Prove that Athlon64 is better

[prathapml]

That's true.

You just have to impress them with all the features and demonstrate as best as you can.

Which would be ?????????? [how/what, according to you should be demo'ed]

[raskren]

64 bit power!

Cool n' Quiet technology!

2Ghz Hypertransport!

3DNow! Professional Technology!

Its hard to impress someone of average computer intelligence with something as technical as a CPU without using "buzzwords" like these. Not that there's anything wrong with it. Can you say Centrino? NetBurst?

The buyer is utimately going to make a decision based on the pros and cons of each product. Right now its tough to overcome Intel's agressive marketing campaigns when trying to convince Joe Sixpack that AMD chips have advantages in certain areas.

It would be helpful to know if your friend is going to do a live demonstration of AMD vs Intel. Then I could probably pick out some benchmarks/apps/games where AMD will mop the floor. Combine this with the buzzwords and you may have a winning combination.

[edmoncu]

actually, imho, 3DNow isn't exploited as SSE/SSE2 or even at least against HyperThreading so i guess i wouldn't call it an advantage for AMD.

[prathapml]

64 bit power!

Cool n' Quiet technology!

2Ghz Hypertransport!

3DNow! Professional Technology!

Thanx for the input. Yeah, u r right - buzzwords are the catch-words.

It would be helpful to know if your friend is going to do a live demonstration of AMD vs Intel

Yup! We'd be doing that (maybe a bit unfairly, though - but not bad compared to the mis-information campaign by Intel).

Comparing an:

Athlon64 3000+, KT800 MoBo, 512 MB DDR400 RAM, 40GB 7200 rpm, FX5700 LE gfx

---to a---

Pentium 4C 2.8 GHz, i865G, rest is same as above.

Now, the above test configurations are finalised and cannot be changed - so no debate on that count. We also know which one of the above beats the pants off the other (on price as well as performance) - but how do you put it such that it is obvious even to the non-IT guy?

[rstryker]

The first thing I would do is show him the differance in Boot Time.

Even Joe Nobody hates to wait for the computer to Boot Up.

Then maybe open a large picture with Photoshop and show haw much faster it opens.

[raskren]

Boot times would probably impress Joe but who is to say that an A64 is significantly faster in the boot process? I also wouldn't go so far as to say that the 3000+ beats the pants off of the Pentium.

Joe doesn't use Photoshop so anything you do in there probably won't impress him.

UT2003/2004 LOVES the A64 architecture so run some botmatches on both machines and graph the results. A64 will win by a significant amount. Use 3Dmark2001 SE as well. You'll want to stay away from media encoding tasks, Divx, Windows Media, Premiere, Maya, etc. The Pentium will usually win in this scenario. Many office productivity suites favor the Athlon's cache so you could run some lengthy macros in Word and time them.

[prathapml]

I love all this info coming in, do keep at it pals....

You do come up with things which I have over-looked. Some more?

[jdeboeck]

The Athlon 64 is a very good architecture. It performs a lot of instructions per clockcycle, and the built-in memory controller is excellent as well. The fact that it is a 64bit processor is only important to make people believe it is "one hell of a lot faster" than a 32bit Intel processor. Personally I think it's a marketing move to sell processors and Intel has to follow.

But 64bit processors have twice the transistor count of comparable 32bit processors and also have a much larger die size. This makes a 64bit processor just as expensive to manufacture as... a dual core 32bit processor. Still the Athlon 64 processor is a good architecture. Don't look for buzzwords, they usually amount to nothing.

1) Athlon has a very large L1 cache, which can function in the same way a traditional L2 cache. Pentium has a small dedicated L1 cache which isn't very useful. Keep in mind that L1 cache is about twice as fast as L2 (3cycle latency vs 7cycle latency I believe)

EDIT: those are 2-4Ghz processor cycles btw, not the 133-266Mhz memory cycles, in case you are thinking your RAM is better than that. So AMD has 128K L1 + 512K L2, against 16K L1 + 512K L2 for Northwood. This makes for a huge difference.

2) Athlon runs at a lower clock frequency, but the memory is the same speed for all platforms. This means an Athlon will have it easier to fetch instructions or data from memory, translating into a short pipeline. The Pentium, at a higher clockspeed, would run out of instructions sooner, so it needs a longer pipeline. Performance penalty is larger when a longer pipeline is filled with a mispredicted branch. This makes Athlon faster at the same clockspeed.

3) Somehow related to the longer pipeline, a Pentium's execution units are idle for longer periods of time. Something Intel solved by passing two threads through the processor simultaneously. The second thread making use of execution units that were idle by the first thread. AMD does not have (so many or so long) idle execution units, which makes the processor again faster at the same clock speed, but unable to implement some form of hyperthreading.

4) AMD has a better manufacturing process Silicon On Insulator, while Intel is stuck with strained silicon, I read something about Intel NOT being allowed to use the patent from IBM... either way, that's largely why AMD runs much cooler. Cool & Quiet, sorry to say it, is just marketing talk, essentially the same as Intel Speedstep.

