Which processor is faster

J

johnnyblue

New Member
Our DELL rep. tells me that she can swap out the processor on a recent (in a lenghty back order) NAS config.

If the swap is made, I can get the NAS soon. If not, it'll be nearly 3 weeks.

Original configuration:
Dual Core Xeon Processor 5050,2x2MB Cache, 3.00GHz, 667MHz FSB, PE 2950 (222-2703)

Alternate configuration:
Dual Core Xeon Processor 5130 4MB Cache, 2.00GHz, 1333MHz FSB, PE 2950 (222-3388)

Which is faster? Do you wait or go with the alternative?

Thanks
 
the woodcrest chips (with the 1gig bus) are the faster xeons out right now
 
Last edited:
Thanks, tlarkin. I do understand that but when you weight it against the fact that one is a 2 GHz and the other a 3 GHz, it made me wonder.

2G on faster bus or 3G on the slower bus?? You say go with faster bus?
 
johnnyblue said:
Thanks, tlarkin. I do understand that but when you weight it against the fact that one is a 2 GHz and the other a 3 GHz, it made me wonder.

2G on faster bus or 3G on the slower bus?? You say go with faster bus?
Click to expand...

The more bandwidth the bus has, the more data it can process and crunch. Plus the new woodcrest are 64bit and the newest architecture which would keep you inline for the upgrades (vista) down the road.

Clock speed is no longer the end all be all stat of a processor.
 
Last edited:
The 3Ghz one I believe is based off of the netburst architecture (like the Pentium D's), and the 2Ghz one is based off of the core architecture (like the core 2 duo's).
 
Out of sheer technicality, the 3GHz is faster. However the 5050 is netburst based whereas the 5130 is core based. In all aspects the 5130 is better.

ed: omega beat me to it while I was double checking :mad: :P
 
I was fairly sure but I don't know the Xeon model numbers quite so well as the desktop processors
 
Put it this way...

Why would a 2Ghz woodcrest Chip cost more than a 3Ghz previous version and not out perform it?

Remember there are things now that companies consider features that overall make a processor. Things like Cache, memory controller, Front Side Bus speed, multimedia extensions, built in instruction sets, etc.

This is why when you go look at a processor these days, they have a model number not a clock speed. Sure some years ago (actually not too long ago) when you went shopping for a processor you could simply say, hey I want to buy a pentium II 350, and that is exactly what you got. Nowadays you may see 3 or 4 processors with the same clock speed but one has more cache, faster front side bus, etc.

I remember when I was first building PCs (like 10 years ago) and bought a celeron 300A, only because you could over clock them to like 600Mhz and they ran pretty stable, and they were dirt cheap on my ASUS 440bx chipset motherboard.

Either way, no one would charge more for a processor that performed less compared to the previous versions.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top