Hi
AMD to Intel P4, there is no contest, AMD takes the socks off them, now the
AMD64s are on the go, the gulf is huge. I see Intel have scrapped intended
production of the next model (Tegus) as they can't stop it overheating.
When AMD bring out the 939 pin chips shortly, the gulf will get bigger.
Anyway, if you want speed, MS XP64 bit edition, is for the AMD64 bit chips,
it flies, and when final is out next month or two. What other PC platform
will be worth using.
cheers
mike macnamara
- Original Message -
From: Jérôme Grimbert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] QSI
Davide Santachiara wrote:
Just for curiosity I had the chance to run QSI with QPC on a P4 3200
Mhz with extra fast ram and it's actually slower than my Athlon 2600+
(2562 vs 2733 - i.e. 27,33 times faster than a GC). Maybe QPC is
optimised for AMD processors?
Nope, at least I do not think so.
P4 is just awfully slow when compared to AMD, on a Hz-for-Hz comparaison.
And it is even worst for legacy code (old x86 code, like QPC is).
Only time P4 might be good is for P4-optimised code (which is damn rare,
as long as you expect to be able to still run on thing like a P3).
And even then, only with heavy use of the SSE2. (do not ask for Floating
point calculation on double precision...)
Perfect for playing WMedia, but that might be all it is good for!
Even slower Xeons are better than fastest P4!
Comparing CPU with bicycles, P4 has a small drive and a big rear-wheel
gear. You can be impressed by the pedaling speed, but others go quicker
with a smaller pedaling speed!
Side note: P4 MUST (per Intel request) be temperatur-monitored with
variable speed fan... I'm not even sure they do not reduce speed when
too hot without telling you. So, even if it's uphill and against the
wind, P4 might not even be the good choice.
___
QL-Users Mailing List
___
QL-Users Mailing List
