VideoHelp Forum

Try DVDFab and download streaming video, copy, convert or make Blu-rays,DVDs! Download free trial !
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    My work is upgrading some systems and I'm going to buy a few of their older system for my younger siblings and relatives. So I would like to know in what order are the fastest ones?

    Thank you.
    1. Intel Pentium 4 3.0 Ghz
    2. Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E6400 2.13Ghz
    3. Intel Pentium Dual Core E2160 1.80Ghz
    4. AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5200+ 2.7 Ghz
    5. AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5000+ 2.20Ghz
    "A computer is never finished, you just run out of money."
    Quote Quote  
  2. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    the E6400, 5200+, 5000+, E2160, P4.
    Quote Quote  
  3. A lot of them are on these charts:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/benchmarks,31.html

    The P4 is way below the others.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks. Would Win 7 ultimate 64bit work fine on any of them?
    "A computer is never finished, you just run out of money."
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    The system with the E6400 would be the most likely to work well, but there are other factors to consider. You need to find out if there are suitable Windows 7 drivers available for the motherboard, and that the motherboard will accept 4GB of RAM. Windows 7 64-bit doesn't run efficiently with less than 4 GB of RAM.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Also, which one is better than my CPU? amd phenom X3 8400 2.1
    Last edited by Stealth3si; 5th Mar 2012 at 07:13.
    "A computer is never finished, you just run out of money."
    Quote Quote  
  7. CPU performance isn't a single dimensional issue. Different CPUs can excel at different tasks. You really have to look at the software you run and the way you use your computer, then look at benchmarks that cover those situations. Overall, none of the CPUs you listed is faster than your 2.1 GHz Phenom X3. But there may be specific benchmarks where some of them is faster.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/compare,828.html?prod%5B...d%5B2177%5D=on

    For example, the Core2 Duo E6400 beats your X3 in Lame encoding, but it's the other way around for Mainconcept h.264 encoding.
    Last edited by jagabo; 5th Mar 2012 at 07:30.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Just tested running #1 against #5 with a database application - a retail POS software.

    Under XP pro on #1 and Win 7 32 on #5,, # 5 was clearly way ahead. (5 seconds against 30 opening the app, 30 seconds against 3-5 minutes printing a report.) Running a #1 with Win 7 64, they became dead even.

    The app is NOT optimized for either Win 7 OR 64-bit, it only recently was approved for those systems, with no major re-write. The report software has not changed at all in several years.
    Quote Quote  
  9. 64bit and hyper-threading are important in windows 7.
    Quote Quote  
  10. I have a P4 ht 3ghz (since 2006) it run just fine with win7x64, trust me on that but if you can get a more recent cpu go ahead
    Quote Quote  
  11. Hyperthreading per se isn't important to Win7. The ability to execute multiple threads simultaneously is, whether it be multicore or hyperthreading. Multicore is preferable to hyperthreading for performance. Eg, a 4 core CPU is faster than a 2 core CPU with hyperthreading (all else being equal). A Pentium D will crush a Hyperthreaded P4.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Eg, a 4 core CPU is faster than a 2 core CPU with hyperthreading (all else being equal)
    Except that recently <somesite> did a comparison of the 4core AMD chips versus the dual core I3 (comparable selling price) and the I3 was ahead in most benchmarks, the only benchmark where the 4core amd chip did better was video encoding. also the I3 used less power whilst performing better.
    If amd's Chips were better performing then your statement would be right. (Piledriver FTW)
    When more software uses multi cores to their fullest ability then many cores (4+) will become the default choice.
    Corned beef is now made to a higher standard than at any time in history.
    The electronic components of the power part adopted a lot of Rubycons.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Originally Posted by RabidDog View Post
    Eg, a 4 core CPU is faster than a 2 core CPU with hyperthreading (all else being equal)
    Except that recently <somesite> did a comparison of the 4core AMD chips versus the dual core I3 (comparable selling price) and the I3 was ahead in most benchmarks, the only benchmark where the 4core amd chip did better was video encoding. also the I3 used less power whilst performing better.
    If amd's Chips were better performing then your statement would be right. (Piledriver FTW)
    When more software uses multi cores to their fullest ability then many cores (4+) will become the default choice.
    AMD and Intel are different architectures. Compare a 4 core i5 vs a 2 core i5 with hyperthreading.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Except that recently <somesite> did a comparison of the 4core AMD chips versus the dual core I3 (comparable selling price) and the I3 was ahead in most benchmarks, the only benchmark where the 4core amd chip did better was video encoding. also the I3 used less power whilst performing better.
    You answer your self, if program is written to take advantage of more cores than it will preform faster on even slower per core cpu vs faster cpu and less cores that's fact. I3 has higher frequencies than AMD ( even overclocks better, better yeald and different architecture as jagabo mentioned). One thing to remember is that the pc is fast ( or slow for that mater) as fast or slow is his slowest component in the chain ( meaning hdd memory graphic card and so on) another very important fact is the architecture, meaning the chipsest that control the data between the components( for that mater I3 and i5 and i7 ) have better memory controller than amd 4x, especially the 2k series. So you see it is not just the cpu that is in the game. In this example Pentium 4 has higher clock than other processors mentioned and it may or may not be faster on programs that are writen with speed on mind and not taking any benefit from cores or from instructions ( there are still some avisynth scripts that use only MMX?! or SSE 1?! and even i7 and pentium 3 and amd athlon xp will preform the same and some will conclude that pentium 3 has beaten the i7 . Hardware is nothing without the software that's why the cpu and gpu companies invest a lot of money in software companies so they can stick a logo saying best played on i7 and geforce for example.
    Given the circumstances the newer architecture if given proper software will blow away the old one ( one example can dual core modern mobile laptop cpus which usually have frequencies of 1,4-1,8 ghz blow away old prescot 3.0 ghz Pentium 4 mobile as once I had my self? yes they can and will
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member ranchhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    USA-midwest
    Search Comp PM
    Usually_Quiet said:
    drivers available for the motherboard,
    There's the rub; I do a lot of old system restoration, just got done Monday soldering 4 new caps on a mobo to build an old 2.3GHz P4 unit. (I give them away to poorer families in my area who can't afford a computer, especially with the economy what it is). First thing is to ask from the old unit owner for any CDs he has with drivers on them; it can be a real trial finding drivers, especially with retail boards. Watch out for Compaq units, there are a lot of them starting to fail. HP bought Compaq, and is not keeping up with legacy drivers posted for them on the HP website. I know this isn't what you were asking, but thought I would mention it.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads