🚀 go-pugleaf

My own experience: I have 4 systems running seti@home:

      System      Hrs         Units      Hrs/wu

      AMD 1.2 DDR Memory 3117.0 557 5.596

      AMD 1.2 SDRAM 1585.1 256 6.192

      XP1700 1727.6 460 3.756

      IBM X41 (P4 1.6) 256.9 46 5.584


      Totals 6686.5 1319.0 5.069


The XP1700+ is slightly oc'd to run at 1524mhz. The IBMX41 P4 1.6 runs at
1596 mhz so from a clock speed these 2 machines are comparable. However it
takes 32% less time on the XP1700+ to do an average wu. SETI is 100% compute
intensive and does a number of Fast Fourier Transforms (FFT's) so from a
pure compute processing point of view AMD is the clear winner. Most
benchmarks also show AMD the winner, however, those that will take advantage
of SSE2 will show some advantage for Intel. This area is one that will raise
some emotions, and there are arguments for both sides, but for me and my
house I will take AMD.

Gary


"Ari Oppenheimer" <ak79@iafrica.com> wrote in message
news:3c9213fc.0@news1.mweb.co.za...
> Hi,
> I've noticed that the new AMD Proccessors are call XP 1600, XP 1700, XP
1800
> etc, but the actual speed of the XP 1600 for example is only 1.4 GHz.
>
> Now does this compare to a P4 1.6Ghz or a P4 1.4Ghz. Also, consider the
fact
> the the P4 runs at a 400Mhz bus. To me it seems as if Intel comes out as
the
> sure winner over here. After all it seems as if P4 1.6Ghz is better than
AMD
> 1.4Ghz,.
>
> Please let me know if my deduction is right, or should I go for the AMD
>
> Thanks
>
>
>