Pentium 4 presscott(3.2ghz) or AMD athlon 64 3500+???
jorbo125
-
-
#1
Hey its me again, I was wondering again which would be better a Pentium 4 prescott(3.2ghz) or AMD Athlon 64 3500+? And before you say AMD like most people do, I was looking at these performance charts on some websites and they said that the P4 Prescott was better than AMD 3500+… So I don’t know if most of you guys are fanboys or just people that think the Athlon name sounds cool and think its better. So just please tell me which one of these processors is better and why! :hotouch:
DonNagual
Posts: 2,382 +5
-
-
#2
http://www23. tomshardware.com/cpu_2004.html
Use this interactive chart to see performance benchmarks between processors. You’ll see that P4 beats Athlon in some, and Athlon beats P4 in some. All depends on what you use your computer for.
I mainly want performance for my gaming. And in THAT particular arena Athlon beats out P4 cleanly so if it were me, the choice would be easy. The Athlon64 3500 is a great CPU.
SCHUMIinSA
Posts: 134 +0
-
-
#3
I had a Celeron 1.7Ghz and a P4 2.6Ghz and I noticed almost no difference between them.
Now I have an AMD Athlon64 3700+ and there is a massive difference compared to the other two. I will never use and Intel chip again if at all possible.
So in other words I am saying get the AMD Athlon 3500+. Then P4 may sound impressive, but the Athlon is still better even though I think the Ghz will be lower, but that does not matter. The AMD name number means that it’s performance is comparable to a 3.5Ghz processor.
My AMD Athlon64 3700+ flies and it’s only a 2.2Ghz machine.
CrossFire851
Posts: 714 +0
-
-
#4
Amd Athlon 64 3500+
2.
2GHZ
1ghz Fsb
Duel-core (2 Physical Cores On One Die(cpu) ) each core is 2.2ghz
It Stays Cooler
Easy To Overclock It To 2.5ghz And With Good Cooling 2.7ghz
Overclock To 2.5ghz sorry I have been thinking some else misread something sorry people….
LipsOfVenom
Posts: 160 +0
-
-
#5
the 3500 isn’t dual core, it is efficient at overclocking if you plan on using the stock cooler though. Also it has been shown to run games better than the P4 prescott equivalents. If you are an IT personnel or like to run 80 processes at 1 time then Intel is better.
the AMD 3500 is $219 currently and the Pentium D 820 at 2.8 Ghz is $240, so of course if you want to multitask then the 820 is a good choice. The prescott 3.2 Ghz is also good at multitasking since it has the HT technology and a large 2 MB cache (socket 775) while the 3500 has only 640 KB total cache.
Sean
Posts: 100 +0
-
-
#6
Yup, it all depends on what you wish to do. As for myself, i do alot of audio/video editing, and encoding. Last time i checked, my cpu is equivillent to a amd64 3400+. Amd has a little advantage in gaming, and some app’s encoded in 64bit, and for its architecture, and a ondie mem controller.
And most amd mobos have good chipsets with good audio, lan, ect,ect.(compared to 478)I would chose the p4, so you have that extra power to do processor intensive applications. my 2 cents.
compres
Posts: 30 +0
-
-
#7
As I said in another thread, the difference in gaming is not even close, so for gaming definetly AMD.
Another thing people don’t seem to be considering is power and heat disipation. The current Pentiums run much more hotter and require bigger power suplys. The cost of a bigger power suply, bigger power bills and better cooling fan/heat sink combos have to be considered.
A cool system is always more reliable.
Other than the processor itself, Intel motherboards tend to be more expensive, so total system cost can be sustantiably more expensive.
I would only consider a Pentium dual core, they seem to be a good bang for the buck right now.
A system build up with an Intel processor can be better than one with an AMD, so you have to see things as a whole. If I were looking at the CPU alone though I would take an AMD for desktop computers. Lap tops are a different story.
Comparison AMD Athlon 64 3500+ vs Intel Pentium 4 P4 3.0 what is better?
Home / CPU / AMD Athlon 64 3500+ vs Intel Pentium 4 P4 3.0
AMD Athlon 64 3500+
1%
DeviceList score
vs
Intel Pentium 4 P4 3.0
1%
DeviceList score
We compared the characteristics of AMD Athlon 64 3500+ and Intel Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and compiled a list of advantages and a comparison table for you. Find out which one to choose in 2023 year.
AMD Athlon 64 3500+ benefits
|
64 bit support |
|
vs
|
Intel Pentium 4 P4 3.0 benefits
Winner in comparison
|
Maximum frequency |
|
3 GGz 0.8 GGz (36.4%) better
vs
2.2 GGz
|
| General information | |
|
Type |
|
|
Architecture codename |
|
| San Diego | Northwood |
|
Number of cores A large number of cores improves performance in multithreaded applications.
