new_to_non_X86 wrote:i'm not a pro in cpu architectures
but i know that the p4 has hypertreading capability
this means that it has an hardware switching method between the treads
so it can switch between treads in nearly no time
so it's has a good multithreading capability but it's not very well programed (this feature is programed as there were 2 cpu)
and it produce a lotof heat and so it's very dificult to cool it silentely (fanless)
in another hand his pipeline architecture isn't very good because it's designed for a very long pipeline and so that makes it not very good for multitasking
that's it reach a higher frequency that produce a lot of heat
so that's not a so good cpu
i know the others processors have a diferent pipeline architecture,shorter pipeline
as the atlon64/sempron754 there are good specialy for overclocking but i think a powerpc is better in term of multitasking
and also the pm(peintium m) it's the same of the atlon/sempron
Hyperthreading is irrelevant to game performance. Games do not benefit from multitasking. There are a handful of SMP aware games but none of them really benefit from hyperthreading either.
The prescott (P4-E) pipeline is too long, and it's clear Intel's primary design goal was making them cheap to manufacture and easy to market, not to make good performers. The previous northwood line (P4-C) is still a good buy for e.g. multimedia encoding. But not a very future proof, seeing as x86_64 is clearly poised to take over the market.
Prescotts do run a little hot (not terribly extreme, though) and AMD64s do run a little cool, which is nice. Northwoods are about average.
PPC systems are expensive and most games aren't designed to run on them.