Pentium 820 D

[fishmahn]

You're absolutely right - It had slipped my mind (which is pretty common - I must have a teflon mind...).

Good catch.

Mike.

<font color=blue>Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside the dog its too dark to read.
-- Groucho Marx</font color=blue>

 

[Starfishy]

I really really hate to side with noko on this one... seeing as it is clear that he is a complete moron, and will never give AMD credit where it is due. That said, I do like the direction that Intel is headed. This bargain 820 D does give a good alternative for those interested in purchasing a lower end multitasking rig. I have read quite a few reviews now, and am pretty satisfied with what the 820 has to offer. It is showing some good test results. It is clear that comparing it to an X2 4800 is rediculous because the X2 far outclasses the 820 D. But when you are looking at price/performance I really don't think you can kill the 820D discussion yet.

 

[P4Man]

>This was an intersting read. Quite surprised by the Photoshop
> results...

That test seems totally bogus. Pentium D may or may not be a terrific bargain for Photoshop, but this test has got to be dismissed. Let me quote Johan Delagas (Aceshardware, now at anandtech):

1. Notice for example the lighting effects: Explain how a 2x 2.8 GHz is more than twice as fast as 3.46 GHz Chip?

2. Why is the X2 3 times faster than the 3800+ while the P-D is slower than the 3.46 GHz in watercolor? (either the test is multithreaded or it is not)

3. Extrude is much faster on a dual core Pentium than on a Pentium, yet, there is almost no difference between the dualcore Athlon 64s and the single core Athlon 64. That is simply not possible. Same is true for underpainting and stained glass in a lesser degree.

and another comment from aces forum:

Indeed. Look at the CPU usage charts he so helpfully provides -- during Watercolour, where the X2 manages to be more than three times as fast as 3800+ while the P-D is slower than the EE, the X2 is managing to achieve that miraculous feat while apparently only using 30% of the CPU! Also weird is how the X2 manages to do in 262MB what apparently requires 828MB on the P-D.

Further more, being a pretty heavy duty PS user myself, let me tell you that filter performance is about the last thing I care about. 99.5% of my time I am working with layers, brush operations or colourspace convertions all which can also be rather cpu intensive on large images, but none of them are tested and btw, AFAIK unlike filters do not benefit from more than one cpu/core.

FWIW, In 10 or so years of using PS, and being someone that used to give professional PS trainings, I cannot recall using watercolour or extrude filters more than once (unless perhaps to see what they do). People who use filters in general do so because they have no idea how to really use the program 😉

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[P4Man]

>I really really hate to side with noko on this one... seeing
>as it is clear that he is a complete moron, and will never
>give AMD credit where it is due. That said, I do like the
>direction that Intel is headed. This bargain 820 D does give
>a good alternative for those interested in purchasing a lower
> end multitasking rig.

I would not use the term "multitasking rig" for a dual core machine, since any decent PC will multitask just fine. Ive been multitasking ever since owned an Amiga, its not like we now suddenly need two cores to achieve that. But I do agree the 820 could be a bargain for certain specific workloads, though I am not sure which ones exactly. Maybe for certain 3D renderers or lightweight video editing for people that dont care much about gaming performance the 820 would be a great match. And of course for intel fanboys that have nothing else to troll about 😉

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[Rugger]

One of the reasons I posted this here was to get some feedback on the results - Thanks! The numbers seemed off to me, especially considering they didn't provide a ton of specifics on the tests.

Can you provide a link to that thread?

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[P4Man]

http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/read_post.jsp?id=115136403&forumid=1


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[Rugger]

Thanks

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[Starfishy]

Yeah... I guess I was assuming that a dual core would multitask better than a single core on most cases. I can see that this might not be true for all scenarios... but in general I think we can agree that dual cores will normally have an advantage over equivalently priced single cores when it comes to heavy multithreading.

Edited "multitasking" to "multithreading".

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Starfishy on 07/21/05 03:02 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Rugger]

for

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[Rugger]

the

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[Rugger]

link

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[Rugger]

P4Man

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[Rugger]

Good read.

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[Guest]

That does it! Im starting a ban poll!!!

Asus P4P800DX, P4C 2.6ghz@3.25ghz, 2X512 OCZ PC4000 3-4-4-8, MSI 6800Ultra stock, 2X30gig Raid0

 

[endyen]

But how many users spend enough time doing "heavy multithreading" on an economy system, to make it a better choice than an equally priced single core system?

 

[Rugger]

I'll have to start a thread in the printer forum...i'm close to the next title (<100)

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[endyen]

That means you still have 2300 to go as a poster boy.

