Which way to go: p4 1.6a O/C'd, or Xp1900+

Printable View

Show 25 post(s) from this thread on one page

05-02-2002, 03:02 PM
gemini8026

Which way to go: p4 1.6a O/C'd, or Xp1900+

Hi guys, im selling my T-bird 1.2 to my sister on June 1st. So I have a month to decide upon my next system.

Before I was sold that I would just buy an Xp processor and be done with it. But I noticed that the p4 when overclocked to 2+ ghz, it becomes faster in many apps then the athlonXP.

So I could pick up a 1.6A and hope that it hits 2+ ghz, or else pick up a Xp1900+ and overclock it very moderately(too damn hot to really push)

Either way, im gonna run a mobo with DDR ram, not rambus. So ddr333 would be my ram of choice. So im sure this affects the p4 system's performance?

Can someone out there recommend whats my best route for performance? I do a lot of musical editing (Cubase VST, Sonar) and 3d graphics work (3dsmax,lightwave)

Keeping in mind, ill use this with DDR333(pc2700 ram), a IBM 60 gig hard drive (120gxp), midiman audiophile sound card, Geforce 3 Ti200...... mobo and processor are still up in the air.

Lastly, what are some numbers that guys are hitting with the 1.6A? I heard the odd few can hit 2.4!
05-02-2002, 03:10 PM
Rich1988

Intel

if you want to save a few bucks, go with the 1900. If you want to overclock, get the 1.6a. It can get to 2.1 without breaking a sweat, get some good cooling and you can probably get to 2.3-4 easy.
05-02-2002, 04:37 PM
d_k

Re: Intel

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich1988
if you want to save a few bucks, go with the 1900. If you want to overclock, get the 1.6a. It can get to 2.1 without breaking a sweat, get some good cooling and you can probably get to 2.3-4 easy.

Well with a P4 1.6A youre almost garaunteed to hit 2.4ghz . Its a tough vhoice and deppends on your preference.
05-02-2002, 04:53 PM
kpxgq

i would personally fo with the 1.6 because I just want a change of pace (recnetly built 2 athlon systems, 1 duron, and 1 xp).... either would go very well
05-02-2002, 04:58 PM
Trav2003

Re: Which way to go: p4 1.6a O/C'd, or Xp1900+

Quote:

Originally posted by gemini8026
Hi guys, im selling my T-bird 1.2 to my sister on June 1st. So I have a month to decide upon my next system.

Before I was sold that I would just buy an Xp processor and be done with it. But I noticed that the p4 when overclocked to 2+ ghz, it becomes faster in many apps then the athlonXP.

So I could pick up a 1.6A and hope that it hits 2+ ghz, or else pick up a Xp1900+ and overclock it very moderately(too damn hot to really push)

Either way, im gonna run a mobo with DDR ram, not rambus. So ddr333 would be my ram of choice. So im sure this affects the p4 system's performance?

Can someone out there recommend whats my best route for performance? I do a lot of musical editing (Cubase VST, Sonar) and 3d graphics work (3dsmax,lightwave)

Keeping in mind, ill use this with DDR333(pc2700 ram), a IBM 60 gig hard drive (120gxp), midiman audiophile sound card, Geforce 3 Ti200...... mobo and processor are still up in the air.

Lastly, what are some numbers that guys are hitting with the 1.6A? I heard the odd few can hit 2.4!

If you can hit anything over 2Ghz with the 1.6a (highly possible) then you'll have a better performing system, so i'd go with that and couple it with a good cooler...

A 1.6 is cheaper (or right at) the price of an XP1900+ so an XP really isn't cheaper...
05-02-2002, 05:02 PM
AMD Soldier

Re: Which way to go: p4 1.6a O/C'd, or Xp1900+

To put it in very simply terms...

1.6a will OC on average to 2.4

Now if you use DDR ram it will perform like a 2.0-1 RDRAM system.

