Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dmf who wrote (94855)	1/3/2000 4:53:00 AM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

dmf and Thread - High end application PIII vs. Athlon review from Anandtech For all of you out there who weed though these types of things. Article is too long to post in its entirety. Conclusion is posted below. Of note, the PIII results are achieved without RAMBUS or 133 FSB. PB ====================================================================== anandtech.com Pro/ENGINEER Performance of High End x86 CPUs (Athlon vs P3)... Conclusion If you must have the fastest Pro/E system out today, then the Kryotech SuperG does come out to be the fastest overall Pro/E performer, at least out of our roundup. Even in comparison to OCUS benchmarks published at Corten's site, it seems as if the SuperG is capable of toppling even the Alpha 21264 running at 667MHz. Is it worth the added cost however? That's up to the individual user to decide, but from our experience the answer would have to be a plain, no. The Pentium III at 800MHz comes very close to the 1000MHz SuperG in the tests and makes it very difficult to justify the added cost of the Kryotech system just to achieve the fastest performance under Pro/E. In overall performance the Athlon is on the heels of the Pentium III E, but falls short as the faster L2 cache and the wider L2 cache bus of the Pentium III E give Intel the advantage. The OCUS benchmark is yet another perfect wake-up call that brings to attention the fact that although the Athlon could easily compete against and topple the old Pentium III, the newer Pentium III is giving AMD some serious competition in certain situations. If AMD is falling behind by 3% in overall Pro/E performance with an L2 cache running at 2/5 of the core clock, when the Thunderbird hits with its full speed L2 cache, AMD should be able to pull very far ahead in the Pro/E world. From a current standpoint, the Athlon makes for an excellent Pro/E workstation. An overclocked Athlon 500 would be both a cost effective and a high performing solution for Pro/E users that would also be able to run the entire library of x86 software unlike the 21264. If you're more of an Intel fan, then Intel's FC-PGA Pentium III (Currently available in 500 and 550MHz parts) would make for the perfect solution. With the 500E and 550E being very strong overclockers, and neither one retailing for more than $400, these nice overclockers would make for a pretty fast Pro/E workstation without the incredible cost of going with a true 600MHz+ Pentium III E. The difference between the Athlon and the Pentium III E under Pro/E is negligible, a conclusion we wouldn't have expected to come to when we first saw the Athlon last August. Intel's Pentium III E will be a thorn in AMD's side until they can free themselves of the barrier that their external L2 cache forms around the Athlon. For a Pro/E user looking for a good x86 solution, both the Athlon and Pentium III E are good solutions, just remember to opt for one of these two instead of the older Pentium IIIs or the Celerons, they are worth the added cost.