 

[noko]

P4man, if you batch process 300 frames or 5 seconds worth, for an animation with layers (shadows, reflections, specular, diffuse, refraction, post process etc.) so you can tweak the outcome and add what you want, times will start to add up. When you are talking about 30 seconds worth of video or 1800 frames any time savings can sure help. Filters are very useful for blurring certain layers such as reflections to make them look more realistic vice being too sharp.

Now I graduated to a moron or are you trying to save face with your buddies ? Now the 820D is looking better now. Well it is a very good buy at the moment regardless of all the attempts in this thread to say otherwise, oh wait, all those comments was not about the 820D but was about. . . .

As for the P4 way of handling memory as being outdated or something to that effect, lets see, quad pumped so reducing the number of pins needed over the Athlon 64 massive 939 for dual channel but yet having the same data rate potential for the same fsb speed is not as advanced? Uses much faster more modern DDR2 memory. . . Both plateforms will probably be memory limited with dual core. How much more cross talk does AMD have with the increase pin number and the max FSB will AMD be able to sustain will be interesting when they go to DDR2. I think here at TomsHardware they got the fsb of Intel mahines to over 500mhz. If Intel advances the technology (like they did AGP8x) and double the data per clock again (8x vice 4x), any memory limitations for Dual core should be aleviated or Intel could go to a Dual quad pump configuration. Just conjecture. AMD's placing the memory controller onto the CPU was very good in a number of ways.

Now I also had an Amiga, actually three of them, two A500 and one A1200. Could never afford the A2000, A3000 or A4000 back then.

Now which one of you will be first in getting a 820D rig going?



<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by noko on 07/22/05 01:05 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[noko]

Oh, one more thing, AMD (I am mad at my rig by the way) should coin a new term for themselves, AMD's new Multistumbling technology within, vice compairing themselves to Intel's multitasking ability. 😱





Just kidding, gesh everyone so serious here .

Wussy, if you are still following this thread, I am an American.

 

[ChipDeath]

quad pumped so reducing the number of pins needed over the Athlon 64 massive 939 for dual channel but yet having the same data rate potential for the same fsb speed is not as advanced? Uses much faster more modern DDR2 memory.

I know that this will obviously sail straight through your head without so much as hitting anything, but...
1)Since the P4 doesn't have the ODMC, you have to include a whole boatload of pins from the P4's Northbridge. The A64 is simply doing more stuff, so needs more pins. Besides by that completely ridiculous logic the athlon XP was better than the S478 Northwoods. (462 Vs 478 pins)
2) There's no advantage to DDR2 at the moment... there probably will be in the fairly near future, but I doubt either current modules <i>or</i> current motherboards will really be able to be used at that point, so using it as an argument here is pointless.
3)You've already said you're not getting anything for a few months anyway, but don't seem remotely keen to see what AMD's X2 offering around that price point will be like. That will probably blow away the price/performance argument.

---
<font color=red>"Life is <i>not</i> like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapeńos - what you do today might burn your a<b></b>ss tommorrow."

 

[Era]

And noko goes: Ship, AHOY!

 

[endyen]

People who should buy the D820 system

1 Want an economy (read slow) system
2 Have an extreme cooling solution
3 Dont know how to set a system up
4 Have no clue about memory technology
5 Dont mind spending a fortune on electric bill each month
6 Only want it to make thier home movies blurry using photoshop filters.
If all these fit you, you should get an Intel D820 system.

 

[Rugger]

DOH! I didn't want to look at that and you just had to throw it in my face. The never-ending poster titles....

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[Rugger]

Noko: You probably missed my earlier post. You've read the reviews and have specific benchmarks on which you are basing your 820D preference. Can you send me a link to the specific benchmarks page that are influencing you.

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>

 

[noko]

Your probably right, since what you say has no weight or merit. DDR2 has some good advantages, less voltage, cooler and advancing much faster then DDR besides with much more bandwidth potential. You can stick to DDR, I am moving to DDR2.

Only logic that is ridiculus seems to be coming from you, quad pumping vice dual channel is superior in cutting down the number of pins or lanes needed to transfer data. Simple point. Now what is AMD going to do to increase bandwidth? Add more pins yet again? Intel was just plain smarter then AMD in this case and has that option of adding more pins and probably still have less needed then AMD. As for the onboard memory controller of AMD that is smart. Except when it can't run the bigger dimmns at that rated speed, then AMD is just shafting the customer, of course by your logic that is OK.

At this point I virtually made up my mind, I don't think AMD will have much more coming in the near future. Thanks to all of you it has become clear which one is better .