Pentium820 D more bang for the $$$$

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: michaelpatrick33

Originally posted by: Pabster
The D 830 will be faster, if you are going to capture/encode video AND game at the same time.

Otherwise, the 3500+ is faster in either single task.

That is definitely the advantage of dualcore. Sometimes however, I thought the Intel dualcore at 2.8 was actually slower than the 3.8 single core with hyperthreading in many instances even when doing both tasks.

I am not critcising or impugning the integrity of the post. I am just posting an awareness/question. LOL

**************Smooth Michaelpatrick33 very smooth . Well done*******************

 

[Markfw]

I don;t think an 820 or an 830 is even close on speed to 3800+ or 4000+ dual-core. The 4200+ right now would be the way to go IMO.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Zebo
Keys I would'nt buy anything prescott based on principle. You have potential to throttle which bugs me. Not always, maybe never, but the potential is there.. Yes even stock, I've seen it, there have been intel posters about it. You have lots of power use.. You have a chip worse than last chip, northwood all in name of marketing Mhz getting/going higher. These P4s are first CPU's in history put out by any company that have gotten less effcient per Mhz than thier predecessors and Prescott is just a continuation of that. It's just an engineering thing.

Anyway dual cores are the future, The 820D (you can make a 830 for free so why spend the xtra?) is prolly your best bet between those two, based on application. It's a shame you can't wait for a $340 X2 3800+, it will be faster then an 840 too.

I could wait for the 3800+ no doubt, but the cost? Dunno what it will debut at. Cause I have to buy the whole package. Mobo, RAM, CPU.

Don't you have DDR right now with your Northwood? No problem using that at all. AT --Gold Metal mobo Epox NPAJ is $80

 

[Technonut]

You'd need stay where you're at anything over 2700Mhz out of a 3000 venice.

You think I'm joking huh

4.5Ghz p4 = 109 FPS
http://www.legionhardware.com/Bench/Int...um_4_630_Overclocking/RealWorld_02.gif

2.6Ghz winchester = 107 FPS
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/90nm%20a64_10090491053/4976.png

Hmmm... I found This when looking for some Doom3 benchies:

We played the game long to find a level where there would be many monsters to record a high-CPU-load demo. As a result, we stopped at the Central Server Banks location on the CPU level. There are many various monsters here, and we recorded a battle with them. The test results with this demo were quite unexpected:

Our demo that has a higher monster count and loads the CPU much more than the standard one (we made sure of that by disabling graphics and witnessing a very small fps rate growth) changes the situation dramatically. Now the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition is the winner, not the Athlon 64! Then, i925X Express systems are faster than i875P-based ones ? this is yet another inconsistency with the previous results. As for the correlation between the processors on Prescott and Northwood cores, it persists: the frequency being the same, the Prescott is faster.

The results explain where the recommendation to have a processor of 3GHz frequency or 3000+ rating comes from. Note also that the Pentium 4 3GHz work faster than the Athlon 64 3000+ or even the Athlon 64 3200+. However, the top-end members of the Pentium 4 and Athlon 64 families have similar results.

I am working on my own results, and will soon post a topic to compare gaming benchmarks with others here on the forum....

 

[Zebo]

Techno I'd be "game" but I have 6800U and a 5700U you have 850XTPE. Apples to oranges. I have an "Old" winny at only 2655 and an "old" newcastle at 2650..not higher clocking venices or san deigos.

Find someone with a 850XTPE...


But you're right..why don't sites do a say a 630 vs 3000 overclockers battle royal.

Edit damn the 630 is expensive@225.. I think it lost already to a $140 3000. And most definity to a $250 820D.

 

[Technonut]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Techno I'd be "game" but I have 6800U and a 5700U you have 850XTPE. Apples to oranges. I have an "Old" winny at only 2655 and an "old" newcastle at 2650..not higher clocking venices or san deigos.

Find someone with a 850XTPE...


But you're right..why don't sites do a say a 630 vs 3000 overclockers battle royal.

I'm not suggesting that we compare benchmarks... It would have to be between similar hardware configurations. That is what I found interesting about the shootout linked in my post above.Choosing The Best CPU For Doom 3.

The same amount of RAM was used on all test systems as well as the same graphics cards. The systems were not OC'ed. The shootout was conducted very fairly IMO....

1024MB DDR400 SDRAM (Corsair CMX512-3200XLPRO, 2 x 512MB, 2-2-2-5);
1024MB DDR2-533 SDRAM (Corsair CM2X512-4300, 2 x 512MB, 4-4-4-12).

NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT (AGP 8x, ForceWare 61.77);
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT (PCI Express x16, ForceWare 61.77).

Western Digital Raptor WD740GD.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Technonut

Originally posted by: Zebo
Techno I'd be "game" but I have 6800U and a 5700U you have 850XTPE. Apples to oranges. I have an "Old" winny at only 2655 and an "old" newcastle at 2650..not higher clocking venices or san deigos.

Find someone with a 850XTPE...


But you're right..why don't sites do a say a 630 vs 3000 overclockers battle royal.

I'm not suggesting that we compare benchmarks... It would have to be between similar hardware configurations. That is what I found interesting about the shootout linked in my post above.Choosing The Best CPU For Doom 3.

The same amount of RAM was used on all test systems as well as the same graphics cards. The systems were not OC'ed. The shootout was conducted very fairly IMO....

Definity interesting.. I really respect that site too. Most site had a stock 3200+ beating on XE's in the built in gamemark.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Man that is an old review 08/2004. All of the A64's are newcastle (pre winchester) and the top dawg is an FX-53

Hardly relevant to today, seeing as how AMD is two or three core revisions down the road

Now a review like this comparing Venice/San Diego to 5xx/6xx series chips would be worth reading.

 

[Technonut]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Man that is an old review 08/2004. All of the A64's are newcastle (pre winchester) and the top dawg is an FX-53

Hardly relevant to today, seeing as how AMD is two or three core revisions down the road

Now a review like this comparing Venice/San Diego to 5xx/6xx series chips would be worth reading.

Agreed... We need to see gaming benchmarks recorded from actual, intensive, in-game play.... I think that I will try working on the concept with my rig starting @ 4.0GHz, working my way to 4.4GHz in 100MHz jumps. It will be time-consuming, but interesting. I have most of the current full-version games used in benchmarks here already....

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Man that is an old review 08/2004. All of the A64's are newcastle (pre winchester) and the top dawg is an FX-53

Hardly relevant to today, seeing as how AMD is two or three core revisions down the road

Now a review like this comparing Venice/San Diego to 5xx/6xx series chips would be worth reading.

LOL things don't change that much.. Northwood cores whoopin the pressys at much high hurtz

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Zebo
But you're right..why don't sites do a say a 630 vs 3000 overclockers battle royal.

Edit damn the 630 is expensive@225.. I think it lost already to a $140 3000. And most definity to a $250 820D.

That's probably why. The price difference between the 3000+ Venice and the 630. About $80-$100, a bit of a gap, for sure.

 

[Hacp]

"
Our demo that has a higher monster count and loads the CPU much more than the standard one (we made sure of that by disabling graphics and witnessing a very small fps rate growth) changes the situation dramatically. Now the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition is the winner, not the Athlon 64! Then, i925X Express systems are faster than i875P-based ones ? this is yet another inconsistency with the previous results. As for the correlation between the processors on Prescott and Northwood cores, it persists: the frequency being the same, the Prescott is faster."

Thats very misleading because anandtech did an article about the prescotts and basically said that anything below 3 ghz, the northwood will be faster than a prescott(w/o HT).

 

[Lord Banshee]

Seems the Pent. D is already going to get a revamp.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20050791210923.html

Intel has some trick up it's sleeve or they knew that the "D" isn't so great as it stands today.

 

[Intelia]

http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=210

 

[stockriderman]

I think they used Photoshop cs for the test. It's not utilizing dual core power. CS2 utilizes 100% of all cores and amd 4200 blows all the intel dual cores away.

 

[AkumaX]

Originally posted by: Intelia
http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=210

Amazing! The 820D clearly lays the smackdown on the X2 4800+!!!!

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: AkumaX

Originally posted by: Intelia
http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=210

Amazing! The 820D clearly lays the smackdown on the X2 4800+!!!!

Huh? there's not a single AMD processor in that test...not sure what you're talking about...

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: AkumaX

Originally posted by: Intelia
http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=210

Amazing! The 820D clearly lays the smackdown on the X2 4800+!!!!

Heh, Do I notice a hint of sarcasm, perhaps?

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: AkumaX

Originally posted by: Intelia
http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=210

Amazing! The 820D clearly lays the smackdown on the X2 4800+!!!!

