Informal Q6600 CPU testing results

[TBoneit]

Just for the heck of it I did a couple of shrinks using DVD Shrink 3.2 on my new toy. A Q6600 with XP Home, 2 Gb ddr2 667 dual channel memory, 320Gb SATA drive.

Shrink 1 was a 7.43Gb > DVD5 and the encode only took 3:34 minutes.
Shrink 2 was a 6.32Gb > DVD5 and the analyze with Deep Analysis and encode took 4:05 minutes
Both had the default settings.

I used to think my older AMD4200+ X2 was pretty good but this blazes past it.
New computer has AVG Internet Security 8 loaded and Webroot's Spysweeper.

[TBoneit]

A little further on for any that are curious.

Testing the same 1hr28min PAL DVD rip to a NTSC MPG file took 1hr27min. to encode using TMPGEnc Xpress3, Latest version.

Using TMPGEnc Xpress4 it took 37 minutes.

Same settings in both, same source drive and destination drive. To speed things up I set to prioritize speedin both.

So despite Xpress 3 showing 1 physical core and and 4 cores and 4 logical cores it was not using the processor anywhere near its capability. Xpress4 wasn't using 100% either, about double the percentage of Xpress 3 but much faster. After seeing the trial versions results I bought the upgrade.

I know it isn't the most scientific benchmark, however it works for me since everything was the same except the software.

So a few more $$$ spent because of the upgrade from a AMD 4200+ X2 to a Q6600 but well worth it in speed.

Cheers

[budz]

Very interesting since I've been debating between the Intel Wolfdale E8400 & Q6600 cpu. I see the Q6600 is dropping in price and but the E8400 Wolfdale price is rising.

[Bjs]

Indeed, interesting that you would use xp home, rather than xp pro which supports dual processors

[disturbed1]

Indeed, interesting that you would use xp home, rather than xp pro which supports dual processors

XP Home still supports multi-core and multi-thread, just not multiple physical cpus, nor terminal service, policies, roaming profiles and more. But dual and quad core is fully utilized with XP Home.

[Bjs]

Winxp home can not take advantage of multi-socketed, multicore SMP environments.

It will see a multicore cpu just fine, but addressing the multicore for processing of threads, is where differences appear.

winxp pro supports multicore, multi-socketed environments, and is able to address all cores in "real" smp.

Esspecially where the op ran tests using "Xpress"

Use the right enviorment for the support of the tool in question, dont choke it to death.

[disturbed1]

Win XP home supports a Quad Core just fine. You do know a multi-core CPU is not the same as multi cpu? Just because Intel soldered two dual corea together on one die doesn't make it anything close to "real" smp.

Consult the MSDN articles on it, and Intel developer pages. The task scheduler for XP home and XP Pro are the same1 You can install XP Home on a dual CPU system, but it only sees one cpu. There is nothing in XP Pro that adds a performance increase. Only networking abilities through roaming profiles, better terminal services (RDP connections), offline folders, encryption, and other things that would not be used in a home environment.

BTW, an Intel multi core processor is not "real" smp. It chokes due to thread thrashing, and the memory controller is a huge bottle neck. Neither XP Home, nor Pro support "real" multitasking/multithreading, the scheduler just isn't robust enough to handle a harsh environment. You need at least 2003 server which received the scheduler improvements.2

[TBoneit]

I'd sure to hate to pay for Server 2003, even the low end version.

I'll agree with both of you about XP Home not supporting More than one CPU.

My research earlier showed that XP Home will support Multi-Core processors. TMPGEnc Xpress 4 is using all 4 cores as far as I can tell. See the attached. I have Priority set to low and am doing several things as it encodes. Even with priority set to low it is using a decent amount of all four cores.

I'm happy. If I were going dual CPU using Q6600 CPUs I'd be using XP Pro.
Since I went lazy with this one and didn't build it myself, My cost ended up at approx $500 for a Q6600, XP Home, 320Gb, 16X DVD Burner, 2 GB Memory. When I priced my costs for a Good Mobo $135, 2 GB Memory $100, Q6600 $254.99 @ Newegg today, and that didn't include a new burner, or hard drive or XP.

Cheers

task%20manager.bmp

Allow me to correct myself. My out of pocket was higher than $500 initially and then I ended up paying less than that, after buying a XP Home license for $30 and using it on my old computer that I sold out and trading in 1 Gb of the old DDR 400 I ended up with a final out of pocket around $450. Then add in the Upgrade cost of Xpress 4 of $60 to utilize all 4 cores for more speed.

Overall I am very happy. It is quiet and fast. If I have to reload XP H I won't have to activate it as it installs preactivated. I see that with Dell. HP, Compaq and other brand names if you use their disc.

BTW the new AVG Internet Security 8 seems better to me than the older 7.5 FWIW.