The 1900XP performs roughly around the 2-2.2a to a P4 system with RDRAM. So keep that in mind dude.

Basically you'd need to have a 2.4-6ghz P4 with DDR to perform with the 1900XP. And only need 2-2.2 with RDRAM to match the 1900.

Everytime I read something like this, seems that a lot of ppl forget this...

Quote:

Originally posted by gemini8026
Hi guys, im selling my T-bird 1.2 to my sister on June 1st. So I have a month to decide upon my next system.

Before I was sold that I would just buy an Xp processor and be done with it. But I noticed that the p4 when overclocked to 2+ ghz, it becomes faster in many apps then the athlonXP.

So I could pick up a 1.6A and hope that it hits 2+ ghz, or else pick up a Xp1900+ and overclock it very moderately(too damn hot to really push)

Either way, im gonna run a mobo with DDR ram, not rambus. So ddr333 would be my ram of choice. So im sure this affects the p4 system's performance?

Can someone out there recommend whats my best route for performance? I do a lot of musical editing (Cubase VST, Sonar) and 3d graphics work (3dsmax,lightwave)

Keeping in mind, ill use this with DDR333(pc2700 ram), a IBM 60 gig hard drive (120gxp), midiman audiophile sound card, Geforce 3 Ti200...... mobo and processor are still up in the air.

Lastly, what are some numbers that guys are hitting with the 1.6A? I heard the odd few can hit 2.4!
05-02-2002, 05:19 PM
CrawlingEye

Not really, AFAIK, the AXP at stock competes with the P4a at stock.
There's no real definite winner. ICWT.
05-02-2002, 05:54 PM
AMD Soldier

Quote:

Originally posted by CrawlingEye
Not really, AFAIK, the AXP at stock competes with the P4a at stock.
There's no real definite winner. ICWT.

I disagree. Of course it depends what programs your using, some are better for others as you know, but I was just giving a general viewsite.

And as I was saying before, depends a lot of the platform (DDR vs RDRAM, and chipsets, etc).
05-02-2002, 06:38 PM
gateways_rule

The P4 1.6A. You're almost guaranteed clock speeds. ;)
05-02-2002, 06:52 PM
d_k

Well said AMD Soldier but I think youre a bit off on the numbers. A 2.4ghz P4 with DDR at high speeds ( FSB : Mem ratio ) like 400mhz ( 3/5) will perform like a 2.4NW with RDRAM ;) It depends on how you set up your memory settings.

On the other hand if you pick up a Abit th7 II and Samsung PC800 RDRAM you can get some very good results ( ask Maximus :) )
05-02-2002, 07:18 PM
CrawlingEye

I (hope) to reclaim the 1.6a in OCing in the name of DDR, when I get mine. :D

We'll see how it goes... ;)
05-02-2002, 07:22 PM
SCUMBAG

I prefer the P4's superior thermal protection. I had an old T-bird party rig burn up when I failed to check the HS/F after transport. This is a non-issue with the P4. It will throttle back and give you time to save your work and shutdown properly.
05-02-2002, 08:03 PM
Indus

Well there's 3 ways to look upon it.

You can overclock a 1.6 to 2.2ghz on average. But you can also overclock a 1900+ to 2200+ easily so that's an even match.

However you can unlock the Athlon XP and run it at 200+ FSB (400FSB DDR).. and match the performance of any overclocked P4 with Rambus.

Its a stalemate basically. I'd go with a 1900+ if you want to unlock the CPU. If you just want to overclock the easy way, go with Intel. If you don't want to overclock at all, go with the 1900+.
05-02-2002, 10:16 PM
Nova101

If you go AMD, don't forget that you need a high quality heat sink, more fans and a more powerful PSU than you would need with a P4. Some people even argue you need a higher quality case that has better cooling.

All this adds into the price equation. And if you at all prize a quiet computer, all of the above can cost quiet a bit.
05-02-2002, 10:49 PM
CrawlingEye

Quote:

Originally posted by Indus
Well there's 3 ways to look upon it.

