV-Ray also relies heavily on x87 FPU instructions to do its work, and it contains only minor SSE optimizations.

http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/athlon64-fx55/index.x?pg=12

POV-Ray isn't optimized for AMD. Its just not a multithreaded application and it hasn't been optimized for SSE/SSE2 so the performance in that application relies on the performance of the floating-point unit.

As we all know the A64 is slower.. it's safe to say it gets even slower when multi-tasking.

Yup. Glad to see you finally came around.

 

[(cf)Eclipse]

most impressive comeback. i suppose i can't argue against that now, can i?

though i do find the differences between xmpeg and dvix encode quite interesting. blame it on optimizations i suppose.
and i say that pov-ray is optimized for amd merely because it doesn't have many optimizations at all, other than floating point. i suppose this shows off the power of the a64's fp unit quite well then.

but anywho, this is getting off topic, i think everyone agrees at this point that intel is better for hardcore multitasking

 

[Jonsey]

Everyone agrees? How about NEVERLIFT?

Nice post with the benchies there burningrave

 

[Tazman2]

Speaking as someone who's owned both (BMW and Mazda), you're sooooooo wrong The conclusion may be correct (Intel isn't really better than AMD, but costs more), but the analogy is completely wrong!

Sure if u had a mazda 121 and a bmw m3!

 

[NEVERLIFT]

WTF!!

I went to all the review sites I could find and googled my ass off looking for some good benchmarks with multi-tasking involved. This is the best I could come up with... I'm not sure if this is a good site?
If anyone knows of more reviews and benchmarks done with multi-tasking feel free to post the links.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1615951,00.asp


Intel Pentium 4 EE/ 3.46 GHz Extreme Edition(s775) 1066MHz FSB, 2MB L3 Cache, w/ Hyper Threading Technology - Retail $1,075.00

Intel Pentium 4/ 3.4 GHz Extreme Edition(s478) 800MHz FSB, 2MB L3 Cache, Hyper Threading Technology - Retail $1,019.00

* Intel Pentium 4 3.40E GHz 800MHz FSB, 1MB L2 Cache w/ Hyper Threading Technology - Retail $312.00

* Intel Pentium 4 560 3.60GHz LGA 775, 800MHz FSB, 1MB L2 Cache Processor w/ Hyper Threading Technology - Retail $450

*Prescott
I suggest anyone thinking about getting a Prescott should read this and read alot reviews about how HOT they are running and the fact they throttle the cpu even when gaming and not to mention how the P4 Northwoods perform better and run cooler and dont throttle at the drop of a dime.

http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=630
QUOTE:
Throttling, No Extra Charge According to Sudhian, the 3.8GHz Prescott throttles back at the drop of a dime, with very, very little headroom even under default conditions, much less overclocking conditions. Realistically, even a high-end cooler isn't too likely to prevent this from happening under realistic overclocking conditions.

Not that this audience is exactly running out to buy these things, but it looks like you'll need water or better for any 4Ghz+ Prescott attempt. If that's NG, wait for the second coming of Hammer.



AMD Athlon 64 3400+ 2.4 GHz, Socket 754, 512k L2 Cache, 64-bit Processor - Retail $221

AMD Athlon 64 3700+ 2.4GHz, Socket 754, 1MB L2 Cache 64-bit Processor - Retail $461

AMD Athlon 64 3800+ 2.4GHz, Socket 939, 512KB L2 Cache, 64-bit Processor - Retail $630

Athlon 64 4000+ 2.4 GHz, Socket 939, 1MB L2 Cache 64-bit Processor - Retail $719

AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 2.4GHz, Socket 939, 1MB L2 Cache, 64-bit Processor - Retail $815

Here is a good review comparing the the s939 and s754.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2065&p=13


I think AMD is not only running cooler and faster but has a better cpu out right now period and it's cheaper.

 

[bizzy420]

i had a p4 2.4c running @ 3ghz. now i have a amd64 3500+ winchester.

for gaming i can REALLY tell the difference, BUT when i do multiple things, i NOTICED RIGHT away that my old P4 was faster...since GAMING is whats important to me right now, i dont really mind that the AMD64 is slower in multitasking.

