Guess it depends on who tested it?Ancra said:Some standard winmark benchmark will do that nicely, I think. 6%
Unreal Tournament also runs faster, faster than the 3.2-800 as well,
Yep and for people who don't use modern apps that are P4 coded I alwaysBut that is beside the point, as the 3.06 and 3.2 really does
have the edge on many modern apps and most modern benchmarks. Not much
of an edge, but the P4 _IS_ faster. ...on that.
Now for the $64000 question: How many P4-code-optimized apps do you
have, and rely on heavily? How many do you intend to buy before
replacing your current computer?
sugest using an AMD. What jerks my chain is when people like JK contsantly
proclaim AMD are the best at everything no matter what.
Guess you missed the pages of benchmarks?That citation is part of an argumentative article that doesn't offer
any testresults that actually support the expressed opinions.
IMHO what changed was the chipsets, especially the DDR solutions. The earlySome
claims, in the article, are also quite off mark as well. Such as the
statement that the 'Northwood' core has meant that the P4 is more
competitive. That's largely nonsens. Northwood is only slightly more
efficient than the Willamette.
845 boards were pathetic and that's what most people bought.
So has the software being sold?What has happened since the Northwood release, is that the benchmark
collections, used in comparisions, have changed. Changed to emphasize
streaming instructions, and have also been recompiled for P4 code
I have been fooled twice. I have acquired two P4's. Both have been
dissapointments (I have Athlons to compare with).
They sure arn't the right choice for some people and for some people they
are, see above.
I've been burned before as well. I just don't think being totally "Push oneI don't believe in HT, I don't believe in 800FSB, I
don't believe in extremetech, I don't believe in the P4 anymore. No
matter what some testers cook up.
brand on people" is being honest to the people asking for advice.