AMD3800+_939 VS Prescott478 3.2E - Page 7

3.1 Ghz. Sub 27-second Super Pi 1M. Crazy multitasking for a single core. Show me a air-cooled 3800+ that can do that. Hell, show me ANY 3800+ that can do that.

having 'upgraded' from an Athlon 64 3500+ (single core )

to a new Pentium D Presler dual-core 3.4ghz, I was expecting the system to fly

however, it is SLOWER on any single application, I expected that to be about the same speed , as Athlon was rated at 3500, and Intel is 3400mhz.

the system loads in data noticably slower, there is definately a lag to doing everything, that wasnt there with the Amd

the Intel IS better, at multi tasking, as I expected, BUT remember, that all this talk of multi tasking, no one seems to mention, that data being read of the hard disk, can only be read so fast

IE hard drives dont read any faster, so thats the bottle neck

most of the time when I multi task, I open up a browser, copy and paste some text, or photos, open up word, or psp, etc etc I open up what I need at the time

THIS IS NO FASTER with the dual core system

sure, once the apps are loaded, than the system does run smoother in multi tasking, but its smoother and slower per individual app......

the one area where I notice an improvement, is on video encoding, seems about 50% faster than the AMD, so a big plus in this area.........

my point is really, if you have an existing AMD 64 system, and fancy more power, get a x2 64 chip...............thats what I wish I had done now.............

went through a lot of hassle changing board etc, for a system that boots slower, runs slower, but multi tasks faster ( once apps are loaded in )

I went for the Intel, due to great spec of the chip and price was good

the x2 amd was more expensive, but I think it would have been the better choice by far

just thought anyone with AMD 64 should know !!

BOOGS