|
|
| 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 |
|
| 230 2 | no data |
|
Transistor count |
|
| 227 million | no data |
|
Maximum frequency Processors with high clock speeds perform more calculations per second and thus provide better performance. |
|
| 2.2 GGz | 3 GGz
0.8 GGz (36.4%) better
|
|
64 bit support |
|
|
Max number of CPUs in a configuration |
|
| 1 | no data |
|
Socket |
|
| 939 | no data |
|
Series |
|
| no data | Pentium 4 |
|
Start price |
|
| 59 USD | no data |
|
Price-quality ratio The sum of all the advantages of the device divided by its price. |
|
| 12.3 % | no data |
|
Bus |
|
| no data | 400 |
|
L1 Cache More threads help the cores process information more efficiently. Real performance will be noticeable in very specific tasks (video editing, databases). |
|
| 128 | no data |
|
L2 Cache |
|
| 512 | no data |
|
Power Consumption (TDP) The calculated heat output shows the average heat output in operation under load,
|
|
| 89 Wt | 89 Wt |
The higher the%, the better the quality per unit price in comparison with all analogues.| Benchmarks | |
|
Passmark |
|
| 563 | no data |
|
3DMark06 CPU |
|
| no data | 811 |
| Technologies and extensions |
| RAM parameters |
| Virtualization technologies |
| Graphics specifications |
Comparison of Intel Pentium 4 HT 531 and AMD Athlon 64 3500+
Comparative analysis of Intel Pentium 4 HT 531 and AMD Athlon 64 3500+ processors according to all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Security and reliability, Technology, Virtualization.
Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark.
nine0003
Intel Pentium 4 HT 531
versus
AMD Athlon 64 3500+
Benefits
Reasons to choose Intel Pentium 4 HT 531
- Newer processor, approx. frequency: 3 GHz vs 2.2 GHz
- L2 cache is 2 times larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
| Issue date | June 2005 vs January 2001 |
| Maximum frequency | 3 GHz vs 2.2 GHz |
| Level 2 cache | 1024 KB vs 512 KB |
Reasons to choose AMD Athlon 64 3500+
- L1 cache is 8 times larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
- About 25% less power consumption: 67 Watt vs 84 Watt a) more: 954 vs 214
| L1 cache | 128 KB vs 16 KB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | |
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 1008 vs 168 |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 954 vs 214 |
Benchmark comparison
CPU 1: Intel Pentium 4 HT 531
CPU 2: AMD Athlon 64 3500+
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core |
|
|||
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | nine0026 | |||
| CPU 1 | ||||
| CPU 2 |
| Name | Intel Pentium 4 HT 531 | AMD Athlon 64 3500+ |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 168 | 1008 |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 214 | 954 |
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 620 | |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 539 |
Performance comparison
| Intel Pentium 4 HT 531 | AMD Athlon 64 3500+ | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture name | Prescott | San Diego |
| Production date | June 2005 | January 2001 |
| Place in the ranking | 2975 | 2243 |
| Processor Number | 531 | nine0033 |
| Series | Legacy Intel® Pentium® Processor | |
| Status | Discontinued | |
| Applicability | Desktop | Desktop |
| Price at first issue date | $59 | |
| Price now | $108. 95 |
|
| Price/performance ratio (0-100) | 1.46 | |
| 64 bit support | ||
| Base frequency | 3.00 GHz | |
| Bus Speed | 800 MHz FSB | |
| Crystal area | 112 mm2 | 115mm |
| Level 1 cache | 16KB | 128KB |
| Level 2 cache | 1024KB | 512KB |
| Process | 90nm | 90nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 67. 7°C |
|
| Maximum frequency | 3 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Number of cores | 1 | 1 |
| Number of transistors | 125 million | 105 million |
| Permissible core voltage | 1.200V-1.425V | |
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | |
| Low Halogen Options Available | ||
| Maximum number of processors in | 1 | 1 |
| Package Size | 37. 5mm x 37.5mm |
|
| Supported sockets | PLGA775 | 939 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 84 Watt | 67 Watt |
| Execute Disable Bit (EDB) | ||
| Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (TXT) | ||
| Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology | nine0033 | |
| Parity FSB | ||
| Idle States | ||
| Intel 64 | ||
| Intel® Demand Based Switching | ||
| Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology | ||
| Intel® Turbo Boost Technology | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) |
Comparison Intel Pentium 4 2.
66 vs AMD Athlon 64 3500+ which is better?
| General | |
|
Type |
|
| Desktop | Desktop |
|
Architecture code name |
|
| Northwood | San Diego |
|
Cores A large number of cores improves performance in multi-threaded applications. |
|
| 1 | 1 |
|
Threads More threads help the cores process information more efficiently. Real performance will be noticeable in very specific tasks (video editing, databases). nine0003 |
|
| 1 | 1 |
|
Process |
|
| 130 nm | 130 nm |
|
Chip size |
|
| 146 mm2 | 230 mm2 |
|
Number of transistors |
|
| 55 million | |
|
Maximum frequency Faster clocked processors perform more calculations per second and thus provide better performance. |
|
| 2.66GHz
Better than at 0.46 GHz (20.9%) |
2.2 GHz |
|
Support 64 bit |
|
|
Max. number of processors in configuration |
|
| 1 | 1 |
|
Socket |
|
| 478 | 939 |
|
Release price |
|
| n/a | 59$ |
|
Value for money The sum of all the advantages of the device divided by its price. The more%, the better the quality per unit price in comparison with all analogues. |
|
| n/a | 12.3% |
|
Level 1 Cache The fastest level of cache that works directly with the core. | |
7%) better than 