<!–#set var="article_header" value="The Final Battle:
P4/2400 vs. Athlon XP 2100+ (2400+)” –>
Intel P4/2400 – The Last One With 100 MHz FSB
Intel’s strategy for CPU models focuses on the Pentium 4 as the leader in the mass market, as well as a continual increase in clock speed. Previously, this meant that since the introduction of the P4, the user has had to change platforms at least once. Nevertheless, the P4 chip has brought in a good profit margin (in tough times) for the company and has contributed to its positive record. On the other hand, the sales figures for the retail component market are still too low – among the real PC enthusiasts, hardly anyone goes for the P4. In this market segment, AMD remains the leader, offering its Athlon CPUs at a significantly lower price. The root of this problem lies in the hardware platform, which is much more expensive for the P4 than for the AMD Athlon XP. This scenario changes, though, if a large quantity of PCs equipped with the P4 are sold through discount chains. This is because typically in such cases only the cheapest components are used. This results in disappointment, however, because the high performance expectations for the P4 systems are never met. The inexperienced user is unable to compare this with a more powerful system equipped with the same processor.
Intel Pentium 4/2400 (Northwood Core) for 100 MHz FSB.
Since last summer, when the chip manufacturer introduced the Pentium 4/2000 (August 27, 2001) for Socket 423, the clock frequency of this flagship model has grown from 2000 MHz to 2400 MHz. In the meantime, the fabrication process was switched from 0.18 to 0.13 micron – and at the same time, the Socket 423 was replaced by the more compact Socket 478. Now it’s clearly headed in the direction of higher clock speeds, which is where Intel has positioned itself in the market, as well as in relation to its competitor, AMD. And in any case, higher clock speeds are required in order to keep performance on a par with the AMD Athlon XP, which has a lower clock frequency. Now, the two competitors differ by 666 MHz, since the AMD Athlon XP 2100+ is clocked at 1733 MHz. As proved by many of the previous tests, the maximum clock speed of a processor is no longer the only factor in evaluating performance. Far more important is how the commands are handled in the context of the CPU architecture.
In comparison: AMD Athlon XP 2100+ and Intel Pentium 4/2400.
A back view of both processors.
Facts about the Pentium 4/2400: according to Intel’s plans, this is will be the last CPU to have a 100 MHz FSB clock. Future P4 processors will run exclusively on an FSB clock of 133 MHz, which actually results in a slower core clock speed. After all, the multiplier lock will continue to exist. The Pentium 4/2533 with 133 MHz FSB will be launched at the beginning of May, with a fixed multiplier of 19.0. With respect to marketing, the faster system clock will even be sold with 533 MHz FSB, where the data is only transferred using the QDR process (rising and falling edges of the signal, double the amount with DDR).
An interesting new aspect is the shrinking of the die size, which Intel has put into practice starting with the launch of the P4/2400. In decreasing the distance between the individual units by 10% within the CPU core, the manufacturer can lower the production costs. For the user, however, this strategy brings no advantages.
