rec.autos.simulators

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 01 Oct 2002 08:53:18

Well like Doug says, apparently the 4400 was and still is the actual
bottleneck in your system. You might have gotten better bang for the buck
upgrading the graphics card... ( remember you started it ;-)

Achim

> Just for giggles, I set my Ti4400 to Ti4600 speeds and re-tested.

> The resulting 3DMarks was 11047.

> I set it back to normal afterward. I'm not a huge overclocking fan.

> -Larry

> > For what it's worth, here for a comparison, the results of an Athlon
> > 2200/GF4-4600:

> > 3dmark2001se
> > 10349

> > Sandra:

> > arithmetic:
> > dhry 4979
> > whet 2503

> > multimedia:
> > int: 9903
> > fp: 11488

> > memory:
> > int: 1919
> > fp: 1816

> > Achim

> > > > It also shows that the Ti4400 was hampered by the AthlonXP 1800+.
The
> > > > fairly substantial increase in frame rate shows this pretty clearly.

> > > The 760 chipset was probably as much to blame as the 1800 itself. a
VIA
> > > KT333 chipset.

> > > However - to go from a 53 CPU to a 184 CPU - one should expect good
> > > improvements - especially when the extra 1Ghz of power ( iirc a 1800+
is
> > > 1.53G )

> > > Why didnt you go with an Athlon 2200 which would have worked in your
> > > motherboard? Would have been a cheaper upgrade with very similar
> > > performance come the end of it

> > > Doug

by **Goy Larse** » Tue, 01 Oct 2002 07:15:38

> Although now that you bring it up, my motherboard is one of the first A7M
> 266's - modern Socket A 333 mobos are quite a bit faster. Maybe your
> system... naw, I'm not going to say it :)

Another satisfied A7M266 user :-)

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

http://www.theuspits.com

"A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
--Groucho Marx--

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 01 Oct 2002 09:33:19

Absolutely :)

Achim

> > Although now that you bring it up, my motherboard is one of the first
A7M
> > 266's - modern Socket A 333 mobos are quite a bit faster. Maybe your
> > system... naw, I'm not going to say it :)

> Another satisfied A7M266 user :-)

> Beers and cheers
> (uncle) Goy

> http://www.theuspits.com

> "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
> --Groucho Marx--

by **Larr** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 04:53:40

Um, I was just having fun Achim :)

-Larry

> You didn't beat me, your system is moderately faster than mine - quite a
> different thing :)

> But the purpose of me uploading this wasn't to make your system look like
> bad bang for the buck or something. I only uploaded this to offer a
> comparison since Doug had mentioned such a system. I refrained on purpose
> from making any appraising comments.

> Although now that you bring it up, my motherboard is one of the first A7M
> 266's - modern Socket A 333 mobos are quite a bit faster. Maybe your
> system... naw, I'm not going to say it :)

> My system is not overclocked, btw, but I did optimize the BIOS.

> Achim

> > Wow, I beat you with a Ti4400 :)

> > How is your system configured? Is everything at the bone-stock setting
?

> > -Larry

> > > For what it's worth, here for a comparison, the results of an Athlon
> > > 2200/GF4-4600:

> > > 3dmark2001se
> > > 10349

> > > Sandra:

> > > arithmetic:
> > > dhry 4979
> > > whet 2503

> > > multimedia:
> > > int: 9903
> > > fp: 11488

> > > memory:
> > > int: 1919
> > > fp: 1816

> > > Achim

> > > > > It also shows that the Ti4400 was hampered by the AthlonXP 1800+.
> The
> > > > > fairly substantial increase in frame rate shows this pretty
clearly.

> > > > The 760 chipset was probably as much to blame as the 1800 itself. a
> VIA
> > > > KT333 chipset.

> > > > However - to go from a 53 CPU to a 184 CPU - one should expect
good
> > > > improvements - especially when the extra 1Ghz of power ( iirc a
1800+
> is
> > > > 1.53G )

> > > > Why didnt you go with an Athlon 2200 which would have worked in your
> > > > motherboard? Would have been a cheaper upgrade with very similar
> > > > performance come the end of it

> > > > Doug

by **Larr** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 04:54:39

Nope. Tried it. The processor change made a much bigger difference.

