Amd 64 athlon vs pentium 4: Please click the green button to continue.

The Ultimate 32-bit CPU Showdown (Page 1/26) :: Articles :: www.hardwarezone.com®

The Time Is Now

OK, folks, we know what you’re thinking right now. Some of you are probably wondering why we are cooking up yet another storm with this Pentium 4 vs. Athlon XP article. We can tell you it’s not on purpose as we’ve wanted to do this some time back. However, circumstances and time has prevented us from doing so and this is why we’ve held back until now.

Even though AMD is preparing to launch the Athlon 64 and Athlon 64 FX in just more than a week’s time, we thought it would be the best time to take a tiny step back and look at what today’s processors have to offer before some of you start to bid farewell to the 32-bit computing world. While a minority of users would be the first few daring martyrs who does not mind sacrificing their hard earned cash to purchase a sparkling new 64-bit CPU, most other users would still prefer to hang on, or invest in what’s common today. These users would likely be the ones that would hang dearly to their trusted 32-bit software for the next couple of years.

Indeed, the 64-bit computing world is an exciting one but it’s also filled with lots of uncertainties. Operating system software, drivers and even optimized applications have yet to surface, thus, it’s extremely difficult for anyone to even begin computing in 64-bits. However, as with all new technologies, time is the essence in which a particular technology will grow into maturity and acceptance.

Well, this article is not about 64-bit computing, but rather, it mainly explores the performance of these two processors. Much has changed in the computing landscape since we last reviewed a CPU. On the Athlon XP front, AMD has boosted their processors with a faster 400MHz front side bus (FSB) while Intel has also moved ahead to support 800MHz FSB. Both these processors actually run on a system bus clocked at 200MHz and the memory banks are normally clocked synchronously with this bus. If you recalled, AMD uses a double-pumped bus (EV6) which effectively increases its data bus bandwith to 400MHz. On the other hand, Intel’s quad-pumped bus boosts the bandwidth further to 800MHz.

Technical Specifications of the Pentium 4 and Athlon XP

Processor Model	AMD Athlon XP	Intel Pentium 4
Codename	Barton	Northwood
Manufacturing Technology	0.13µm	0.13µm
No. of Transistors	54.3 million	55 million
Die Size	101 mm²	146 mm²
Front Side Bus	400MHz	800MHz
L2 Cache	512KB full-speed	512KB full-speed
Clock Multiplier	10.5 — 11x	12 — 16x
Clock Frequency	2. 1GHz — 2.2GHz	2.4GHz — 3.2GHz
Core Voltage	1.65V	1.475V — 1.550V
Current (Icc) — Max	41.4A — 46.5A	52.4A — 67.4A
Thermal Design Power (Max)	68.3W — 76.8W	66.2W — 82.0W
Form Factor	Socket-462	Socket-478

Looking at the specifications above, one cannot help but wonder why a 2GHz 0.13µm part from AMD needs as much as 1.65V to operate. Even Intel’s highly clocked Pentium 4 3.2GHz processor is available at 1.475V. However, current drawn by the Pentium 4 is higher and so that resulted in a processor with much higher power consumption. Even then, its Thermal Design Power is only about 5W more than the Athlon XP 3200+.

We shall not bore any of you with technical specifications as this will be a pretty lengthy article. Let’s get to the results right away.

Comparison AMD Athlon 64 3400+ vs Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz what is better?

Home / CPU / AMD Athlon 64 3400+ vs Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz

AMD Athlon 64 3400+

DeviceList score

Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz

DeviceList score

We compared the characteristics of AMD Athlon 64 3400+ and Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz and compiled a list of advantages and a comparison table for you. Find out which one to choose in 2023 year.

AMD Athlon 64 3400+ benefits

64 bit support

Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz benefits

Winner in comparison

Power Consumption (TDP)

59.8 Wt

-29.2 Wt (-32.8%) better

89 Wt

General information
Type
Десктопный	Десктопный
Architecture codename
Clawhammer	Northwood
Number of cores A large number of cores improves performance in multithreaded applications. At the moment, increasing the number of processor cores is one of the priorities for increasing performance.
1	1
Number of threads More threads help the cores process information more efficiently. Real performance will be noticeable in very specific tasks (video editing, databases).
1	1
Manufacturing process technology
130 nm	130 nm
Crystal size
193 мм2	no data
Transistor count
105 million	no data
Maximum frequency Processors with high clock speeds perform more calculations per second and thus provide better performance.
2.4 GGz	2.4 GGz
64 bit support

Max number of CPUs in a configuration
1	no data
Socket
754	no data
Series
no data	Pentium 4
Bus
no data	400 МГц
L1 Cache More threads help the cores process information more efficiently. Real performance will be noticeable in very specific tasks (video editing, databases).
128 Кб	no data
L2 Cache
512K	no data
Power Consumption (TDP) The calculated heat output shows the average heat output in operation under load, the larger the value — the more the requirements for cooling and energy consumption increase.
89 Wt	59.8 Wt -29.2 Wt (-32.8%) better

Benchmarks
Passmark
577	no data
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
no data	1308
x264 encoding pass 1
no data	10
x264 encoding pass 2
no data	2
3DMark06 CPU
no data	633

Technologies and extensions

RAM parameters

Virtualization technologies

Graphics specifications

Page not found

We did not find such a page on our site: /ru/cpu/pentium-4-p4-3. 0-protiv-athlon-64-x2-4000-plus%23item-vote

Popular processors

EPYC
9654

Ryzen 5
5500U

Core i3
1115G4

Core i5
12400F

Core i5
1135G7

Ryzen 5
3600

Page not found

We did not find such a page on our website: /ru/cpu/pentium-4-p4-3.

Amd 64 athlon vs pentium 4: Please click the green button to continue.

The Ultimate 32-bit CPU Showdown (Page 1/26) :: Articles :: www.hardwarezone.com®

Comparison AMD Athlon 64 3400+ vs Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz what is better?

Page not found

Popular video card comparisons

Popular video cards

Popular

Popular processors

Page not found