Pentiun D 3.44 vs Core 2 1.86

[evilr00t]

I bet someone's going to be in for a mailbox shock in the morning.

<--writing angry email.

 

[runswindows95]

*shakes head and laughs at this entire topic.* Thanks for posting that email! I needed a good laugh!

 

[SEALBoy]

I'm emailing this supposed intel guy. Anyone with me?

 

[redwing]

A conroe based (4mb cache) core2 performs clock-for-clock about twice as fast as a Netburst based Pentium D. Sometimes it's a little less, but that seems to be upholding in most of the benchmarks.

For the easiest closest (and readily verifiable) comparison, take a 3Ghz D830 (or 930), and compare it to the x6800 in Toms charts. Most of the times the conroe system takes half the time to complete the benchmark.

Obviously the chipset and memory speed have a role in this, but it's not a huge factor (although I can tell you that the pentium D performs a lot better on an Nforce4 motherboard than it does on a p965/945 and other Intel chipsets).

So then it'd be reasonable to assume that a Pentium D @ 3.5 Ghz will be a little slower than a stock E6300, albeit not more than 10-15%. Multithreaded benchmarks will show a greater difference, since we're virtually multiplying this advantage by up to 2x. From a user point of view, unless you have a top of the line video card or are a benchmark freak, I doubt you'll feel a difference. With D805s going for under 90$ and some decent Nforce4 boards well under 100$ (although they're getting harder to find), a Pentium D rig is a lot more economical than the cheapest Core2 build, if money is a big issue.

Yes, the core 2 runs cooler, faster, and you get to put that fancy "Core 2 Inside" (or whatever it says) sticker on your case. But unless you really need that kind of processing power, there are cheaper alternatives. Which are mostly the Pentium D or an Athlon64 rig (single core), those s939 chips are dirt cheap nowadays.


Cheers

p.s. If you have just read my post and happen to disagree vividly, and are preparing to write an extensive 3 page report on how "he doesn't know what he's talking about", consider the following :

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Fart.

 

[quantumsheep]

A conroe based (4mb cache) core2 performs clock-for-clock about twice as fast as a Netburst based Pentium D. Sometimes it's a little less, but that seems to be upholding in most of the benchmarks.

For the easiest closest (and readily verifiable) comparison, take a 3Ghz D830 (or 930), and compare it to the x6800 in Toms charts. Most of the times the conroe system takes half the time to complete the benchmark.

Obviously the chipset and memory speed have a role in this, but it's not a huge factor (although I can tell you that the pentium D performs a lot better on an Nforce4 motherboard than it does on a p965/945 and other Intel chipsets).

So then it'd be reasonable to assume that a Pentium D @ 3.5 Ghz will be a little slower than a stock E6300, albeit not more than 10-15%. Multithreaded benchmarks will show a greater difference, since we're virtually multiplying this advantage by up to 2x. From a user point of view, unless you have a top of the line video card or are a benchmark freak, I doubt you'll feel a difference. With D805s going for under 90$ and some decent Nforce4 boards well under 100$ (although they're getting harder to find), a Pentium D rig is a lot more economical than the cheapest Core2 build, if money is a big issue.

Yes, the core 2 runs cooler, faster, and you get to put that fancy "Core 2 Inside" (or whatever it says) sticker on your case. But unless you really need that kind of processing power, there are cheaper alternatives. Which are mostly the Pentium D or an Athlon64 rig (single core), those s939 chips are dirt cheap nowadays.


Cheers

p.s. If you have just read my post and happen to disagree vividly, and are preparing to write an extensive 3 page report on how "he doesn't know what he's talking about", consider the following :

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Fart.

Think that defeats any reply.

 

[yipsl]

From a user point of view, unless you have a top of the line video card or are a benchmark freak, I doubt you'll feel a difference. With D805s going for under 90$ and some decent Nforce4 boards well under 100$ (although they're getting harder to find), a Pentium D rig is a lot more economical than the cheapest Core2 build, if money is a big issue.

Yes, the core 2 runs cooler, faster, and you get to put that fancy "Core 2 Inside" (or whatever it says) sticker on your case. But unless you really need that kind of processing power, there are cheaper alternatives. Which are mostly the Pentium D or an Athlon64 rig (single core), those s939 chips are dirt cheap nowadays.


Cheers

While the Pentium D's give more bang for the buck, They are even overkill for the average person who buys a name brand PC for web surfing, Word and Excel and e-mails. The real reason to have a dual core is video encoding, 3D graphics and future proof gaming. The best reason to go C2D or Athlon X2 over Pentium D is that no one needs a space heater on their desktop.

Plus, what do you consider high end video? I'll put a performance range X1950 Pro in my new PC, and the factory overclocked Sapphire looks good there. That will certainly boost my Oblivion performance over a Radeon 9800 Pro. I also think it will work better alongside an X2 or C2D than a Smithfield or Pressler.

Since I did my post above, I checked out Tom's Hardware CPU benchmarks, various Oblivion benchmarks and prices at Newegg. I might just go Athlon X2 4600+ instead of a C2D E6300 Conroe or E6400 Allendale, because AMD boards have been more futureproofed than Intels for CPU upgrades. Yes, I know AM2+ and AM3 are coming, but AMD produces similiar new processors for the last generation chipset, whereas Intel often forces a voltage based motherboard upgrade.

Anyways, that Pentium D 805 with a free motherboard at Fry's did look good for $93, but I live in Texas and though it's an ice storm tonight, I usually have to deal with 100F + temps most of the year and I'd rather not have a space heater on my desktop.

 

[apt403]

but I live in Texas and though it's an ice storm tonight, I usually have to deal with 100F + temps most of the year and I'd rather not have a space heater on my desktop.

Oh, there was an iced storm in Texas. A podcast i listen too canceled a live show today because of an ice storm, that couldnt get to the house they record in.

 

[Pippero]

Well,

I don't really think we should compare the stock performance of one to the OC of the other. Do you? Apples and Apples, either max OC on both, or, stock performance on both. Because if he is going to OC a crappy Pentium D in order to achieve E6300 like performance.... why not OC the E6300 and blow any Pentium D out of the water hands down?

wes

Hmm, because the Pentium D 805 and 820 are dirty cheap right now (85€).
They are the "Sempron" of dual core CPUs, and you can get them for half the price of an E6300 (at least here in Germany).
The only thing preventing me from pairing one with a 50€ mobo for a bargain HTPC, is the lack of SpeedStep and the high thermals... still i'm about 50-50 in the process of buying one anyway.

 

[apt403]

I dont think i should have posted my email, ive been getting all kind of subscription confirmation things to mountain climbing web sites and collage newsletters. Ive never even heard of most of the crap thats been showing up im my inbox. I know its from the same person because the either the username or password is "mungbean" in everyone of the emails. DAMN YOU!!!

 

[yipsl]

but I live in Texas and though it's an ice storm tonight, I usually have to deal with 100F + temps most of the year and I'd rather not have a space heater on my desktop.

Oh, there was an iced storm in Texas. A podcast i listen too canceled a live show today because of an ice storm, that couldnt get to the house they record in.

Yes, I have a low level IT job with a state agency that closed today and will probably be closed tomorrow ("winter mix" until 4 p.m.). My six year old has never seen snow outside of television and we tried to build a snowman today. There might even be an inch of snow in the morning, but it's mostly been sleet and snow mixed.

I'm from Maryland, and I'm used to snow, but my wife's from California, and she's only seen snow up in the mountains. It only snows here once every ten years or so, though snow flurries that don't lay happen every few years.