Well, I was gonna compare and contrast the processors, until I saw this ending:
Quote:
Originally posted by Dwayne
and recomend which one is the better choice for the price.
|
Athlons are better for the price. I don't care how big of an Intel fanboy gets ahold of you, they simply can't argue their way out of the price-for-performance ratio that Athlons have. Athlon XPs used to be much, much cheaper than Pentium 4s a few months ago, but Intel lowered their prices. AMD lowered their Athlon XP prices as well however, creating an only slightly smaller price gap. In other words, AMD Athlon XPs are still the best bang for your buck.
To be fair, I'll compare and contrast them with a few simple facts. Athlon XPs are better for gaming, and Pentium 4s are better for media creation/encoding/ripping due to their high clock speeds. The faster the processor (and I mean actual speed, not structure), the faster media is encoded. Pentium 4s have always been faster than Athlon XPs in raw clock speed, so they're better for applications that require more clock cycles (media).
Games require L cache on the processor, data stream paths within the processors, and processor-to-memory pipelines. Athlon XPs generally excel in all of these categories, making them better for gaming (compared to a same-model rating Pentium 4).
So: Athlon XPs are better for gaming, and Pentium 4s are better for media applications. Athlon XPs are better bang for your buck, but if you really need fast clock speed for media applications, then Pentium 4s are an excellent choice.
-Lasereth