What is the AMD equivelent of the Pentium 4 2.66gh
 

I noticed the names are different so I was wondering. Thanks.

AMD's have a lower overall speed, shown in gHz, from what I've seen. But that doesn't mean alot -- my computer (1.6gHz Athlon 2000) still owns my friend's 2.something gHz p4 in everything...

I don't think any Athlons currently clock that high, I believe the Athlon 3000 clocks at like 1.9 or 2.something low? Could be wrong. Athlon owns though ;)

Wait. I think I got it. It's the Athlon XP 2600+? And it is better than P4

the 2600+ is supposed to be comprable to a 2.6 GHz P4, yes. I don't know how they actually compare. try TomsHardware possibly for some benchmarks?

Yeah, look at the Benchmarks (Anandtech.com is good in addition to Tomshardware) and factor those over the prices at pricewatch.com. I find the mhz/model numbers not very useful when determining the overall value of a CPU.

AMD's PR ratings (2800+) means roughly equivalent to a p4 of the same speed. The AMD chips are clocked lower and have a lower FSB due to differences in architecture.

As for looking at benchmarks, this is where you have to be careful, because being the bully that Intel is, they have groups make benchmarks that include more of the p4's strongpoints than the AMD strongpoints. you have to look at a full array of benchmarks and then decifer them for yourself.

AMDs give a much better bang for the buck. But they do need a little more in cooling than the p4s when overclocking.
site plug: www.amdmb.com

Benchmarks are like statistics, they can be made to show anything.

And the PR rating actually is in relation to the first gen T-Birds.

The amds rating is normally equal to the intels mhz rating or better.. The only time I personally have seen the Intel out do the amd is when intels SSE2 instructions are utilized. ..

the amd xp 2600+ has a lower clock than p4 2.6ghz but it's as good as a p4 2.8ghz

I dont plan on overclocking though. Dont even know what it is lol.

overclocking = making it run faster than it is. done by pumping hte front side bus to a higher bandwidth. it means better performance but there are risk factors with overclocking, mainly cooling and life.

with amd you can unlock it and push up the mulitplier

Here's a good overall comparison site:

www.cpuscorecard.com (I love it!)

Athlons have three FPU pipelines vs. P4's two. So, in oversimplified terms, every time their (slower) clock flips, they're doing three FPU operations to the P4's two.

i dont think the fastest xp crosses the 2.2 or 2.3 mark, but it can sure kick the p4's ass.

Tom's Hardware did a Processor shootout where they actually OC'd a barton to 2.5 Ghz (core) and it mopped the floor with the P4 3.06 in almost every category.

There are things that the Pentium line do better, there are things that the AMD line do better. If you want performance right out of the box with no tinkering and minimal headaches, go Pentium. If you want to save a ton on your processor, and spend 1/3rd of a ton supporting that processor, or if you have plans of rolling up your sleeves and tinkering a bit, go AMD.

Truth be told, unless you're planning on doing things that really tax the processor, anything over 2.5ghz(or 2400+) is overkill for most people.

Me and a couple of friends did a bunch of CPU and videocard tests at ASU, and we've got sure-fire results from both types.

The CPU tests yielded that an Athlon XP has the processing power of a 600 MHz faster Pentium 4. In other words, a 1.6 GHz Athlon XP runs with the same power as a 2.2 GHz Pentium 4. We used 3d Mark 2001, 3d Mark 2003, and SiSoft Sandra to conduct these tests.

-Lasereth

Oh, and I'm not counting the Barton Athlons. The Barton Athlons are a leage of their own, with the 2.1 GHz Barton Athlon being just about as powerful as the 3.06 GHz Hyper-Threading Pentium 4, and in some cases even more powerful than the Pentium 4.

-Lasereth