You can overclock a 1.6 to 2.2ghz on average. But you can also overclock a 1900+ to 2200+ easily so that's an even match.

However you can unlock the Athlon XP and run it at 200+ FSB (400FSB DDR).. and match the performance of any overclocked P4 with Rambus.

Its a stalemate basically. I'd go with a 1900+ if you want to unlock the CPU. If you just want to overclock the easy way, go with Intel. If you don't want to overclock at all, go with the 1900+.

Many have gotten over 2.2ghz, though. There's people here running at 2.66ghz. ;)
05-03-2002, 02:15 AM
gotmonopoly?

I will tell you right now, I have built the same exact computer as mine, except with an Athlon XP 1700+ and GA-7VRXP, and I cannot tell the difference in anything. It performs on par with my system in almost all benchmarks, except for the ones which favor SSE2. So it's really up to you. I really love the stability of my system but at the same time the other computer I built for a friend with Athlon XP has never crashed either... They both run Morrowind perfectly and well...

I'm pretty much over the whole CPU game, I chose this motherboard for the features. I wanted RAID, USB 2.0, onboard LAN etc! I only went Intel because I wanted to try out the 8IRXP after working with the wonderful 7VRXP. I am super pleased with both systems.

Too bad mine required overclocking to be competitive. Whereas the Athlon's are awesome stock performers for the price. Sure everyone can overclock, but it's more of a matter of features to me now.

I'd recommend whatever you feel is the right choice for you. Just don't skimp on the motherboard, because that is what is really important in the long run. (firewire, USB 2.0, LAN, RAID!)
05-03-2002, 08:56 AM
Indus

Quote:

Originally posted by CrawlingEye

Many have gotten over 2.2ghz, though. There's people here running at 2.66ghz. ;)

Yes but what's the point if unlocking the 1900+ gives the same performance if not faster. The only kick is.. the 1900+ requires more maintenance.

My evaluation stands as this: If he wants more performance and doesn't mind unlocking his athlon, by all means go with an AXP 1900+. If he's not overclocking at all, go with an AXP 1900+ since that will blow away the P4 1.6A at stock speeds. However if he wants to overclock easily and just wants to be dazzled by #'s and not performance.. go with the P4 1.6A. Its pretty good but its not the *best*. :(
05-03-2002, 09:31 AM
azns_kickass

Hey guys, I'm new to this forum. This is my first post.

Anyway, on to the topic.

Its a tough choice, but if you are overclocking, then I suggest you go with the P4 1.6A, although its a very close call indeed. I think the high FSB speed obtained from a P4 overclock will be enough to pull it slightly ahead of an overclocked Athlon XP 1900+, though not by much.

I disagree with Indus on a few points.

Quote:

Originally posted by Indus
Well there's 3 ways to look upon it.

You can overclock a 1.6 to 2.2ghz on average. But you can also overclock a 1900+ to 2200+ easily so that's an even match.

However you can unlock the Athlon XP and run it at 200+ FSB (400FSB DDR).. and match the performance of any overclocked P4 with Rambus.

Its a stalemate basically. I'd go with a 1900+ if you want to unlock the CPU. If you just want to overclock the easy way, go with Intel. If you don't want to overclock at all, go with the 1900+.

The average overclock speed of a P4 1.6A, according to www.overclockers.com CPU database, is 2379Mhz. The average overclock of an Athlon XP 1900+ 1797 Mhz, which is equal to a 2200+ PR.

Keep in mind that at 2.4Ghz, the P4's FSB would be at a whopping 600Mhz vs the 400Mhz FSB on a stock P4 2.4Ghz. Such a high FSB should allow a P4 1.6A @ 2.4Ghz to outperform a stock P4 2.4Ghz by about 5%. In memory intensive applications the difference should be even greater.

