AMD athlon or Intel pentium D-------&&---32-bit Vs 64-bit?

Question

I have 3 questions,
1.In what way.... AMD athlon 4000+ (64 bit) is better than Pentium D 1.6 GHz Processor. which should I have to buy ? Is there is any heat sink prbl in AMD?

2.can I load ubuntu 32-bit (or win XP- sp2) OS on athlon 64bit prcssr ?

3.Can I load 32-bit games,softwares on 64-bit processor without any problem?

Answer 1

The Pentium D is probably a 64 bit processor anyway (if it has EM64T then it is).

The Athlon 4000+ is a faster processor than the Pentium D 1.6 GHz (and the stock heatsink on AMD processors is quite good enough for reasonable people who run their computers at stock settings). If you are choosing between the two then the Athlon is a better processor (although it is comparing one of Intel's worst).

The 64 bit processors mostly sold now (which includes pretty much everything from both AMD and Intel) can run 32 bit programs just fine and at full speed so you won't have any problem installing 32 bit operating systems (though in the case of Linux there probably isn't much point since 64 bit Linux works pretty much just as well (although with Windows you probably don't want 64 bit since it doesn't work very well)). You can also run 32 bit games on a 64 bit processor just fine.

Though I should just note that in this case 64 bit processor means using the x86_64 instruction set created by AMD (and now also used in most Intel processors under the name EM64T) which is a 64 bit addition to the 32-bit x86 instruction set and which thus has full backwards compatibility with old x86 software.

I run 64 bit Gentoo Linux on a Core 2 Duo (Merom core) along with 32 bit XP (though I almost never use XP on this computer) and I've run 32 bit applications under 64 bit Linux just fine.

Answer 2

The Athlon will run 32 bit just as well as 64 bit, and it can use linux and it is excellent at gaming.
There are actually two model 4000, the athlon 64 and atlon 64 x2, which is dual core. The single core version is 2.6ghz and the dual core has dual 2.2ghz cores.
I looked through all the benchmarks at Toms hardware charts for you and I found that in almost every case both of the 4000s beat the crap out of the pentium d.
I would definitely go with the amd over the intel in this case.

Answer 3

When we talk about difference between AMD and Intel, Intel is like more advanced in Technology compared to AMD. AMD is economy than Intel,
load win XP- sp2 OS on athlon 64bit prcssr
64 bit processor is very fast compared to 32 bit
Architectural component 64-bit Windows
Virtual memory 16 terabytes
Paging file size 512 terabytes
Hyperspace 8 GB
Paged pool 128 GB
Non-paged pool 128 GB
System cache 1 terabyte
System PTEs 128 GB


Architectural component 32-bit Windows
Virtual memory 4 GB
Paging file size 16 terabytes
Hyperspace 4 MB
Paged pool 470 MB
Non-paged pool 256 MB
System cache 1 GB


So, you may go for 64 bit to load 32 bit games

Answer 4

AMD is economy than Intel

What the heck? AMD blows Intel away!!!

To answer the question: AMD dual core

I personally use AMD X2 (dual core) 6000+ 3.0GHz. It averages over 5.2 Million keys/sec cracking Win LM pass hash in LC5 (that's FAST) and I have never had any software lag. Here's a screenshot of my desktop

http://thorsdecree.excessiveforce.org/images/desktop.jpg

As you can see, x64 is insanely awesome. Everything is SOOO fast, except for the 32 bit apps I run, and they're still amazing on this core. 3.4GHz PIV or C2D from Intel don't even touch this. Intel's clock faster, but usually lack the cache size, and, therefore, sheer processing power. AMD cpus are more efficient, anyway. Currently, with over 2 days uptime and right now running several major apps including itunes and photoshop (both cpu hogs) my core is only at 97ºF, and my mobo is at 96. AMD cores run cooler, so they last longer and are more stable. Also, x64 completely blows x86 out of the water. Go 64bit if you can; I use 64 bit WinXP and Fedora Core 8 Linux.

Hope that helps. You can think of x64 as essentially 150%-190% x86 in terms of speed/power, depending on how many "legacy" x86 apps you run. With true x64 OS and software, it will tear x86 to shreds.

Get an AMD dual core CPU, they are cheaper (you're not paying $80 extra for advertising) and more powerful.

Hope that helps, later.

The thing about 32 bit libs; that's not a problem, its not difficult to do. I have had no issues so far (except the 32 bit version of Nod32 antivir not working; had to get the 64 bit, but i'm happy; its way faster) even with oder x86 games, such as Halo 1 for PC. x64 is the way to go.

Ah the last part about 32 bit stuff on x64: I have another computer sitting next to me with win32 adn full 32 bit apps on an Athlon 64 3500+ 2.2GHz. Yes, x64 can run 32 bit, 32 AND 64 bit, and true 64 bit. Go with AMD, they are by far better, unless you just want to sit around playing with numbers. AMD's are much better for graphics and "heavier" stuff.

Answer 5

Ok well 1st of all In the CPU you should go AMD, Pentium D's are horrable CPU's. Before the core 2 CPU Intel was far behind AMD in CPU technology for the reccord, 2nd of all if you have windows SP2 Xp -32 bit, it dossnt matter if you have 64 bit CPU, it can run 32 bit if you have 32 bit Operating System and 64 if you have 64.

Answer 6

1. AMD is good for heavy read+write operations. Intel good for heavy number crunching. It is said so. I'd go for Intel.

2. Yes. Until you have a real need to use 64 bit software, use 32 bit software by all means.

3. On 64 bit OSes, a 32 bit compat lib has to be installed in order for 32 bit apps like 32 bit games to run smoothly.

Answer 7

1.Spec's on Athlon 64 4000+ ,(64bit, 2.4GHz)http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1666
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2249
You look at this chip, and then Intel's Pentium D 1.6 : http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/Intel_Pentium_E2140_Dual_Core_Processor/
2.Best to use a x86 64 bit version.
3. Everything I have seen so far, Yes.