-Larry.

> Well like Doug says, apparently the 4400 was and still is the actual
> bottleneck in your system. You might have gotten better bang for the buck
> upgrading the graphics card... ( remember you started it ;-)

> Achim

> > Just for giggles, I set my Ti4400 to Ti4600 speeds and re-tested.

> > The resulting 3DMarks was 11047.

> > I set it back to normal afterward. I'm not a huge overclocking fan.

> > -Larry

> > > For what it's worth, here for a comparison, the results of an Athlon
> > > 2200/GF4-4600:

> > > 3dmark2001se
> > > 10349

> > > Sandra:

> > > arithmetic:
> > > dhry 4979
> > > whet 2503

> > > multimedia:
> > > int: 9903
> > > fp: 11488

> > > memory:
> > > int: 1919
> > > fp: 1816

> > > Achim

> > > > > It also shows that the Ti4400 was hampered by the AthlonXP 1800+.
> The
> > > > > fairly substantial increase in frame rate shows this pretty
clearly.

> > > > The 760 chipset was probably as much to blame as the 1800 itself. a
> VIA
> > > > KT333 chipset.

> > > > However - to go from a 53 CPU to a 184 CPU - one should expect
good
> > > > improvements - especially when the extra 1Ghz of power ( iirc a
1800+
> is
> > > > 1.53G )

> > > > Why didnt you go with an Athlon 2200 which would have worked in your
> > > > motherboard? Would have been a cheaper upgrade with very similar
> > > > performance come the end of it

> > > > Doug

by **Joachim Trens** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:04:52

Ah ok, I was a little worried I'd stepped on your toes, which hadn't been my
intention :)

Achim

> Um, I was just having fun Achim :)

> -Larry

> > You didn't beat me, your system is moderately faster than mine - quite a
> > different thing :)

> > But the purpose of me uploading this wasn't to make your system look
like
> > bad bang for the buck or something. I only uploaded this to offer a
> > comparison since Doug had mentioned such a system. I refrained on
purpose
> > from making any appraising comments.

> > Although now that you bring it up, my motherboard is one of the first
A7M
> > 266's - modern Socket A 333 mobos are quite a bit faster. Maybe your
> > system... naw, I'm not going to say it :)

> > My system is not overclocked, btw, but I did optimize the BIOS.

> > Achim

> > > Wow, I beat you with a Ti4400 :)

> > > How is your system configured? Is everything at the bone-stock
setting
> ?

> > > -Larry

> > > > For what it's worth, here for a comparison, the results of an Athlon
> > > > 2200/GF4-4600:

> > > > 3dmark2001se
> > > > 10349

> > > > Sandra:

> > > > arithmetic:
> > > > dhry 4979
> > > > whet 2503

> > > > multimedia:
> > > > int: 9903
> > > > fp: 11488

> > > > memory:
> > > > int: 1919
> > > > fp: 1816

> > > > Achim

message

> > > > > > It also shows that the Ti4400 was hampered by the AthlonXP
1800+.
> > The
> > > > > > fairly substantial increase in frame rate shows this pretty
> clearly.

> > > > > The 760 chipset was probably as much to blame as the 1800 itself.
a
> > VIA
> > > > > KT333 chipset.

> > > > > However - to go from a 53 CPU to a 184 CPU - one should expect
> good
> > > > > improvements - especially when the extra 1Ghz of power ( iirc a
> 1800+
> > is
> > > > > 1.53G )

> > > > > Why didnt you go with an Athlon 2200 which would have worked in
your
> > > > > motherboard? Would have been a cheaper upgrade with very similar
> > > > > performance come the end of it

> > > > > Doug

by **Larr** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:30:40

Hehe. Not at all :)

It's a shame I don't believe in overclocking. I could probably make this
thing a lot faster...

-Larry

> Ah ok, I was a little worried I'd stepped on your toes, which hadn't been
my
> intention :)

> Achim

> > Um, I was just having fun Achim :)

> > -Larry

> > > You didn't beat me, your system is moderately faster than mine - quite
a
> > > different thing :)

> > > But the purpose of me uploading this wasn't to make your system look
> like
> > > bad bang for the buck or something. I only uploaded this to offer a
> > > comparison since Doug had mentioned such a system. I refrained on
> purpose
> > > from making any appraising comments.

> > > Although now that you bring it up, my motherboard is one of the first
> A7M
> > > 266's - modern Socket A 333 mobos are quite a bit faster. Maybe your
> > > system... naw, I'm not going to say it :)

> > > My system is not overclocked, btw, but I did optimize the BIOS.

> > > Achim

> > > > Wow, I beat you with a Ti4400 :)

> > > > How is your system configured? Is everything at the bone-stock
> setting
> > ?

> > > > -Larry

> > > > > For what it's worth, here for a comparison, the results of an
Athlon
> > > > > 2200/GF4-4600:

> > > > > 3dmark2001se
> > > > > 10349

> > > > > Sandra:

> > > > > arithmetic:
> > > > > dhry 4979
> > > > > whet 2503

> > > > > multimedia:
> > > > > int: 9903
> > > > > fp: 11488

> > > > > memory:
> > > > > int: 1919
> > > > > fp: 1816

> > > > > Achim

> message

> > > > > > > It also shows that the Ti4400 was hampered by the AthlonXP
> 1800+.
> > > The
> > > > > > > fairly substantial increase in frame rate shows this pretty
> > clearly.

> > > > > > The 760 chipset was probably as much to blame as the 1800
itself.
> a
> > > VIA
> > > > > > KT333 chipset.

> > > > > > However - to go from a 53 CPU to a 184 CPU - one should expect
> > good
> > > > > > improvements - especially when the extra 1Ghz of power ( iirc a
> > 1800+
> > > is
> > > > > > 1.53G )

> > > > > > Why didnt you go with an Athlon 2200 which would have worked in
> your
> > > > > > motherboard? Would have been a cheaper upgrade with very
similar
> > > > > > performance come the end of it

> > > > > > Doug

by **Gerry Aitke** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 15:07:25

> Hehe. Not at all :)

> It's a shame I don't believe in overclocking. I could probably make this
> thing a lot faster...

It exists, believe me.

by **Joachim Trens** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 20:34:13

I used to moderately overclock my systems for many years, starting with the
very first Pentium, but I feel it's become unnecessary. With our systems we
get excellent fps with all quality and detail settings in both drivers and
sims maxxed. So why overclock.

I btw decided to purchase Athlons a few years ago not only because they are
much cheaper and were faster at the time, but also because I felt and still
feel that it's important to have a second player in the market. And the
advent of AMD to the market has shown that it is beneficial for us all if
there's a bit of competition going on.

I'm currently watching the new DDR333 based Athlons (2800 or Barton),
together with an Nvidia chipset with its fast dual channel memory access,
but I'm in no hurry - what a nice situation, for a change - and this clearly
comes from the competition between AMD and Intel. If Intel still owned the
market alone, we'd still be starving for more power all the time. But the
competition has pushed both Intel and AMD ahead of the software industry -
finally! That's why I'll buy strategically in the future as well. I may even
buy an ATI next year <g>

Achim

by **Jussi 'Igor' Koukk** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 19:13:02

wrote something like this:

Cause it's fun :)
--
- Igor -

by **Joachim Trens** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:46:49

It used to be fun when I really gained something, but now, all I can see is
a difference in the fps counter, but I don't have any advantage in the
gameplay. That's suspended the fun for me. Might come back one day, who
knows :)

Achim

...

by **Gerry Aitke** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:10:39

> wrote something like this:

> >I used to moderately overclock my systems for many years, starting with the
> >very first Pentium, but I feel it's become unnecessary. With our systems we
> >get excellent fps with all quality and detail settings in both drivers and
> >sims maxxed. So why overclock.

> Cause it's fun :)

And geeky. ;)

by **Goy Larse** » Wed, 02 Oct 2002 23:00:31

> I used to moderately overclock my systems for many years, starting with the
> very first Pentium, but I feel it's become unnecessary. With our systems we
> get excellent fps with all quality and detail settings in both drivers and
> sims maxxed. So why overclock.

Because "We need more power !!!" to quote a famous TV show host, anyone
seen Heidi the tool girl lately ?

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

"The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/

"A man is only as old as the woman he feels"
--Groucho Marx--

by **Larr** » Thu, 03 Oct 2002 21:55:33

I agree.

AMD is solely responsible for my being able to buy a P4 2.53 Retail
Processor for $260.

-Larry

> I used to moderately overclock my systems for many years, starting with
the
> very first Pentium, but I feel it's become unnecessary. With our systems
we
> get excellent fps with all quality and detail settings in both drivers and
> sims maxxed. So why overclock.

> I btw decided to purchase Athlons a few years ago not only because they
are
> much cheaper and were faster at the time, but also because I felt and
still
> feel that it's important to have a second player in the market. And the
> advent of AMD to the market has shown that it is beneficial for us all if
> there's a bit of competition going on.

> I'm currently watching the new DDR333 based Athlons (2800 or Barton),
> together with an Nvidia chipset with its fast dual channel memory access,
> but I'm in no hurry - what a nice situation, for a change - and this
clearly
> comes from the competition between AMD and Intel. If Intel still owned the
> market alone, we'd still be starving for more power all the time. But the
> competition has pushed both Intel and AMD ahead of the software industry -
> finally! That's why I'll buy strategically in the future as well. I may
even
> buy an ATI next year <g>

> Achim

> > Hehe. Not at all :)

> > It's a shame I don't believe in overclocking. I could probably make
this
> > thing a lot faster...

by **Cong** » Fri, 04 Oct 2002 01:54:35

There is no way an 11% improvement in your rendering pipe equates to 30 fps
increase. LOL Also the fps meter in papy games is flawed.

> Ah ok, I was a little worried I'd stepped on your toes, which hadn't been
my
> intention :)

> Achim

> > Um, I was just having fun Achim :)

> > -Larry

> > > You didn't beat me, your system is moderately faster than mine - quite
a
> > > different thing :)

> > > But the purpose of me uploading this wasn't to make your system look
> like
> > > bad bang for the buck or something. I only uploaded this to offer a
> > > comparison since Doug had mentioned such a system. I refrained on
> purpose
> > > from making any appraising comments.

> > > Although now that you bring it up, my motherboard is one of the first
> A7M
> > > 266's - modern Socket A 333 mobos are quite a bit faster. Maybe your
> > > system... naw, I'm not going to say it :)

> > > My system is not overclocked, btw, but I did optimize the BIOS.

> > > Achim

> > > > Wow, I beat you with a Ti4400 :)

> > > > How is your system configured? Is everything at the bone-stock
> setting
> > ?

> > > > -Larry

> > > > > For what it's worth, here for a comparison, the results of an
Athlon
> > > > > 2200/GF4-4600:

> > > > > 3dmark2001se
> > > > > 10349

> > > > > Sandra:

> > > > > arithmetic:
> > > > > dhry 4979
> > > > > whet 2503

> > > > > multimedia:
> > > > > int: 9903
> > > > > fp: 11488

> > > > > memory:
> > > > > int: 1919
> > > > > fp: 1816

> > > > > Achim

> message

> > > > > > > It also shows that the Ti4400 was hampered by the AthlonXP
> 1800+.
> > > The
> > > > > > > fairly substantial increase in frame rate shows this pretty
> > clearly.

> > > > > > The 760 chipset was probably as much to blame as the 1800
itself.
> a
> > > VIA
> > > > > > KT333 chipset.

> > > > > > However - to go from a 53 CPU to a 184 CPU - one should expect
> > good
> > > > > > improvements - especially when the extra 1Ghz of power ( iirc a
> > 1800+
> > > is
> > > > > > 1.53G )

> > > > > > Why didnt you go with an Athlon 2200 which would have worked in
> your
> > > > > > motherboard? Would have been a cheaper upgrade with very
similar
> > > > > > performance come the end of it

> > > > > > Doug

rec.autos.simulators

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.

OT - Athlon to P4 Upgrade Complete - Basic comparison results.