Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

[jesus]

This question is in regards to the architecture of both processors. We know that we can run games on a single core if we have a dual-core processor by changing the affinity in task manager.

So what would perform better? A 1.8ghz core2duo running games like Crysis, CoD4, WiC, UT3 on only ONE core or a 3.0ghz pentium 4 running the same games?

[AvalancheDiode]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2008-q1-2008/Serious-Sam-2,390.html

It takes Pentium EE 965 (3.7GHz) to take down slowest Allendale core (Pentium Dual Core E2160 at 1.8GHz) on Serious Sam 2.

[jesus]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

Wow lol... but I think your link is broken. It's taking me to the "make new post" page

[solofowaffles]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

Fact-My 1.83 ghz e6300 will kick a pentiu 4's *** any day.

[Wizrdwarts]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

E8400 3ghz SuperPi time: 14.969s
Pentium D 2.8ghz time: 47.047

SuperPi is a single-thread app.

[jesus]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

Fact-My 1.83 ghz e6300 will kick a pentiu 4's *** any day.

Yeah and my 64 X2 4000+ 2.1ghz does, too. But dual-core versus single core isn't fair. I'm talking about a 1.8ghz (or lower) core2duo limited to only one core versus a single core 3.0ghz (or higher) pentium 4.

E8400 3ghz SuperPi time: 14.969s
Pentium D 2.8ghz time: 47.047

SuperPi is a single-thread app.

I'd like to see what a 1.8ghz core2duo would score. Did you get that from any specific website, or did you do it yourself?

[Wizrdwarts]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

Did it myself. Don't have a 1.8ghz C2D so I can't test, perhaps you can get someone who does and get them to run SuperPi?

[jesus]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

I found one here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php...&postcount=303

25 seconds for a 1.8ghz core2duo

[Busby, Paul (Bicci)]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

With nehalem coming to us ina matter of weeks i think your asking the wrong question :P

[=98=]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

Nehalem seems to have a few flaws in early revisions. Apparently, while fast at stock speeds, it doesn't overclock well. This may be a problem with the CPU or the X58 chipset. I'm sure they'll be ironed out.

Secondly, the price of motherboards, CPU and DDR3 will not fall to a price that the 95th percentile can afford for a good year. They want to market it as a high end product to begin with and then slowly phase it into the general market. If they went straight for the basic market, there would be a great excess stock of old E8xxx and Q6xx CPU's.

[AvalancheDiode]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

I doubt that the tri-DDR3 Core i7 will ever enter mainstream price range. QX6850 never drops price, and I doubt QX9770 and QX9650 will drop price lower than $500 before they are phased out by Intel. Lynnfield core on LGA1160 with P55 chipset will be for the mainstream, but we have to wait for half year to see it. The price of X58 may drop a few months from now, especially when X68 comes out.

[=98=]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

Tri-DDR3?

Do you mean tri-core I7's? If so, that might be feasible since they are usually quad cores that have one faulty core cut out.

[Busby, Paul (Bicci)]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

No he means the tri-channel. The Nehalem chips use tri-channel memory controllers in comparison to the dual channel found on AMD and C2D systems. I havent heard them say anything about tri-core. The next step for them is oct-core as far as i have read.

I saw some screenies of someone managing to pull a nice 5GHz overclock somewhere, il hunt the screenies down if you would like?

Another thing i have discussed with people over in the Hexus forums and we are a little unsure of is the memory speeds with the lower end chips (920 and 940). The native memory speed that can be run with the chips is 1066 and apparently at the moment the only way to make the memory run any faster is to overclock the CPU. Not entirely sure if this is the fault of the current chipsets or whether the new integrated controller but im desperately hoping it will be the chipset as 1066MHz ram isnt much of a jump for a lot of us. If it turns out to be the controller then il be seriously miffed and it just proves how much control Intel has over the market as they can offer as little functionality as they want and still charge the big bucks.

[AvalancheDiode]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

Not entirely sure if this is the fault of the current chipsets or whether the new integrated controller but im desperately hoping it will be the chipset as 1066MHz ram isnt much of a jump for a lot of us. If it turns out to be the controller then il be seriously miffed and it just proves how much control Intel has over the market as they can offer as little functionality as they want and still charge the big bucks.

1066x3=3200

1333x2=2666

1600x2=3200

Now you know what's in Intel's (and probably AMD's) book. That's why QPI is capped at 3.2GHz and HyperTransport 3.0 is 2.6GHz. It doesn't mean it can't use higher speed RAM, but it just doesn't make sense since QPI has to wait.

Yes, these numbers do mean (ram speed) x (number of channels to the controller)

[Busby, Paul (Bicci)]

Re: Core2Duo versus Pentium 4

What do these numbers actually represent?

(ram speed) x (number of channels to the controller) ?