Intel Pentium 4 vs. AMD Athlon XP
| Manufacturer | AMD | AMD | Intel |
| Processor | Athlon XP w/Palomino Core | Athlon XP w/Thoroughbred Core | Pentium 4 w/Northwood Core |
| Introduction | October 9, 2001 | Q2, 2002 | January 7, 2002 |
| Clock Frequencies | 1.2 – 1.80 GHz | 1.86 – 2.xx GHz | 1.6 – 2.xx GHz |
| Manufacturing Process | 0,18 µm | 0,13 µm | 0,13 µm |
| Die size | 128 mm2 | 80 mm2 | 146 mm2 |
| Number of Gates | 37,5 Million | 37,5 Million | 55 Million |
| Platform | Socket462 | Socket462 | Socket478 |
| CPU Bus Clock (Front Side Bus) | 133 MHz / 266 MHz DDR | 133 MHz / 266 MHz DDR | 100 MHz / 400 MHz QDR |
| L1 Execution Cache Size | 64 KB | 64 KB | 12.000 µ-Ops (Trace Cache) |
| Execution Pre Decode? | no | no | yes |
| L1 Data Cache Size | 64 KB | 64 KB | 8 KB (unconfirmed) |
| Hardware Data Prefetch | yes | yes | yes |
| L1 Cache Clock | core clock | core clock | core clock |
| L1 Data Cache Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache Size | 256 KB | 256 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache Clock | core clock | core clock | core clock |
| L2 Cache Addressable Range | 64 GB | 64 GB | 64 GB |
| Processor Data Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| Platform Support | |||
| Chipsets | VIA KT133 to KT333A SiS 735 and SiS 745 ALi Magik 1 Nvidia nForce AMD 750 and 760 |
VIA KT133A to KT333A SiS 735 and SiS 745 ALi Magik 1 Nvidia nForce AMD 750 and 760 |
Intel 845, Intel 845D and Intel 845E Intel 850 and Intel 850E VIA P4X266 VIA P4X266A SiS 645 |
| Type of Memory | SDRAM, DDR-SDRAM | SDRAM, DDR-SDRAM | SDRAM, DDR-SDRAM, RDRAM |
| Memory Clock | 100/133/166 MHz | 100/133/166 MHz | 100/133/166/300/400/533 MHz |
| Instruction Extensions | |||
| MMX | yes | yes | yes |
| Enhanced 3DNow! | yes | yes | no |
| 3DNow! Professional | yes | yes | no |
| SSE | yes | yes | yes |
| SSE2 | no | no | yes |
| Electrical Specifications | |||
| SMP-Support | no (‘not officially endorsed or supported’) | no (‘not officially endorsed or supported’) | no |
| Core Voltage | 1,75 Volt | 1,5 Volt | 1,5 Volt |
| Thermal Protection (Thermal Diode) | yes | yes | yes |
| Integrated Thermal Protection Logic | no, requires logic on motherboard | no, requires logic on motherboard | yes |
Intel’s Strategy: Dual-Channel DDR By The End Of 2002?
The chapter on memory is clearly of a political nature, because ultimately, Intel has committed itself to DDR technology after RDRAM was massively boycotted by the market. With the continually increasing clock speeds, especially with the Intel platform, one thing is obvious: the single-channel DDR technology (DDR266) cannot offer enough bandwidth to achieve optimal system performance. A System with Rambus memory or dual-channel DDR helps, but the latter is certainly not in sight. So the only thing that’s left for the power user is the possibility of switching to the RDRAM platform. In any case, as our benchmark results show, DDR266 memory slows down the entire system with clock speeds of 2.5 GHz, at the very latest. Even the Pentium 4/2400, which we ran with 133 MHz FSB, showed an indisputable increase in speed when used in combination with 533 MHz RDRAM memory. Highly confidential roadmap documents, which are revealed to only the closest of partners, prove that the manufacturer will already be introducing a chipset with Dual DDR support at the end of this year. This is supposed to provide the bandwidth required for P4 CPUs with clock speeds starting from 3 GHz.
New RDRAM With 32 Bit, Bundled With Motherboards
A comparison of the very latest memory modules (not yet available for sale): RDRAM for 400 and 533 MHz (Samsung), as well as DDR333-Modul (Infineon) with CL2.0.
Also runs in DDR400 mode: a hand-picked memory module.
A test sample from Infineon: 256 MB DDR333 for 166 MHz and CL2.0 timing.
There are some new developments with RDRAM, which will be available in two different versions in the future: the standard 16-bit will be offered, as will a 32-bit version, which will differ mechanically from previous modules. Asus plans to be the first manufacturer to offer 32-bit memory (Kingston) bundled with its P4T533 motherboard in May. Samsung and Infineon will forgo production of 32-bit modules entirely after PC1066. Infineon will go so far as to offer only PC800 modules for 400 MHz.
Limited Quantities: Rambus Boards from Asus, Gigabyte, Intel and QDI
It’s already an established fact that when Intel launches the 850E chipset in May, only a very few board makers will be offering the corresponding mainboards. The manufacturers estimate that this niche market is not as lucrative, so they are concentrating on the DDR platform. Only Asus, Gigabyte and QDI will have boards available, and MSI will monitor the market demand first before making a decision. For this underlying reason, mostly boards with the Intel 845D chipset will be produced for the mass market. It remains to be seen if the SiS 645DX chipset, which is of good quality and costs less, will be accepted.