5) Integrated memory controller removes any latencies incurred when the processor has to ask the chipset for a memory access. Too bad the regular Athlon64 only has a single channel memory controller.

6) Hypertransport really isnt 2.0Ghz wow! It's actually 1.0Ghz with two transfers per clock on a 16bit path. DDR400 memory is 200Mhz with two transfers per clock on a 64bit path. It's just a bus with the same bandwidth as the memory. The difference with intel is that it is a bus with a protocol, which makes it easier for two processors to be on the same bus I guess. I think it's something the Opteron really needed, and the Athlon64 just has it thrown in for buzz.

7) Lance Armstrong and Michael Schumacher both sport AMD logo's.

I hope this is of use to you, and not too late, I have been on a holiday. One last piece of advice though: I you want to get the message accross: CHEAT!

Put a 10000rpm Raptor in the Athlon machine and grandma's drive in whatever you are comparing it with. Highend mobo for the Athlon, midrange for the Pentium. If it's a benchmark you know AMD could loose, make like it doesn't exist. Call it a 2Ghz processor compared to a 3.2Ghz processor when it does lose a benchmark, call it a 3000+ compared to a 3.2Ghz when it wins. Just keeps things in the wrong perspective. It's how Intel and AMD compare their products themselves...

EDIT: And Intel rulez all

[killerbee]

hi,

the power consumption of the A64 is not so dramatically high as the new P4-prescot.

From the applicatiuon side this isn't easy to say, because it highly depends on the apps you use. You need to test your favorite apps to see if it runs faster. And ofcourse A64-Systems are cheaper than a P4-system with the same performance.

hope this helps a bit

cya

Killer Bee

[jdeboeck]

For who is this demonstration supposed to be actually? Is it the salesman that needs to make the sale? A fanboy that needs to convince his boss to get him an AMD box? Someone that just wants to prove he is right?

Both Intel and AMD have strong points and benchmarks to prove it. you want your demonstration truly objective, I would explain, for each of AMD's strong points, how Intel understates the importance of it, and how AMD covers up their weaknesses.

- AMD has Cool & Quiet: Intel says that's notebook only technology and that the reduced noise and power consumption are irrelevant in a 400W+ desktop.

- AMD is 64bit: Intel says you don't need 4GB+ in a desktop (yet), but they can help you out in the server/workstation department.

-AMD has an integrated memory controller: Intel has a dual channel memory controller in their chipsets. Athlon64FX has both so Intel has to start selling server chips to gamers as well Pentium4XE.

-AMD mobo's are cheaper: Intel says cause the processor is more expensive (because of the memory controller, not talking price/performance here)

- AMD Hypertransport is a 4GB/s bus, against 3.2GB/s for Intel Netburst: Intel says there is no PC4000 DDR-500 to make use of it. Actually there is but it's not certified. Intel is betting the farm on the more recent DDR2-533.

- Intel chooses DDR2 for the future, AMD simply can't do that, because that would require them to redesign the entire processor, not just a chipset. It's a good thing AMD can come up with a benchmark to prove DDR faster than DDR2.

- AMD has 3D Now, Intel has SSE3. Neither is widely used.

- AMD has NoExecute bit, Intel says Windows doesnt support it (yet), unless you want to play around with betas. The same goes for the entire 64bit-ness as well.

- AMD says 64bit is the future. Intel agrees, but you may need to upgrade your AMD as well, before the future is here.

- Intel has HyperThreading, AMD doesn't need it, couldn't benefit from it.

- Intel pushes PCI Express, DDR2, BTX, while AMD finds all these things irrelevant for now.

Each should make up there own mind, based on their specific needs. Convincing someone with a demonstration full of buzzwords is just going to create more fanboys.

[prathapml]

For who is this demonstration supposed to be actually?

The average consumer looking to buy a mid-range desktop (first-timer or otherwise).

Convincing someone with a demonstration full of buzzwords is just going to create more fanboys.

LOL, that would be fine by me.

[venim]

Well I'm gonna update my hardware in these days.

And I want to move to athlon 64.

Is it worth buing it now or wait for athlon64fx.In case amd is gonna change again the socket?

[jdeboeck]

No need to 'wait' for an AthlonFX, but you mean the new socket right? The FX-51 and FX-53 were socket 940, but FX-53 will have a socket 939 replacement soon (EDIT: if not already available). Future FX-55 and higher will be socket 939 only.

I think socket 939 is a safe bet. AMD has got 4 dekstop sockets right now (462, 754, 939 and 940) and that's way too much. Socket 939 is the only one that isn't being phased out. Socket 940 desktops will be dead, and the other two will just receive new Sempron processors.

[Justice]

940 Dead? Opterons are 940 only, so I don't think we'll see the demise of the 940 anytime soon.

[jdeboeck]

Socket 940 desktops will be dead

Opterons are for servers/workstations, but gamers and enthusiasts will move to socket 939 Athlon FX, with unregistered memory and without PCI-X slots...