I do acknowledge that you can push the FSB on the Athlon XP 1900+ as well, but generally speaking, Athlon XPs can only reach their maximum potential overclock speed through multiplier unlocking or multiplier unlocking + FSB adjustment. FSB adjustment alone will hardly ever allow an Athlon XP to overclock to its fullest potential. Therefore Athlon XPs won't benefit from a FSB overclock to the extent a P4 does.

Hence my reasoning as to why a P4 1.6A @ 2.4Ghz will slightly outperform an Athlon XP 1900+ @ 2200+. Add the fact that the 1900+ costs a bit more than the P4 1.6A (here in Australia it does anyway, don't know about you guys in the US)

Another thing to also consider is heat. An Athlon XP 1900+ @ 2200+ would be substantially hotter than a P4 1.6A @ 2.4. Which means a more powerful HSF would be needed for overclocking the Athlon XP, making the price difference between the two CPUs even greater. Also, the Athlon XP system would be noisier.

Having said that, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what I would buy if I was in the same situation as gemini8026. You may be thinking after reading this post that I am biased towards Intel. Well, you would be right. I think Intel are better overclockers at the moment than AMD.

I look forward to your reply Indus. ;)
05-03-2002, 04:00 PM
gemini8026

Thanks for all the great points guys.....

There are both great arguments for either side of the decidion. Only one small problem, there is nothing overly conclusive :D

Right now im kinda leaning toward the p4 due to upgradability. Im guessing in another few months it would be easy to stick a new processor in there without much hassle.

With the Injtel mobos, which ones support DDR 333. Also, if a person bought a mobo and pc3200 memory becomes available, will a person be able to simply swap that in with a new processor and still be good to go?
05-03-2002, 04:34 PM
Indus

Quote:

Originally posted by azns_kickass
I disagree with Indus on a few points.

The average overclock speed of a P4 1.6A, according to www.overclockers.com CPU database, is 2379Mhz. The average overclock of an Athlon XP 1900+ 1797 Mhz, which is equal to a 2200+ PR.

Keep in mind that at 2.4Ghz, the P4's FSB would be at a whopping 600Mhz vs the 400Mhz FSB on a stock P4 2.4Ghz. Such a high FSB should allow a P4 1.6A @ 2.4Ghz to outperform a stock P4 2.4Ghz by about 5%. In memory intensive applications the difference should be even greater.

I do acknowledge that you can push the FSB on the Athlon XP 1900+ as well, but generally speaking, Athlon XPs can only reach their maximum potential overclock speed through multiplier unlocking or multiplier unlocking + FSB adjustment. FSB adjustment alone will hardly ever allow an Athlon XP to overclock to its fullest potential. Therefore Athlon XPs won't benefit from a FSB overclock to the extent a P4 does.

Hence my reasoning as to why a P4 1.6A @ 2.4Ghz will slightly outperform an Athlon XP 1900+ @ 2200+. Add the fact that the 1900+ costs a bit more than the P4 1.6A (here in Australia it does anyway, don't know about you guys in the US)

Another thing to also consider is heat. An Athlon XP 1900+ @ 2200+ would be substantially hotter than a P4 1.6A @ 2.4. Which means a more powerful HSF would be needed for overclocking the Athlon XP, making the price difference between the two CPUs even greater. Also, the Athlon XP system would be noisier.

Having said that, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what I would buy if I was in the same situation as gemini8026. You may be thinking after reading this post that I am biased towards Intel. Well, you would be right. I think Intel are better overclockers at the moment than AMD.

