Which of These Two Processors is Faster?

the d's arent really underrated, they take twice as much power to use, and what do they give you in return? a netburst architecture that cant beat a 2.5ghz C2D.
 
Comparing them to today's standards, then yes. However, they gave some serious runs-for-the-money at their release and their price-point in terms of performance was (and still is, really) incredible. It's like spending $175 for an E8200 or $115 for an E4500. Yes, the 8400 is better, but worth $60...eh. Not everyone needs that marginal performance.

But then again, you were what...11 when they were released? No offense, I'm not certain how much stock I'd place in your assessment of them. Unless you knew (real-world applications/testing/use as opposed to reading reviews and Wiki articles) at 11 years old how they worked and why the Netburst ultimately failed, it's a moot point to regurgitate information. Though, I suppose that being all of 15 years young, you ultimately know best, so I'll stfu now... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I don't get it. Why is the E4700 faster than the Pentium D 915? The Pentium has more cache than the E4700. Is it something to do with the microcode?
 
2048Megabytes said:
Microcode is firmware. It is instructions which are permanently built into the processor chip.
Click to expand...

then no, its not the microcode, its the architecture. firmware is just software. software can be changed. the c2d core architecture is physically more efficient.
 
Cleric7x9 said:
the e8400 over the e4500 is more than a marginal performance increase..
Click to expand...

For some yes, others no. But you know what I meant:P If you're not used to the few areas you'd actually notice a difference, don't need the extra speed, or honestly don't care and just want something that's quick and works, you'd never notice the difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top