Heh, Do I notice a hint of sarcasm, perhaps?

I wouldn't be able to tell...haven't had a chance to sleep in 2 days...
:frown:

 

[Elfear]

Technonut- I would be willing to run some benchmarks with you if you're game. I have the components in my sig. I've already run a couple benchmarks but if you'd like to run a few more (of the games I have of course) I'd be interested to see the results. I was always under the impression that A64>P4 in gaming but sounds like X-bit labs says different, at least with Doom3.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

posted by Elfear

"Technonut- I would be willing to run some benchmarks with you if you're game. I have the components in my sig. I've already run a couple benchmarks but if you'd like to run a few more (of the games I have of course) I'd be interested to see the results. I was always under the impression that A64>P4 in gaming but sounds like X-bit labs says different, at least with Doom3"



If your going to play with Technonut you better step up to the pump and get some PC cooling His rig is pretty monstrous at 4.4ghz on a Vapochill PE.

 

[Technonut]

Originally posted by: Elfear
Technonut- I would be willing to run some benchmarks with you if you're game. I have the components in my sig. I've already run a couple benchmarks but if you'd like to run a few more (of the games I have of course) I'd be interested to see the results. I was always under the impression that A64>P4 in gaming but sounds like X-bit labs says different, at least with Doom3.

Well, I am working on the best way to record an average FPS while playing an intesive fight in Doom3, Far Cry, and PainKiller so far. Any suggestions?

If you want to compare what I have done before, download Benchemall, and run it for Doom3. (If you have it)

I do not OC my X850 XT PE BTW..... I will go ahead and post the Benchemall results, but I will need to start my own thread to continue this further..

4.1GHz
640x480 121.3 fps
800x600 115.2 fps
1024x768 101.2 fps
1280x1024 79.8 fps

4.2GHz
640x480 124.3 fps
800x600 117.3 fps
1024x768 102.1 fps
1280x1024 80.0 fps

4.3GHz
640x480 127.5 fps
800x600 119.2 fps
1024x768 103.3 fps
1280x1024 74.9 fps

4.4GHz
640x480 129.6 fps
800x600 121.1 fps
1024x768 104.2 fps
1280x1024 77.1 fps

Benchemall uses the timedemo, so I would really need to record in-game play to see if my results would be similar to X-Bit Labs....

 

[imported_Frallan]

Hmmm the 1280*1024 looks strange? Do U have any idea why?

 

[Technonut]

Originally posted by: Frallan
Hmmm the 1280*1024 looks strange? Do U have any idea why?

I was trying to figure that out myself.... Does anyone know if the X850 XT PE downclocks if overheating? I am not OC'ing the card. (Stock HSF)

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Technonut

Originally posted by: Elfear
Technonut- I would be willing to run some benchmarks with you if you're game. I have the components in my sig. I've already run a couple benchmarks but if you'd like to run a few more (of the games I have of course) I'd be interested to see the results. I was always under the impression that A64>P4 in gaming but sounds like X-bit labs says different, at least with Doom3.

Well, I am working on the best way to record an average FPS while playing an intesive fight in Doom3, Far Cry, and PainKiller so far. Any suggestions?

If you want to compare what I have done before, download Benchemall, and run it for Doom3. (If you have it)

I do not OC my X850 XT PE BTW..... I will go ahead and post the Benchemall results, but I will need to start my own thread to continue this further..

4.1GHz
640x480 121.3 fps
800x600 115.2 fps
1024x768 101.2 fps
1280x1024 79.8 fps

4.2GHz
640x480 124.3 fps
800x600 117.3 fps
1024x768 102.1 fps
1280x1024 80.0 fps

4.3GHz
640x480 127.5 fps
800x600 119.2 fps
1024x768 103.3 fps
1280x1024 74.9 fps

4.4GHz
640x480 129.6 fps
800x600 121.1 fps
1024x768 104.2 fps
1280x1024 77.1 fps

Benchemall uses the timedemo, so I would really need to record in-game play to see if my results would be similar to X-Bit Labs....

I ran the timedemo just for kicks at the same settings you used.
Venice @ 2.6 GHz (236x11) with RAM @ 187 MHz 2-3-3 and 6800GT @ 400/1050

640x480 = 120 FPS
800x600 = 119 FPS
1024x768 = 111 FPS
1280x1024 = 93 FPS