I look forward to your reply Indus. ;)

I agree with you on most things as being very accurate. I wouldn't buy a 1900+ currently but I might when the price dips a little more as you suggested. However the thing I disagree with you on is the average overclock stats on www.overclockers.com

Some of those are with LN2 (liquid nitrogen) which you can't use in a home environment, only in a lab. You can only take air into account. Well you could also take water cooling into account but I am not a fan of spending $150 US on cooling or mixing electrical parts with water. You know all too well what can happen. :(

Anyways if we take just air.. I've seen quite a few overclocks hit 2.4ghz but the average o/c is still only 2.16Ghz which is GUARANTEED. I think the highest possible on air that we know till now is 2.5ghz from a 1.6A. That's not shabby by any means but it varies from CPU to CPU. The basic rule of overclocking is.. nothing is guaranteed.. :( Some CPU's might not even be able to do that. :( However 1.6 to 2.13 is pretty good and that is the norm in most cases, hence the average. ;)

As for the FSB overclocking of an Athlon.. yes I agree with you.. unlocking it takes patience and experience a few people have killed their CPU like that.. so I don't blame anyone if they don't want to do it. I mean its your money and your decision to risk it. I personally wouldn't do that, however I cannot overlook the performance gained by the procedure.

But all in all, if you don't want to do the surgery and still want to overclock, by all means go with the 1.6A. I myself will in a few months. :)
05-03-2002, 05:42 PM
AMD Soldier

I'm tired of hearing how much better cooling an AMD system will need...

Simply not true.

1900 AXP with a stock HSF on average runs at 37C from what I've seen.

Is that terribly hot? lol I don't think so. When OCing, say 100 or even 200mhz faster, the temp. will increase by on average 2-4C w/o voltage increasement.

That is with stock cooling ppl.

Put a Volcano 7 for $16 + $4 shipping (bestbyte) if you want better cooling and your temps will decrease a good margin. The whole cooling issue, is a none issue as far as I can see. Only really matters if you want MAX OC with high voltages.
05-03-2002, 08:19 PM
azns_kickass

Quote:

Originally posted by Indus

I agree with you on most things as being very accurate. I wouldn't buy a 1900+ currently but I might when the price dips a little more as you suggested. However the thing I disagree with you on is the average overclock stats on www.overclockers.com

Some of those are with LN2 (liquid nitrogen) which you can't use in a home environment, only in a lab. You can only take air into account. Well you could also take water cooling into account but I am not a fan of spending $150 US on cooling or mixing electrical parts with water. You know all too well what can happen. :(

Anyways if we take just air.. I've seen quite a few overclocks hit 2.4ghz but the average o/c is still only 2.16Ghz which is GUARANTEED. I think the highest possible on air that we know till now is 2.5ghz from a 1.6A. That's not shabby by any means but it varies from CPU to CPU. The basic rule of overclocking is.. nothing is guaranteed.. :( Some CPU's might not even be able to do that. :( However 1.6 to 2.13 is pretty good and that is the norm in most cases, hence the average. ;)

Indus, again, I disagree with you on some points. :p
I think the CPU database is pretty accurate. Take a closer look at the CPU database. I can't see an entry with LN2 cooling. The highest overclock in the P4 1.6A database is 2.85Ghz. I have seen P4 1.6A with LN2 overclocked to 3.5Ghz and up! Most of the overclocks in there are air-cooled, with a few water cooling entries as well. Also, take note of the amount of stock Intel HSFs in the database. I'd estimate that 50% of the entries are using stock cooling! :o

I know of someone who has his 1.6A @ 2.4 @ 1.65V with stock cooling. The temperatures were admittedly a bit high with the stock HSF at 59C but it was still completely stable. :D
If he can hit 2.4Ghz with stock cooling, imagine putting in a Thermaltake Volcano 7+! :eek:

AMD soldier:
I highly doubt an Athlon XP 1900+ would be at 37C with the stock fan. From what I've seen, the stock AMD fan usually pulls temps in excess of 50C. How many people do you see overclocking an 1900+ with the stock fan?! Very few. It would be just plain foolish. They won't get very far. :p Any seasoned overclocker will realise that AMD CPUs need better than stock cooling to overclock well.

Also, you cannot deny that an overclocked AMD CPU does run hotter than an overclocked Intel CPU. :p

edited for spelling mistakes...
05-03-2002, 09:08 PM
Indus

That's not true.

