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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rsi_boy who wrote (60314)	10/25/2001 5:48:24 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

rsi_boy, can I take it that you are slightly changing your attitude from your last post ("We all know, that in most applications, a 1.2Ghz "celeron" on pc133 would beat a Pentium 4 of any speed on that same memory type")? Re: "Show Celeron 1.2 destroying p4 1.5 in business Winstone and content creation Winstone (48 to 38 points and 56 to 48 respectively) when the Celeron is running 133 bus." Yes, Winstone has been regarded as a very tough test for Pentium 4. I'm not trying to explain it away, but in the future, I expect Winstone 2002, etc, to be less harsh on Pentium 4, even with SDRAM. (And this would be due to less legacy code, not cooking of the benchmarks by Intel). Re: "The reasons for this are clear, in some of the applications PC 133 bounds each processor equivalently. In the CPU bound apps, the superior IPC of the P6 core wins out except in the case of the few applications so far that have been painstakingly optimized for the P4." I see quite a few applications where the Pentium 4 does quite well, without painstaking optimizations. SysMark Content Creation uses that WME program that people here love to hate, so I won't count that. Besides that benchmark, though, the 1.5GHz Pentium 4 with SDRAM beats the 1.2GHz Celeron with the exact same memory in Winzip 8.0 (no P4 optimizations that I know of), FlasK Encoding (using a simple recompile - no tricks), Quake III (Intel friendly, but no painstaking optimizations required), DroneZ (includes SSE, but not sure about SSE-2), 3DMark2001 (optimized, but not painstakingly so, AFAIK), and ScienceMark (said to be a quite objective benchmark for FPU performance). Gee, it looks like, as I said, that there are more than a few applications out there where the Pentium 4 beats the Celeron, even with the worst case configuration. Of course, I fully expect that you can find more counter-examples, but let me again show you the quote that I had the biggest problem with. "We all know, that in most applications, a 1.2Ghz "celeron" on pc133 would beat a Pentium 4 of any speed on that same memory type" It doesn't look like that to me. wanna_bmw