Athlon XP 2400: High Speed At 184 MHz Memory Clock
An Athlon XP overclocked to 1918 MHz.
With the help of hand-picked memory modules from Infineon, we were able to overclock the AMD Athlon XP to 1918 MHz for the first time. In addition, the memory module ran at the most aggressive settings while in CL2.0 mode (timing 2-2-2), and during the test phase it showed no stability problems. The benchmark results speak for themselves and show what kind of performance the Athlon XP 2400+ (using the Thoroughbred core above all) will bring. After some slight delays, AMD will introduce the new CPU in April 2002.
Test phase: core voltage of up to 2.05 Volt with P4, with the help of extra resistance.
Nothing works without watercooling: the kit from Innovatek.
Overclocking: Pentium 4 with 3000 MHz
We’ve already brought you a detailed analysis of the Pentium 4/3000 in the test Clash Of The OC’d Titans: Athlon XP 2300+ vs. Pentium 4/3000.
Intel Pentium 4 with 3011 MHz – P4/2400 serves as the basis.
Abit TH7 II: still one of the best overclocking platforms for the P4.
Voltage modification in the IC of the Abit TH 7 II.
Speed help for testing: raising the core voltage of the P4.
Our new test platform: Soltek SL-75DRV5 for AMD Athlon XP with VIA KT333.
Ready for DDR333 and overclocking: Soltek SL-75DRV5.
Chipset Comparison: Intel 850E, 850, 845D and 845
This table lists all the Intel chipsets for the Socket 478 platform.
| Chipset | SiS 645DX | SiS 645 | Intel 850E | Intel 850 |
| Introduction | March 2002 | November 2001 | June 2002 | January 2001 |
| Processor Platform | Socket 478 | Socket 478 | Socket 478 | Socket 423/478 |
| Supported CPU | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 |
| Multiprocessor Support | no | no | yes | yes |
| Chipset Northbridge | SiS 645DX | SiS 645 | Intel KC82850E | Intel KC82850 |
| Chipset Southbridge | SiS 961 | SiS 961 | Intel 82801 BA | Intel 82801 BA |
| Front Side Bus Clock | 100/133 MHz | 100 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 100/133/166 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 400 MHz/533 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Asynchronous Memory Clock | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| FSB-Overclocking | up to 166 MHz | up to 133 MHz | up to 166 MHz | up to 133 MHz |
| max. # DIMM-Slots | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| max. Memory | 3072 MB | 3072 MB | 2048 MB | 2048 MB |
| SDRAM Support | yes | yes | no | no |
| DDR SDRAM Support | yes | yes | no | no |
| VC SDRAM Support | no | no | no | no |
| RIMM Support (Rambus) | no | no | yes | yes |
| Dual RIMM Support (Rambus) | no | no | yes | yes |
| Ultra-DMA/33/66/100 | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes |
| Ultra-DMA/133 | no | no | no | no |
| Max. # USB | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| USB 2.0 | no | no | yes | no |
| Max.# PCI Slots | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Integrated Graphics | yes | yes | no | no |
| AGP 1x / 2x / 4x | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes |
| ACPI Features | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Chipset | Intel 845D | Intel 845 | VIA P4X266 | VIA P4X266A |
| Introduction | December 2001 | July 2001 | August 2001 | December 2001 |
| Processor Platform | Socket 478 | Socket 423/478 | Socket 423/478 | Socket 478 |
| Supported CPU | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 |
