PDA

View Full Version : Firingsquad FB performance review between AMD vs. Intel



XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 03:54 PM
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/intel_pentium_4_3.2_review/page9.asp
the comparison seems more reasonable compare to the other review made by simhq.com.

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 03:54 PM
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/intel_pentium_4_3.2_review/page9.asp
the comparison seems more reasonable compare to the other review made by simhq.com.

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 07:49 PM
Just a little more time to wait, before we can whiteness the next battle between
the Intel Pentium 5 (code name Prescott) and the AMD Athlon 64 (64 bits).

Personally I think the Pentium 5 at 3.4 GHz will beat the hell out off the Athlon 64 3400+ running IL-2 FB.

Don't get me wrong I am not an AMD hater nor an Intel fan, I even currently I own an AMD 1900+
but for the new system I will buy by the end of 2003 I will most likely go for an Intel Pentium 5.

Flight Sims Forever!
http://home.wxs.nl/~elzer033/images/dutch-bf109.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 07:56 PM
Another review:

http://www.simhq.com/_technology/technology_010a.html

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap18a.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 07:59 PM
Do you think the 3.4 chip will need a new MB?

Da Buzz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only the spirit of attack, born in a brave heart, will bring success to any fighter aircraft, no matter how highly developed it may be.... Adolf Galland
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/hartm1-2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 08:07 PM
NO I do not think so!

The first Prescott's that ship this year and run at 3.2 and 3.4 GHz will fit on a motherboard with i865 or i875 chipset.

But next year there will be a new Prescott which also needs a new motherboard because it uses a new processor socket.

Flight Sims Forever!
http://home.wxs.nl/~elzer033/images/dutch-bf109.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 08:20 PM
I see an upgrade coming up. When is that chip supposed to be available?

Anybody want to buy a 3.06 chip?

Da Buzz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only the spirit of attack, born in a brave heart, will bring success to any fighter aircraft, no matter how highly developed it may be.... Adolf Galland
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/hartm1-2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 08:21 PM
RaybanJockey and I are holding out for the next Cray Supercomputers /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



<p align="center"> http://www.1stclassproperties.ca/mr/Spit.jpg
Tongue-tied & twisted,
just an earthbound misfit,
I.
</CENTER>
</p>

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 09:01 PM
Dexmeister wrote:
- RaybanJockey and I are holding out for the next Cray
- Supercomputers

Buy a PS2. Very similar architecture.

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 09:03 PM
Dutch60 wrote:
- Just a little more time to wait, before we can
- whiteness the next battle between
- the Intel Pentium 5 (code name Prescott) and the AMD
- Athlon 64 (64 bits).
-
- Personally I think the Pentium 5 at 3.4 GHz will
- beat the hell out off the Athlon 64 3400+ running
- IL-2 FB.

Intel's first 64 bit core was a flop, so I presume#
that the new core takes a leaf out of the AMD64
core and runs 32 bit code too?

Athlon 64 3400+ implies a change in the naming
structure for the AMD 64 chips, was a confusing
combination of number of pipelines and speeds
that made little sense!

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 11:11 PM
Intel's Itanium wasn't a flop, it was more of a development model. The FUD was layed on a bit heavy by marketeers and journalists looking for soundbytes, but Itanium, realistically, was nothing but a box to give to developers to develop on.

No one can realistically expect a completely new architecture to take off right away.

/i/smilies/16x16_robot-wink.gif


.