Processor Equivalency Question

[Jack Bruss]

I've always been under the impression that the numbers behind the XP in an
Athlon are about equal to the processor speed. Thus, an XP 1800 runs like
a P4 1.8GHz, and an XP 2500 like a P4 2.5GHz, assuming, of course, that the
rest of the system is equivalent. Is that roughly correct?

I have a XP2500 on an Asus A7N8X, nForce2 mb, and my son has a P4 2.4GHz
Barton on an Asus P4P8X, 865P mb, and we were wondering if they performed
at about the same speed. Both have 512 ram, PC 2700.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Als]

I've always been under the impression that the numbers behind the XP in an
Athlon are about equal to the processor speed. Thus, an XP 1800 runs like
a P4 1.8GHz, and an XP 2500 like a P4 2.5GHz, assuming, of course, that the
rest of the system is equivalent. Is that roughly correct?

I have a XP2500 on an Asus A7N8X, nForce2 mb, and my son has a P4 2.4GHz
Barton on an Asus P4P8X, 865P mb, and we were wondering if they performed
at about the same speed. Both have 512 ram, PC 2700.

Thanks,

Jack

You can look at this table from Tom's Hardware. It is however just one
benchmark.

http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030217/cpu_charts-32.html#comparison_table

 

[somebody]

I've always been under the impression that the numbers behind the XP in an
Athlon are about equal to the processor speed. Thus, an XP 1800 runs like
a P4 1.8GHz, and an XP 2500 like a P4 2.5GHz, assuming, of course, that the
rest of the system is equivalent. Is that roughly correct?

The short simple answer is "roughly" - yes.
The long winded, complex, confusing one, starts with that they're
faster on different things...

I have a XP2500 on an Asus A7N8X, nForce2 mb, and my son has a P4 2.4GHz
Barton on an Asus P4P8X, 865P mb, and we were wondering if they performed
at about the same speed. Both have 512 ram, PC 2700.

There is no such thing as a P4 2.4GHz "Barton". Barton is the latest
AthlonXP core, so possibly you mean a 2.4P4B? Never mind. Again,
giving "at about" some latitude, and considering an average of many
tasks, yes.

The system falls apart somewhat, at the ends. Thus, a 1.8GHz P4 is
definitely slower than a XP1800+, while at the other end, a 3.2GHz P4C
mostly has the edge on a XP3200+.

It also falls apart with the new Athlon64s ratings. These are sharply
deflated compared to XP ratings. So Athlon64 3000+ corresponds rather
to a hypothetical XP3400+ than a XP3000+.

Here's a couple of (Sysmark is IMO poor) very good benchmarks
(Winstone), that show off the differences in performance. It's not
entirely relevant as this P4 is running on 875P and DDR400. But
still...

This first, 'Content Creation' consists of tasks that the P4 does
well. And we see the P4 2.40 have a 16% advantage on XP2500+

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1834&p=5

The second, 'General Usage' consists mostly of tasks that the Athlon
does well. And we see a reversal, the XP2500+ having a 21% advantage
on the P4 2.40.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1834&p=6

As you understand, these differences in behavior, makes for an
excellent opportunity for *Lying* about cpu performance with
benchmarks. Just pick the ones favoring your case. And I'd say it's
also more usual than not.
It also means, that if you're using a PC for a specific task, it's a
good idea to check out how well the cpu performs on your application.

ancra