First of all about the AMD CPU.. you can sand the heatsink and it'll decrease the temperature noticable. Also as for high temps under overclock.. that's inaccurate. Look into the Thermalright AX-7 heatsink. :) 35 degrees is UNHEARD of with that heatsink under load with a heavy overclock. Its usually 25-30 degrees. :)

As far the Intel CPU's go.. well I agree with you that it is possible, but I've been here a while and a lot of people in the Overclocking section can't get their CPU beyond 2.16. They start getting corruptions on their hard drives or crashes.. which is an unstable overclock. I mean sure you can clock your computer at 2.8ghz but what good is it, if it crashes? :( That's the deal.. some can hit a 50% overclock, not all though.

However I just think its a stalemate. Someone who's never tried an AMD will favor Intel. :( Someone who hasn't tried an Intel, will favor AMD. But there are a few people that've tried both and they favor the AMD unlocked with a high FSB. For example, Mystifmagic, KJY9 and I believe them. :)
05-03-2002, 10:00 PM
azns_kickass

Quote:

Originally posted by Indus
That's not true.

First of all about the AMD CPU.. you can sand the heatsink and it'll decrease the temperature noticable. Also as for high temps under overclock.. that's inaccurate. Look into the Thermalright AX-7 heatsink. :) 35 degrees is UNHEARD of with that heatsink under load with a heavy overclock. Its usually 25-30 degrees. :)

I was talking about the stock HSF that comes with an AMD Athlon XP 1900+. Those things aren't very competent for overclocking IMO. If I was are planning to overclock an AMD I would just get the OEM CPU without the fan and get a Volcano 7+ instead.

I do agree that it is not always possible to get 2.4Ghz out of a P4 1.6A, there will be good and bad batches, and a good mobo and RAM is also crucial for overclocking. That may be the reason many people haven't been able to push their P4s very far. I think someone who couples a P4 1.6A with an SiS645DX chipset mobo and DDR333 has a good chance of hitting 2.4Ghz.

Many people just don't realise how important the chipset and RAM are to overclocking success. :rolleyes:

After reading this article http://www.overclockers.com/tips828/
"My Northwood 1.6A Overclocking Experiences" I am quite confident that a P4 1.6A has a good chance to reach 2.4Ghz.

Also, for your initial comment that the CPU database is inaccurate because people use all kinds of cooling with the P4 1.6A, what is to say that the same doesn't apply to the Athlon XP 1900+? If people can use watercooling with their P4s, they can use watercooling with their Athlon XP as well right? So if we go by your initial comment on the accuracy of the CPU database, then the Athlon XP 1900+ results should be inflated as well. :)

Having said that, however, it doesn't really matter what you get gemini8026. These two CPUs will both have excellent performance when overclocked. Apart from benchmark scores, you will never notice any real world performance between the two when they are overclocked. the performance difference between the two CPUs would be too slight to notice.

If the P4 doesn't overclock well, it might be 5% slower. If it overclocks well it might be 5% faster. You will never notice these differences in real world computing. :p

All in all, I say it comes down to personal preference. Just buy what you are more comfortable with, knowing that both options are just as capable of good performance. :)

Indus, it has been good to have an intelligent discussion with you, something I don't always get in other forums. :rolleyes:

More often than not, I have AMD fanatics screaming "AMD RULES! END OF STORY!" with no facts to back up their comments. These kind of ignorant fools who think they know all but in fact know nothing really gives me the shits! :mad:

So, once again Indus, I thank you for keeping the discussion civil and intelligent, and I'm sure we will have many more intelligent discussions in future. I look forward to them. :D
05-03-2002, 10:28 PM
marv

Benchmarks of a 1.8a at 2.5GHz compare with a [email protected] on a SIS645 P4S333.

http://marv1950.ezhoster.com/

The SIS645DX has even better bandwith for the memory than the SIS645 does and unless your going above a FSB of 135-140, or so, the DX performs as Rambus does.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/mainboards/sis645dx/

https://www.sharkyforums.com/

Show 25 post(s) from this thread on one page