| Multiprocessor Support | no | no | no | no |
| Chipset Northbridge | Intel 82845 | Intel 82845 | VIA VT8753 | VIA P4X266A |
| Chipset Southbridge | Intel 82801 BA | Intel 82801 BA | VIA VT8233 | VIA VT8233A |
| Front Side Bus Clock | 66/100/133 MHz | 66/100/133 MHz | 100 MHz | 100 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz |
| Asynchronous Memory Clock | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| FSB-Overclocking | up to 166 MHz | up to 180 MHz | up to 180 MHz | up to 180 MHz |
| max. # DIMM-Slots | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| max. Memory | 2048 MB | 2048 MB | 4096 MB | 3072 MB |
| SDRAM Support | no | yes | yes | yes |
| DDR SDRAM Support | yes | no | yes | yes |
| VC SDRAM Support | no | no | yes | yes |
| RIMM Support (Rambus) | no | no | no | no |
| Dual RIMM Support (Rambus) | no | no | no | no |
| Ultra-DMA/33/66/100 | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes |
| Ultra-DMA/133 | no | no | no | yes |
| Max. # USB | 4 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| USB 2.0 | no | yes | no | yes |
| Max.# PCI Slots | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 |
| Integrated Graphics | no | no | no | no |
| AGP 1x / 2x / 4x | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes |
| ACPI Features | yes | yes | yes | yes |
Test Setup and Details
| Intel Hardware (Socket 478) | |
| Processors 1 133 MHz FSB – 533 MHz Memory Clock |
Pentium 4A 2.6 GHz (2666 MHz) Pentium 4A 2.5 GHz (2533 MHz) Pentium 4A 2.4 GHz (2400 MHz) |
| Processors 2 100 MHz FSB – 400 MHz Memory Clock |
Pentium 4A 2.4 GHz (2400 MHz) Pentium 4A 2.2 GHz (2200 MHz) Pentium 4A 2.0 GHz (2000 MHz) Pentium 4A 1.8 GHz (1800 MHz) Pentium 4A 1.6 GHz (1600 MHz) Pentium 4 2.0 GHz (2000 MHz) Pentium 4 1.9 GHz (1900 MHz) Pentium 4 1.8 GHz (1800 MHz) Pentium 4 1.7 GHz (1700 MHz) Pentium 4 1.6 GHz (1600 MHz) Pentium 4 1.5 GHz (1500 MHz) Pentium 4 1.4 GHz (1400 MHz) |
| Motherboard | ABIT TH7II (I850) Revision: 1.0 Bios: TH7H_38 |
| Memory 1 | 2x 256 MB RDRAM, PC800, 400 MHz, 40ns, Infineon |
| Memory 2 | 4x 128 MB RDRAM, PC1066, 533 MHz, 35ns, Samsung |
| AMD Hardware (Socket 462) | |
| Processors 1 133 MHz FSB – 166 MHz Memory Clock |
Athlon XP 2100+ (1733 MHz) Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz) Athlon XP 1900+ (1600 MHz) Athlon XP 1800+ (1533 MHz) Athlon XP 1700+ (1466 MHz) Athlon XP 1600+ (1400 MHz) Athlon XP 1500+ (1333 MHz) Athlon 1400 (1400 MHz) |
| Processors 2 100 MHz FSB – 133 MHz Memory Clock |
Athlon 850 (850/100/133 MHz) |
| Motherboard | Soltek SL-75DRV5 (KT333) Revision: 1.0 Bios: |
| Memory | 512 MB DDR-SDRAM, CL2.0, 166 MHz, PC2700, Winbond |
| General Hardware | |
| Graphics Card | GeForce 3 Ti 500 (MSI MS-8854) Memory: 64 MB DDR-SDRAM Memory Clock: 500 MHz Chip Clock: 240 MHz |
| Hard Drive | 40 GB, 5T040H4, Maxtor UDMA100, 7200 rpm, 2 MB Cache |
| Drivers & Software | |
| Graphics Driver | Detonator 4 Series V28.32 |
| VIA KT333A Driver | 4 in 1 Version: 4.38(2)v(a) |
| DirectX Version | 8.1 |
| Intel 850 Driver | V 3.20.1008 |
| Intel IAA Driver | V 2.0 |
| OS | Windows XP, Build 2600 |
| Benchmarks & Settings | |
| Quake III Arena | Retail Version 1.16 command line = +set cd_nocd 1 +set s_initsound 0 Graphics detail set to ‘Normal’ Benchmark using ‘Q3DEMO1’ |
| 3DMark2000 Pro | Version 1.1 Build 340 – default Benchmark |
| 3DMark2001 Pro | Build 200 – default Benchmark |
| PCMark2002 Pro | only CPU and Memory Bench (no Video Memory) |
| SiSoft Sandra 2001 | Professional Version 2001.3.7.50 |
| Newtek Lightwave | Version 7b Rendering Bench SKULL_HEAD_NEWEST.LWS |
| mpeg4 encoding | Xmpeg 4.2a DivX 5.0 Pro Compression/quality: Fastest Data Rate: 780 Kbit Format: 720×576 Pixel@25 fps 150 MB VOB-Datei, no Audio |
| Studio 7 | Version 7.11267 (MPEG 2) |
| Sysmark 2002 | no Patch |
| Lame | Lame 3.91 MMX, SSE, SSE 2, 3DNow! |
| WinACE | 2.11, 178 MB Wave File, Best Compression, Dictonary 4096 KB |
| Cinema 4D XL R7 | Version V7.303 Rendering: 1024×768 |
| 3D Studio Max | Version 4.2 Rendering of the “Rabbit” scene 800×600 10 Images |
Benchmarks Under Windows XP
| OpenGL Performance | Quake 3 Arena “Demo 1” and “NV15 Demo” |
| 3D Rendering | SPECviewperf “Light-04” Lightwave 7b Cinema 4D XL 7.303 3D Studio Max 4.2 |
| DirectX7 Games | 3D Mark 2000 |
| DirectX8 Games | 3D Mark 2001 SE |
| MP3 Audio Encoding | mp3 Maker Platinum |
| MPEG-2 Video Encoding | Pinnacle Studio 7 |
| MPEG-4 Video Encoding | XMpeg 4.2a and DivX 5.0 Pro |
| Office Performance | Sysmark 2002 |
| Archiving | WinACE 2.11 |
| SiSoft Sandra 2002 Pro | CPU and Multimedia Bench |
| PC Mark 2002 | CPU and Memory Bench |
We performed a total of 21 different benchmark tests in order to obtain the most complete, well-balanced view of how the Pentium 4/2400 with 400 MHz and 533 MHz RDRAM performs. You can get a clear overall picture from the benchmark results for a total of 25 different processors – including the Pentium 4/2533 and the Pentium 4/2666, both of which won’t be introduced for another few weeks. We compared this to all of the AMD Athlon XP processors, from the classic Athlon with Thunderbird core to the slowest of all, the Athlon 850. A highlight is the AMD Athlon XP 2400+, which runs at a clock speed of 1918 MHz.
We ran four different Quake 3 tests to determine OpenGL performance. The different MPEG-encoding benchmarks provide a comprehensive testing environment – the Lame MP3 Encoder was used to encode a 178 MB WAV file into “MPEG-1 Layer 3 format.” Still a classic, our MPEG-4 test converts a file from a commercial DVD-ROM into MPEG-4 format using Xmpeg 4.2a and the DivX 5.0 codec. We also created an MPEG-2 film using the video-editing software “Pinnacle Studio 7.” A regular in our list of benchmarks is determining rendering performance using Newtek’s Lightwave (version 7b). We also ran the new WinACE 2.11 to test how well the CPU performs when archiving files, a common application in the computing world. The Sysmark 2002 benchmark was used for the first time to determine office performance. The SPECviewperf benchmark offered a comprehensive 3D benchmark suite. A newcomer is PC Mark 2002, which analyzes the performance of the CPU and memory.
OpenGL Performance: Quake 3 Arena
In the four Quake 3 Arena time-demo runs, the Intel Pentium 4/2400 is ahead of the AMD Athlon XP 2100+. The Intel Pentium 4/2666 breaks a record here, achieving 344 fps. An Athlon 850 is just barely able to make 140 fps. The Athlon XP lacks memory throughput, causing the AMD platform to end up in the lower ranks. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
DirectX 7 Games: 3D Mark 2000
The 3D Mark 2000 determines DirectX 7’s Direct3D performance under Windows XP. The Athlon XP 2100+ chalks up a new record with 11991 points. Here, the Intel clock speed monster cannot keep up.
