| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tallman
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 3
Location: Chisinau, Moldova
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:35 pm Post subject: Intel or AMD chip for a linux machine? |
 |
|
| Quote: | Athlon 64 3500+ 512Kb, FSB 1000MHz, 2,2Ghz Tray, s.939 100
Athlon 64 3000+ FSB 1000Mhz, 1,8Ghz, Socket AM2, Dual chanels DDR2, Tray 96
Athlon 64 3200+ FSB 1000Mhz, 2,0Ghz, Socket AM2, Dual chanels DDR2, Tray 104
Pentium4 524 3.06GHz s.775 cache 1024b,64bit, FSB 533Mhz 94
Pentium4 531 3.0GHz s.775 cache 1024b,64bit, FSB 800Mhz 98 |
the number at the end indicates the price $.
There is no significant difference in price between these models, but what about the performance...? 
I know that AMD Athlon 64 will do better for a gamer, but I don't play games, I use it mostly as a linux desktop, where I will need to compile often software, such as the linux kernel.
Please help me make the correct choice, I've searched google for benchmarks and comparisons, but haven't found anything relevant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kkrr2
Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 5
Location: northwest usa
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| well the athlon 64 just about killed the p4 in almost every computing catagory on thoughs sandra + tests. were they stress test a maachine and cpu in gaming, video graphics, video editing,word processing-number crunching ect. but the rolls have been reversed with Intels thrid or is it four duel core version. and one one of their duel core versions was basically a messed up copy of AMD's duel core. and now their cheating by putting two duel core dies in one cpu package a claiming its a quad core what a shame intel.unlike AMD new quad core which is four cpu's on a single die coming out soon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CPUShack
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 34259
Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GN
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 14
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm running an Athlon 64 here on my main Linux machine, and it's is running just fine. Compilations and other stuff is no problem at all. Though beware that if you install 64-bit Linux you might have some troubles getting things like the Flash player for the browser to run 'cause flash for linux at the moment is only 32-bit. you may also have a little trouble in multimedia apps though nothing than cant be solved. I'd say go for the Athlon 64
I'm running openSUSE 10.1 if you're interested
_________________
Windows: A 64-bit service pack to a 32-bit extension and GUI shell to a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor and sold by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1-bit of competition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tallman
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 3
Location: Chisinau, Moldova
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CPUShack wrote: | | I would go with the Athlon 64 3200, mainly because it is socket AM2, so in the future, it will be much easier to upgrade |
what about the socket LGA 775 ? is it worse then AM2? how long AMD promises to support AM2?
| Quote: | | ersions was basically a messed up copy of AMD's duel core. and now their cheating by putting two duel core dies in one cpu package a claiming its a quad core what a shame intel.unlike AMD new quad core which is four cpu's on a single die coming out soon |
 That's the HT technology, I thought it improves performance when doing multiple tasks, also P4 531 has EM64T...
| Quote: | | m running an Athlon 64 here on my main Linux machine, and it's is running just fine. Compilations and other stuff is no problem at all. Though beware that if you install 64-bit Linux you might have some troubles getting things like the Flash player for the browser to run 'cause flash for linux at the moment is only 32-bit. you may also have a little trouble in multimedia apps though nothing than cant be solved. I'd say go for the Athlon 64 |
Thanks, waht about updating to suse 10.2?
any Intel users here? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CPUShack
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 34259
Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
AMD typically supports sockets longer then Intel,
Hyperthreading in lots of cases (namely server stuff) slows things down lol
AMT64T is a copy of x86-64
Intel User? sometimes, Core 2 Duo = very fast, but also cost alot
_________________
New for 2025! The CPU Shack has a co-processor!
Visit The CPU Shack of microprocessor history and information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tallman
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 3
Location: Chisinau, Moldova
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 5:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CPUShack wrote: | AMD typically supports sockets longer then Intel,
Hyperthreading in lots of cases (namely server stuff) slows things down lol
AMT64T is a copy of x86-64
Intel User? sometimes, Core 2 Duo = very fast, but also cost alot |
especially the socket 939
with the s775 I'll be able to upgrade to Conroe, will I be able to upgrade to something more performanced on socket AM2 ?
http://www.itp.net/features/details.php?id=4862 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GN
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 14
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tallman wrote: |
Thanks, waht about updating to suse 10.2?
|
Naah, thanks, I like to run my SUSE versions a little longer and not always jump on the newest release SUSE makes. I always skip one release version
_________________
Windows: A 64-bit service pack to a 32-bit extension and GUI shell to a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor and sold by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1-bit of competition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001 phpBB Group
|
