February 21, 200521 yr What is so special about this processor? Why is the 3.40 Ghz processor of this type several hundred dollars more than the regular Intel processor of similar size? Would it make a big diff having such a processor compared with a "normal" (i.e., non-extreme) 3.6 or 3.8 Ghz processor for running FS2004?Any advice, info welcome. Thanks!JS Jonathan Sacks Dell XPS Gen 4, Pentium IV Northwood extreme 3.8Ghz, 3Ghz RAM, eVGA 7900 GTO, 12 GoFlight modules plus MCP-PRO AP and EFIS, GF pedestal, CH rudder pedals, CH throttle quadrant, 42" LG LED, 24" DELL LCD, Windows XP, FS2004, FSUIPC 3.96 FS Autostart 1.1 (Build 11), FS Navigator 4.6, UT, FE, GE, REX, PMDG, Level-D, PSS, etc.
February 21, 200521 yr JS,This has been tackled here before. Yes, these are more powerful processors (but I would rather prefer AMD's FX series) but the extra price compared to extra performance makes them a rather poor buy. It is only for those who love to spend $$.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2 Michael J.
February 21, 200521 yr They cost so much because some people will pay whatever to get the fastest currently CPU available. Now that is the FX 55 so who figure lol.Anyway the Extreme edition do have 2mb l2 cache and yes they are quite a bit faster than regular P 4:s but of course about as bad bang for the buck you can ever get ;)Many people pay for performance I have no issues with that really :)
February 21, 200521 yr Author Thanks, gentlemen, you confirmed what I think I suspected.Appreciate your posts.JS Jonathan Sacks Dell XPS Gen 4, Pentium IV Northwood extreme 3.8Ghz, 3Ghz RAM, eVGA 7900 GTO, 12 GoFlight modules plus MCP-PRO AP and EFIS, GF pedestal, CH rudder pedals, CH throttle quadrant, 42" LG LED, 24" DELL LCD, Windows XP, FS2004, FSUIPC 3.96 FS Autostart 1.1 (Build 11), FS Navigator 4.6, UT, FE, GE, REX, PMDG, Level-D, PSS, etc.
February 23, 200521 yr "...the Extreme edition do have 2mb l2 cache..."Actually, the 3.4EE has 512KB of L2 cache. It has 2MB of L3 cache, which isn't nearly as important to gamers as L2.I agree with Michael and Par... the better choice today for gamers is AMD. Winchesters for those who are looking for the best bang for the buck, and FX for those who simply want the best.Greg
February 26, 200521 yr I've owned several AMD chips in the recent past and frankly I've had software issues with them. Yes, Intel costs more (so does a BMW comparted with a Ford Taurus and mostly it's the same thing, a car!, maybe it's a bad analogy)and up till most recent Intel generation, probably faster, but I'll tell you, if you were to run up against a "well, our software has issues with AMD processors and we don't know how to fix it" once or twice and you'd go back to Intel products as well.Randy Jura, KPDX
February 26, 200521 yr Yeah Intel has had software developers optimizing their stuff for Intel CPU:s (including Microsoft products) so no wonder. However as windows XP 64 is optimized around the A64 you will probably see it the other way around.However most issues wasn
February 26, 200521 yr >Things have changed however and the X800 series sells very>well more because of it Noel System: 9900X3D Noctua NH-D15 G2, MSI Pro 650-P WiFi, G.SKILL 64GB (2 x 32GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6000, WD NVMe 2Tb x 1, Sabrent NVMe 2Tb x 1, RTX 4090 FE, Corsair RM1000W PSU, Win11 Home, LG Ultra Curved Gsync Ultimate 3440x1440, Phanteks Enthoo Pro Case, TCA Boeing Edition Yoke & TQ, Cessna Trim Wheel, RTSS Framerate Limiter w/ Front Edge Sync. Aircraft used in MSFS 2024: Fenix A320, Aerosoft CRJ, FBW, WT 787X, I-Fly 737 MAX 8, Citation Longitude.
February 26, 200521 yr Market share reports from different news sites on the web :). It goes well for both ATI and AMD at the moment.
Create an account or sign in to comment