DirectX 8 Games: 3D Mark 2001 SE
The 3D Mark 2000 determines DirectX 8’s Direct3D performance under Windows XP. In this test, the AMD Athlon 2100+ and the Intel Pentium 4/2400 are just about the same. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
MP3 Audio Encoding: mp3 Maker Platinum
mp3 Maker Platinum was used to convert a 178 MB sound file from a WAV format to an “MPEG-1 Layer 3” format under Windows XP. The chart shows that the Pentium 4 processors take the top positions. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
MPEG-4 Video Encoding: Xmpeg 4.2a und Divx 5.0 Pro
RAM performance is an important factor in MPEG-4 encoding. The Pentium 4/2400 holds the record with double-realtime speed! By contrast, the Athlon 850 shows its age with approximately 24 fps. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
SiSoft Sandra 2002 Benchmarks: CPU and Multimedia
In the SiSoft Sandra Pro Benchmark 2002, the Pentium 4 with 533 MHz RDRAM proves to have the highest memory performance. The latest Pentium 4 with 400 MHz RDRAM, as well as all of the AMD processors with 133 MHz, clearly fall behind. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
3D Rendering: Newtek Lightwave 7b
The Lightwave test also shows that nothing can hold a candle to the 533 MHz memory clock – the three P4 processors take the lead. The calculations follow eight threads simultaneously. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars. The P4/2400 is still in the lead.
3D Rendering: Cinema 4D XL 7.303
It’s a different picture with the Cinema benchmark: the Pentium 4/2400 and the Athlon XP 2100+ are about even. Note: the Pentium 4/2400 won’t be available on the market with 133 MHz. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
Office/Internet Performance: Sysmark 2002
The new 2002 version of the Sysmark benchmark recently came on the market; we’ve used this to test all 25 processors on the different platforms. In all three areas, the P4/2400 is ahead of the AMD competition. In Office performance, the Pentium 4/2666 reaches a new top score with 187 points. Again, this shows that the adjustment to FSB and memory clocks help increase the performance of the P4 CPUs. One comment about all AMD Athlon XP CPUs: compared to Intel’s models, the AMD processors prove to be relatively weak because they lack enhancements. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
PC Mark 2002: CPU and Memory
In these two new benchmark tests, the P4/2400 is ahead of the Athlon XP 2100+.
Archiving: WinACE 4.11
Archiving is a very practical application. WinACE 4.11 was used under Windows XP to archive a 178 MB WAV file while the clock was running. It’s clear-cut: the P4/2400 wins with a slight lead over the Athlon XP 2100+. Once again, the fast memory clock of 533 MHz (grey bars) has a noticeable effect. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
MPEG-2 Video Encoding: Pinnacle Studio 7
The Pentium 4/2400 is somewhat faster than its AMD rivals at creating an MPEG-2 video with Pinnacle Studio 7. The slowest candidate is once again the AMD Athlon 850, which we’ve included in this comparison. The performance of the AMD Athlon XP 2100+, however, is quite impressive: in combination with DDR333 (CL 2.0) and the KT333 chipset, it is able to keep apace with its Intel rivals, which are clocked to much higher speeds. All chips that are not yet available on the market are marked with grey bars.
3D Rendering: 3D Studio Max 4.2
In this benchmark, ten pictures from the “Rabbit” scene were calculated with a resolution of 800 x 600 pixels. The Athlon XP 2100+ is just a nose ahead of the P4/2400.
Conclusion: P4/2400 Reaches Top Position, Athlon XP 2400+ A Highlight
In the previous “AMD vs. Intel” comparison (Athlon XP 2100+: AMD Turns Up The Heat), the Athlon XP 2100+ took the leading position by a nose, but now the Pentium 4/2400 easily overtakes its arch rival. Meanwhile, you should keep in mind that that the P4 has a 666 MHz core clock advantage over the Athlon XP. It should be clear that it’s a meeting of two completely different architectures, which cannot be evaluated merely on the basis of MHz figures. Basically, there’s not much new to report about the P4/2400, and it won’t be until the P4/2533 is launched in May that we will see a new FSB clock of 133 MHz.
Without a doubt, a highlight of this test was the AMD Athlon XP 2400+, whose benchmark results were included in the comparison of 25 processors. Although the sample that we used was an overclocked CPU, the scores give us a good preview of how the next Athlon XP 2×00+ (Thoroughbred core) will perform when it is introduced in the days to come.
When all’s said and done, the new Pentium 4, whose clock has been increased by 200 MHz, does not differ from its slower variants with the Northwood core.
