cpu comparison chart

[slag]

I have an E4300 (1.8 ghz chip) overclocked to 3.33 ghz. Its decently fast with 4 gb of ram, but I want to see how it compares to a PII X3 720 or any of the budget PII chips that can overclock and have 3-4 cores. I'm itching to build another system with an ATI card and want to go a little faster cpu wise..

Is there a chart/site/anything that will do comparisons on how my chip stacks up against others?

Thanks in advance,

Slag

 

[filibusterman]

wish I could help because you can probably tell from my sig i have a similar set up on my main rig and would also be interested in such a chart. I think at this point it is important to know what mobo you have and if it is compatible with the newer quads. If it isnt then you could prob jump ship to AMD pretty easily and still keep the ddr2 and such.

 

[angry hampster]

Keep cache size in mind. Framerates tend to go up ~10-15% with every double in cache size.

 

[BolleY2K]

I also have an E4300@3.1GHz, 4 GB DDR2-800 4-4-4-12, 8800 GTS 512@stock.

I built a PC for a friend last November, consisting of an E8400@stock, 2 GB DDR2-800 4-4-4-12, 4850 512@stock.

To my surprise, my rig was a little bit faster than the E8400 & 4850 in 3DMark 06, Crysis and COD4.

Just as a little help for you guys...

 

[faxon]

yea bolleY2K you probably are seeing that because he only has 2GB in a current gaming rig, when he should have at least 4GB. E8400@ stock + 4850 should be faster than an 8800GTS 512 + E4300@3.1ghz with the same memory

 

[BolleY2K]

Not really - I had 2GB in my rig before and didn´t see any significant increase in FPS after going to 4GB. I don´t think, you have a point here.

 

[slag]

Originally posted by: filibusterman
wish I could help because you can probably tell from my sig i have a similar set up on my main rig and would also be interested in such a chart. I think at this point it is important to know what mobo you have and if it is compatible with the newer quads. If it isnt then you could prob jump ship to AMD pretty easily and still keep the ddr2 and such.

I have an intel bad axe 2 motherboard which doesnt support any of the newer socket 775 chips, so this is pretty much it for me.

I plan on turning this into my media center box, but putting in a spare 2 gb of memory I have and reusing my 4 gb thats in there now in my new AMD system.

I found some basic cpu benchmarks, nothing real world though, that show the phenom 2 chips are much much faster, however, synthetic doesn't really mean much to me.

So I'd need a new motherboard, video card, chip, and case, and already have a dvd burner and hard drive.

 

[joutlaw]

I hear yah on the e4300.

I have one that has been @ 3.0GHz since March 2007 and I'm craving more speed since I got a 4890.

 

[RussianSensation]

Gaming: E4300 @ 3.42ghz vs. X6800 2.93ghz

Gaming: E4600 @ 3.30ghz vs. E6850 3.0ghz

Based on these benches, it seems 2mb -> 4mb cache deficiency can be largely overcome by overclocking. In other words, an E4300 processor @ 3.30ghz easily keeps up with a Core 2 Duo 3.0ghz with 4mb cache.

So I would not waste $ on upgrading to a Phenom II for gaming as most games don't benefit from 4 cores anyway.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
So I would not waste $ on upgrading to a Phenom II for gaming as most games don't benefit from 4 cores anyway.

Some of them have a hard time using 2 cores. Quite a few times I've had major lag problems in Ghostbusters, so I open task manager on the second monitor and see that it's pinned at 50% (maxing out 1 core, not touching the second).


slag, I can't tell you how to bench your CPU against others, but you can test if you need a new CPU by running a game at absolute lowest graphical quality and looking at the frame rate. Run a game at super low res (full screened), no AA, no AF, no shadows, no shading. The frame rate you get at low quality is roughly the maximum frame rate you can get with an infinitely fast video card. I really wish someone told me that a few years ago; I've wasted so much money on pointless CPU upgrades.

 

[Udgnim]

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/processors,6.html

you'll need to do some digging to try to get comparable results though

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: angry hampster
Keep cache size in mind. Framerates tend to go up ~10-15% with every double in cache size.

I'd say this is only in a more best case scenario, where the GPU is not being loaded to its full potential. When the GPU is loaded, there really won't be that much of a difference. At best, in a few games which do need more processing power, I'd say the average difference would be around 5%. As the following results show, when the GPU is loaded framerates are pretty consistent despite cache sizes and even processing speed. Well, the legionhardware results show this more than the xbitlabs does.

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Gaming: E4300 @ 3.42ghz vs. X6800 2.93ghz

Gaming: E4600 @ 3.30ghz vs. E6850 3.0ghz

Based on these benches, it seems 2mb -> 4mb cache deficiency can be largely overcome by overclocking. In other words, an E4300 processor @ 3.30ghz easily keeps up with a Core 2 Duo 3.0ghz with 4mb cache.

So I would not waste $ on upgrading to a Phenom II for gaming as most games don't benefit from 4 cores anyway.

 

[Gikaseixas]

try Anand's Bench

http://www.anandtech.com/bench


if you get a X3 720BE and a decent 790GX board you'll be able to reach 3.6 to 3.9 and that will be a great jump in performance since it will have both more cache and mhz in it's favor