Windows XP and Quad Core Processors

[TheVanman]

Thanks for the reply b-unit. That makes good sense why I would avoid the 8xxx series, and also why they are the same price or less than the 6600.

Good heads up.......Vanman

 

[cjl]

Sry for the delay, but the Q8xxx chips have had most of their cache disabled, hence should have been called 'Pentium Quad-Core'. While I find this just fine for a basic machine (who needs a quad in a basic machine tho) for CPU intensive tasks, you will loose performance to a Q6600 or Q9xxx.

Check out the actual benchmarks. The Q8200 is in a dead heat with the 6600 for the most part, and doesn't tend to suffer terribly for the lack of cache. Besides, if you are on a crusade against cache disabling, you should also tell people to avoid the Q9x00 chips in favor of the 9x50 chips - IIRC, the 8000 series has 4MB cache, the 9x00 series has 6MB, and the 9x50 has 12MB (6000 series have 8MB).

Basically, yes, people should go for the 9000 series if they can, but I would actually recommend an 8200 over a 6600 in most cases if they are on a budget. It runs cooler, takes less power, and is just as fast. It'll even overclock farther, if your board can take a high FSB for a quad.

 

[TheVanman]

Hi CJL. Where did you find benchmarks on the 8200? I hadnt seen them here, but that isnt saying much for the limited research that I have had time to do.

I am just looking for a really decent CPU to take over for my old and tired P4 3200 HT.

All of the processors mentioned here will probably reduce my video render times into 1/4 of what they are now, or better.

Which do you think will be the best for my intended application? I need reliability mostly. Cooler running and horsepower are always a major PLUS.

Keep in mind that I am still going to use XP Pro, which is how I got to this thread to begin with.

For the price I am leaning towards the q8200 $169, or the q8300 $189. With the q9400 $229, the q9550 $279, or the q9650 $329, the price is just escalating.

I dont know how much more the 9550 or 9650 are going to wow me, and if it will justify spending the extra $100-$150.

This is where my mindset is. I am used to setting the videos to render and walking away to...like...rebuild an engine...or something else that takes all day. I guess that I will have to find things to do that take less time!

Thank you all for your great insight. I am soaking it all up!

Vanman

 

[Huskymaniac]

I have a system that was shipped with a Core 2 Duo processor running at 3GHz on XP 23 bit SP2. I upgraded to a Core 2 Quad running at 3GHz and the speed of my monte carlo simulations on excel got cut in HALF!!!! I updated the bios, did a fresh install of XP 32 bit, updated the chipset drivers and ran all of the relevant hotfixes and the speed is still half of what it was with the dual core CPU. However, when I use msconfig to tell XP to boot using only 2 of the 4 cores, I get my speed back to where it was with the dual core CPU!!! The cpu temperature seems to remain in range as does the core CPU voltage. Device manager and task manager shows all four of the cores, shows them as being used and properly identifies the CPU when I boot to use all four cores. Anyone want to take a stab at this?

 

[Huskymaniac]

I FINALLY figured it out. The problem was with Excel 2007 all along. There was a bug causing my spreadsheet to run slowly on 4 cores versus 2 cores. It turns out that the issue was with add-ins (like Crystal Ball) performing re-calculations. Installing Office SP2 fixed the problem once and for all. I stumbled on this when I noticed that a different spreadsheet that didn't use volatile functions from within Crystal Ball ran faster when I booted XP to use all 4 cores. I then downloaded Passmark's benchmarking utility and it indicated that all was fine with the CPU. After some searching I found this issue with Excel 2007. For anyone stumling upon this thread, here is my suggested upgrade path for moving from a dual core to a quad core CPU:

1. Update the BIOS
2. Install the new CPU
3. Do a clean install of XP
4. Update XP to the latest SP
5. Update the system software, if your OEM has one
6. Update the chipset drivers
7. Update Office or your relevant software to the latest version or SP

 

[Mousemonkey]

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey