LINUXGAMES

LinuxHardware.org Pentium 4 Review Extended

July 26th, 2001 by Crusader

In response to theirlast review,LinuxHardware.org hasreviewedthe IntelPentium 4again (specifically, a 1.7GHz CPU) with additional benchmarks:

Well after all the hype over the Pentium 4 review, we felt that we wouldstoke the fire a bit more with a couple new benchmarks and the much talkedabout price verses performance comparison. This will be quick andhopefully painless. Those of you that are a bit sensitive about theAthlon though may want to prepare yourselves a bit. In this extension, wetake a look at Unreal Tournament and MP3 encoding.

6 Responses to “LinuxHardware.org Pentium 4 Review Extended”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    From the comparison between the Intel IV 1.7, and the Athlon 1.2, I think price/performance, the Athlon smokes Intel once again.

  2. clump Says:

    But I type this on an Athlon T-Bird 800 ;)

  3. chunky Says:

    UT and mpeg encoding. Neither of which I do. I want to see two benchmarks: quake3 [since that's what I play most of the time], and a kernel compile. Obviously, ut and mp3 is good too, to give an idea, but they’re not relevant to _me_.

    And I’d like to say that the reason quake3 does well in p4s is the same reason that intel say their chips are fast. If you write code with them in mind, they’re f**king fast. If, OTOH, you want to stick to the athlons [can the linux users see anything here that they recognise?], and you don’t consider the intel as an alternative, then it’ll be shit-slow on a pentium, but screamingly fast on the athlon.

    For those who’re missing what’s going on here, we don’t have Internet Explorer in Linux, and huge numbers of websites nowadays don’t work in ns/moz. I don’t want to know that NS is technically inferior, by the way, I still prefer it for usability.

    Gary (-;

  4. Anonymous Says:

    Since before it debuted, I’ve said that the P4 would only beat the Athlon if they could raise the clock at a much higher rate than the K7. Well, that’s what they’ve been doing, and low and behold, now it doesn’t suck. Unless you count cost. And the benchmarks where it does suck. ;)

    Not that cost should matter. You compare the best of each to find out which is _fastest_. If you want to also consider price when purchasing, then do so. Benchmarks are still about who has the most muscle.

    I am dissapointed in the number of benchmarks. I would have liked to see more. But between the two reviews they have 6, which isn’t a horrible number.

  5. rssvihla Says:

    I’m a little confused. I’m a big T-bird user and fan, but even I know that P4 is better at gaming and mp3 encoding so what. Thats the goal of the P4, even Intel readily admits that themselves. Last time I checked the strength of Linux was not in either of those categories anyway, hence making it an obnoxiously stupid purchase for most people on a linux desktop, let alone for a server(btw I love that so many companies are buying those for server usage as I speak, and getting worse preformance than even there pIII that I’m sure they’re replacing.)

  6. Anonymous Says:

    Hi all

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.