 

[Posty]

Ok so pretty much the argument is that Intel's p4's multitask "smoother" and that amd's are without a doubt faster. I have a lil app that i have used for many years on many pcs that made even my PIII and Athlon XP seem smoother , its called hare and it helps with the way the cpu handles tasking you guys should really check it out http://www.dachshundsoftware.com/index.html

Sooo the question is do you want something smooth hot and expensive or a cpu thats cooler , faster , cheaper and smooth enough your not going to notice a difference unless you happen to have to type that report at the last min while checking your e-mail, defraging your hdd, running a virus scan , listing to a mp3 , dling pirated software and playing a game in a window
(even in this case you would be getting better fps in the game and the virsus scan and defrag would finish faster on an amd , you would just notice a very slite pause switching between tasks.)

@bizzy420 not faster ... "smoother"

 

[burningrave101]

Ok so pretty much the argument is that Intel's p4's multitask "smoother" and that amd's are without a doubt faster. I have a lil app that i have used for many years on many pcs that made even my PIII and Athlon XP seem smoother , its called hare and it helps with the way the cpu handles tasking you guys should really check it out http://www.dachshundsoftware.com/index.html

Sooo the question is do you want something smooth hot and expensive or a cpu thats cooler , faster , cheaper and smooth enough your not going to notice a difference unless you happen to have to type that report at the last min while checking your e-mail, defraging your hdd, running a virus scan , listing to a mp3 , dling pirated software and playing a game in a window
(even in this case you would be getting better fps in the game and the virsus scan and defrag would finish faster on an amd , you would just notice a very slite pause switching between tasks.)

@bizzy420 not faster ... "smoother"

I really dont know where people get the idea that the Athlon 64's are without a doubt faster then the Pentium 4's. They are a few fps faster in gaming but the Pentium 4 is faster in a large portion of the applications out there, especially ones that are multithreaded.

The Northwood CPU's run about the same temp as the Athlon 64's and the Pentium 4's cost around the same exact price as an equivalent A64.

I've already said it a few times but i guess i'll say it again. If you want a system for gaming then buy an Athlon 64. If you want a system that will be used for CPU intensive applications then your better off with the Pentium 4, especially if you plan to run more then one application at a time or if the software is multithreaded like 3ds max.

 

[Sasuke]

For single threaded application performance Athlon 64 dominates, period. It is what it was designed to do and it does it well, the majority of benchmarks out there support this.

Now in heavy multitasking environments the P4 dominates, period. Now by heavy multitasking i dont mean having your IM program open, a few IE windows, your MP3 app, and movie player going at the same time as I expect any current and several year old processor to be able to do that easily, by heavy multitasking I mean running two cpu intensive tasks at the same time, i.e. video encoding and large file compression and in this vein the P4 is far superior. Now why somebody would want to compress files and encode at the same time is irrelevant the fact is in this sort of environment the P4 is vastly superior.

And just for you Neverlift you want proof here it is (took 5 mins to google up)

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1615966,00.asp

Now for most work and light multitasking the A64 is best choice by far, but for those who need to do lots of hefty work at once and can't stretch to a dually then the P4 is the best choice.

Now for dual core processors the A64 version will be the one to have in my opinion as it is due in Q2,05 and will run significantly cooler than the Intel variant which is due Q3,05 and is based on the prescott core which I wouldn't touch with a barge pole, the Pent-M variant is due sometime in 06 so is not worth thinking about at this time. The fact that the Prescott dual core proc will have HT is pretty much irrelevant, as I have found that the HT on my Xeons doesnt get used much, as most applications if multithreaded only get a large gain for the first additional processor and for each additional processor after that the perfomance gain starts to drop off significatly.

Hope this ins't too long winded

 

[formula350]

Actually intel is like a bmw. Its more expensive but not really any better then a amd which to me is like a mazda. Its great when it runs! =D Thus its the intel that is a e-penis product!

BMW owners get what they pay for.

 

[(cf)Eclipse]

hence why you buy an old volvo just to prove a point to those with money

 

[Tazman2]

BMW owners get what they pay for.

Weightwise sure!