Processor Performance

Benchmark test are a useful tool. But the actual processor that is best for your application depends on how you use your PC.

If you plan to edit digital video, than a P4 with hyper-threading will perform best.

For regular tasks, on a cost versus performance basis, the AMD Athlon series wins hands down.

For "bragging" rights, the 64-Bit AMD processors are the way to go.

The MAC is often claimed to run faster than X86 based systems.
IMHO, this is from differences in the buss structure, and that the MAC OS is more streamlined than Windows.
MAC software packages "can" perform better for desktop publishing and image editing.

Chas

Another great resource for general and indepth technology as well as benchmarks for the latest hardware you can always visit www.anandtech.com

thats true anadtech gives good reviews. the only thing with mac-l is thatThe Mach-L are Intel P4's overclocked...

In order of betterness.

They can not compete with normal computers
Performance is all about what you need the processor to do. IMO the most important measurement in the real world is bang for your buck. AMD wins hands down in that category despite the recent narrowing of their price advantage.

For normal Windows programs, the AMD Athlon 51 FX (@2.2Ghz)will outperform the P4 (@3.2GHz) by about 25%.
The exception to this, Adobe Photoshop.
Adobe Photoshop is Hyperthreaded. (Most Windows Applications are not.)
Running Adobe Photoshop, the P4 with its hyperthreading will be able to keep up with the Athlon 51 FX. (They will perform equally.)

The Mac can almost keep up with the Athlon FX. (Both running Photoshop.) It is very close.
Regards, Chris

I used to be an AMD man, BUT ive moved to intel now for many reasons:

1) game programers optimize there products to p4 chips (but not Hyper threading YET)
2) nearly all 800MHz FSB p4 will have Hyper-threading, this technology is amazing (its 1 physical processor and its 1.5 logical processors)
3) there alot colder (chips run faster at colder temps.) and not so poluting compared to the radiator AMD chips

after using amd up to 1.4GHZ then changing to intel celeron and p4 (from 1Ghz celeron up to 3.2GHz P4) a 1.6 ghz celeron seemed equil to a 1.4 amd athlon and nobody can compare an AMD and A Pentium 4, p4's are too good! :P

This is gonna start a riot.

The new Mac G5 and the 64bit PC's are kicking butt right now. I own a AMD 64 3200+ on the pc side.

I do all of my image processing on the Macintosh. It is just a better machine for imagery.

This discussion could fill several books.

Try this site. More reading than you can shake a stick at.

http://www.anandtech.com

Good Luck Lee

well i use intel cause there optimized by games and utilities. p4's hyperthreaded 800Mhz FSB CPU's are pure quality.
AMD are cheaper tho

AMD: more actions per clock cycle
INTEL: higher clock speeds, more features (eg: MMX HT etc.)

I agree with the statement of depending on what you have in mind, but with hyper-threading, the software must be able to utalise the H-T otherwise it will in basic terms run as usual, I agree that the benchmarks for these should be you best shopping tool but consiter what you will be using it for and cross it with the benchmarks. we all have our "opinions" the best one of choice is yours, the best advice? take your time, look at these benchmarks,prices, shop around. you want this to work for you so only you can deside, in gen., there is somewhat of a standared, except for perhaps what Apple/MAC does, but the rest is in most cases compairable..don't get something some one elce tells you, get what YOU want and what works the way YOU want it!!!!!

This question was closed by the author