New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ferrari 3200 confused - Page 3

post #41 of 120
6/22/04 at 3:41pm
I think it boils down to:

If you are on a tight budget and want a decent performing laptop go with a AMD solution.

If you want the best performance and the best battery life go dothan but whether the PREMIUM price is worth it is a whole new debate

And totally off topic: Rince who is that girl in your avatar?
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 120
6/22/04 at 11:06pm
lol yeah i've been curious as to that since i would not have taken you for a girl at first rince. no offense or anything if that is you, because i don't mean it insultingly.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 120
6/23/04 at 12:47am
I don't plan on getting another laptop for three or four years, so I'm getting the 64 bit processor over the 32 bit P-M. The revolution is coming soon.

As far as 32 bit performance goes, they are basically equal so I would choose battery life(P-M). Personally I'd rather be a little more prepared for the future since I use my lappy as a desktop replacement.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 120
6/23/04 at 2:58am
Uhm, incidently... FPS... kinda a stupid debate really. The human eye cannot detect a difference in FPS above approx. 60 or so... it really does not matter.

The other tests are silly because you can't compare the two. Case closed.

.... Or... the revolution isn't coming soon. What if 64 bit processors lead to the Terminator. Eh? Eh? 'sright! Can't fight that. CAn you. NOPE.

Oasa Wins.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 120
6/23/04 at 8:01am
8-Bit Arnold is completely humiliated by the new and improved 64-bit terminator, i can sse it now.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 120
6/23/04 at 11:54am
damn you guys aren't future proofing yourselves... imagine quantum computing Arnold...

- reaching new heights of geekiness!!!
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 120
6/23/04 at 8:25pm
ok, so if i'm right, the game performance are pretty much the same on the A64 cpu and the dothan cpu.

so: next question is: should I get an A64 of the dothan cpu for best performance in graphics programs like: photoshop, illustrator, etc... ? I was thinking of the A64, because 64bit will be the future...
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 120
6/23/04 at 9:16pm
A little off topic but, How come they always sent an obsolete terminator into the past to protect john conner? why not send something better?
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 120
6/23/04 at 9:53pm
cause the machines make the awesome top of the line terminators, since well... they're machines
the human resistance can only just steal old machine technology (T2, T3 movies) and reprogram them for their purposes
in T3 arnold's character (the old T model) actually killed john connor in the future, but his wife stopped it before it could kill her, reprogrammed it, and sent it back in time to try and protect john in the past
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 120
6/23/04 at 10:01pm
lol, we've got ourselves a fanatic! hehe i never really watched any of those movies...which movie was it when the terminator killed the gay stripper and took his clothes? those movies are so friggin dumb, but have the odd bit of humor from time to time...like me.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 120
6/23/04 at 10:48pm
a P-M with 2mb L2 cache will greatly reduce the time for you to load stuff in photoshop/illustrator (faster/better)

whereas the athlon64 in the ferrari3200 only has 512KB l2 cache
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 120
6/24/04 at 12:43am
That's not really true. The AMD doesn't need the large L2 cache because its memory structure is far superior. Every little bit helps, but because the memory structure is so efficient there wouldn't be much difference between a chip with 512K and 2MB. Intel's chips really do need it though.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 120
6/24/04 at 12:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okle
lol, we've got ourselves a fanatic! hehe i never really watched any of those movies...which movie was it when the terminator killed the gay stripper and took his clothes? those movies are so friggin dumb, but have the odd bit of humor from time to time...like me.
you're jokin right... T3 was definitely sub-par, but T1 and T2 were awesome movies, that's pretty much common knowledge


on the cache thing, i'd have to agree-- the two architectures are drastically different, it'd be difficult to compare the relative cache sizes and say that the intel chip will load faster just because the raw size is 4x as big.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 120
6/24/04 at 1:04am


Cinebench is based on Maxon's Cinema 4D modeling, rendering, and animation app. This revision of Cinebench measures performance in a number of ways, including 3D rendering, software shading, and OpenGL shading with and without hardware acceleration.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 120
6/24/04 at 1:05am
i' d be concenred about materry lift.. i know i am... rincewind how much for your lappy? i was too lazy to reserach since you post so mmuch.. that's liek the exact config i wnat lol
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 120
6/24/04 at 1:08am
well, uhh... that's an overclockered dothan. and uhh... those guys are french =D
ils sont des vaches foules la-bas.
if you know what that means you're crazy too.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 120
6/24/04 at 1:10am
were talking about a ferrari 3200 with 2800 cpu here tho

just scale down the numbers :P

its hard to find benchmarks that tests strictly 2d/3d type stuff...

sysmark01 internet content creation benchmark is great coz it measures

macromedia flash
adobephotoshop
illustrator
maya etc

but there arent too many benchmarks posted on the net comparing athlon64 and pentium-m

this was the closest i could find
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 120
6/24/04 at 1:19am
You also need to remember that almost all benchmark apps used are optimized for Pentium architecture. That automatically puts the AMD's at a disadvantage. They also don't include FX model AMD's. I wonder how this chart will look when 64 bit versions of these apps are released later this year/early next.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 120
6/24/04 at 8:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rincewind
I'm going to set my 9700 at 460/210 since thats what his 3200 was default clocked at
No, according to soyboy the Ferrari 3200 is set at 450/209.25 and 452.25/209.25 according to DragonFlame.

Anyhow, here are soyboy's overclocked 3DMark03 results:
http://notebookforums.com/showthread...6&page=2&pp=15

"I just reran 3DMark03 with clocks of 481 core and 250 memory and scored 3457. I want to note that at these clocks, it was still very very stable and no artifacts whatsoever. I believe I can push it even more....

I submitted my score into the orb. By the way, my CPU score was 538"

"Anyway, I ran 3DMark03 again at 490/260 and got 3562 with a CPU score of 536. It ran fine without stability issues or artifacts here. I think I may push it up slightly later."

He also used the official ATI catalyst drivers that came with the machine, while you are using the tweaked omegadrivers that are slightly better when it comes to gaming optimizations. This hardly makes it a fair comparison I think.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 120
6/24/04 at 8:28am
he should run them again with omegas, as they are better optimized for gaming

score wise omegas do slightly worse in synthetic benchmarks compared to stock
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Other Brand Notebook Reviews