processor questions...

csi1189

csi1189

New Member
ok, so... im looking at several new comps (sony vgc-ra... or vgc-rc...). the only apparent differences, besides price, is the processor and amount of HDD space (both SATA). vgc-rc has a 3Ghz intel pentium d with 320gb of hdd space. vgc-ra has 3Ghz intel pentium 4 w/Ht and 250gb hdd space. and both have 1gb ddr2 ram. i plan to use this new comp mostly for video editing, so i want it to be able to easily handle this. there are two more expansion slots for future upgrades of more hdd space, so thats not really a problem at all. so i guess what i'm getting at is, what exactly is the difference between pentium d and pentium 4 w/HT?? (both 3Ghz... so...)... hope someone can clear this up for me, if there really is any one that is better for the job.
 
csi1189 said:
ok, so... im looking at several new comps (sony vgc-ra... or vgc-rc...). the only apparent differences, besides price, is the processor and amount of HDD space (both SATA). vgc-rc has a 3Ghz intel pentium d with 320gb of hdd space. vgc-ra has 3Ghz intel pentium 4 w/Ht and 250gb hdd space. and both have 1gb ddr2 ram. i plan to use this new comp mostly for video editing, so i want it to be able to easily handle this. there are two more expansion slots for future upgrades of more hdd space, so thats not really a problem at all. so i guess what i'm getting at is, what exactly is the difference between pentium d and pentium 4 w/HT?? (both 3Ghz... so...)... hope someone can clear this up for me, if there really is any one that is better for the job.
Click to expand...


The Pentium D is a dual core processor while the P4 HT is a single core processor. The Pentium D is Intels latest and greatest line of processors using the same architecture as the P4HT but, it's 65nm vs. 90nm. What that means is, the die is much smaller and the Pentium D is more efficient and runs cooler.

In my opinion, the Pentium D would be the better choice by far as, it's dual core, more efficient and will multitask better. The nice thing about the D series too is, there's more headroom for overclocking.
 
csi1189 said:
pentium d 3.0ghz still better than p4ht 3.6ghz??
Click to expand...

Yes, it is better. You have two 3Ghz physical processors. Two is better than one in my opinion. Besides, if you ever decide to overclock, you can overclock it to 3.6 and beyond more than likely.
 
LithiumSunset said:
Yes, it is better. You have two 3Ghz physical processors. Two is better than one in my opinion. Besides, if you ever decide to overclock, you can overclock it to 3.6 and beyond more than likely.
Click to expand...
In most cases it is, however if your running a cpu intesive app that is only single threaded, the 3.6 will outperform the dual-core.

And i doubt you could o'c it to 3.6Ghz. Dual-cores dont overclock as high.
 
(im not really sure of this) Based on my research, the single core 3.6 would be faster in terms of just playing one game/using one application at a time. However, when it comes to multitasking, the dual 3.0 would blow the single 3.6 away in performance. If your like my friend, and likes to just play games, the single core would be better. However, if your like me, who plays games WHILE doing other stuff like photoshop, video editing, browsing internet, etc, then go for the dual core.
 
dragoon38900 said:
(im not really sure of this) Based on my research, the single core 3.6 would be faster in terms of just playing one game/using one application at a time. However, when it comes to multitasking, the dual 3.0 would blow the single 3.6 away in performance. If your like my friend, and likes to just play games, the single core would be better. However, if your like me, who plays games WHILE doing other stuff like photoshop, video editing, browsing internet, etc, then go for the dual core.
Click to expand...
Very true, but even in single threaded apps you will still benefit, since the windows processes will be split up between both cores, along with any background apps that you have running.
 
dragoon38900 said:
(im not really sure of this) Based on my research, the single core 3.6 would be faster in terms of just playing one game/using one application at a time. However, when it comes to multitasking, the dual 3.0 would blow the single 3.6 away in performance. If your like my friend, and likes to just play games, the single core would be better. However, if your like me, who plays games WHILE doing other stuff like photoshop, video editing, browsing internet, etc, then go for the dual core.
Click to expand...

Well, your right to a degree. Dual cores may not produce the same FPS as singles do in some games however, it depends on how the game is written. Besides that, most games are coming out with patches that support dual core and along with some games now, all future games will support dual core.

Now if you wanna talk performance, my opteron is currently running @2.5Ghz from it's stock speed of 1.8Ghz. I have an Intel 630 prescott single core here with HT enabled running at stock speed.

Opteron:
http://s44.photobucket.com/albums/f.../?action=view&current=OpteronCurrentSpecs.jpg

Intel 630:
http://s44.photobucket.com/albums/f16/Luminaris/630 Screens/?action=view&current=IntelStockTemps.jpg

Now, here's the opterons 3DMark06 score:
http://s44.photobucket.com/albums/f...creens/?action=view&current=3DMark06Score.jpg

and the Intels score:
http://s44.photobucket.com/albums/f16/Luminaris/630 Screens/?action=view&current=Intel3DMark.jpg


Now, keep in mind the opteron is running 500Mhz less than the Intel machine is and only has 1 Gig of RAM compared to 2 Gigs the Intel machine has. Both machines at the time of the test had the exact same graphics card, an XFX 7800GT.

This just kind of gives you an idea as to how dual cores can stack up against single core processors. I realize there are all kinds of variables and I for one am certainly not saying single cores or Intel are not good. My objective it to prove that dual core processors are easily overclockable, run games very well and just as good if not better than single core processors in some cases and multitask very well.
 
Let me just add one more thing, I have tested both of my Pentium D 930 and 950 machines pretty much at stock speeds and they came fairly close to the Opteron scores in the benchmark test I ran. I just don't have the screens up yet.
 
i ended up getting the vgc-rc110g - plenty of room for upgrades from the standard 250gb. and its the pentium d 830 model, not the 930. but still 3.0ghz, which is definately better than my current laptop's 2.4ghz celeron p.o.s...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top