3.e E0 seems slower than 2.8c

chevyrulz099 · Apr 18, 2005

this is gonna sound kinda dumb, but i feel like the new chip is slower than the old 2.8

i am actually kinda dissappointed by this, i have tried reinstalling windows and so forth, all to no change.

anyone else have this experience with the 3.2s?

Mud · Apr 18, 2005

it depends.. did u install the chip on the exact same mobo and other bits?? wot are the other bits in ur mobo?? does ur board support the cpu?? ru installing HSF right?? or did u apply the thermal compound right?? these questions and some other more have to be asked first..

chevyrulz099 · Apr 18, 2005

everything is done right, yes the board supports it, everything is fine there.

it just doesnt seem like a better chip IMO. im thinking about selling it, and getting something else if it doesnt cost anything for the swap.

ed.howell · Apr 18, 2005

Unfortunately, it's not weird, you are correct.

I bought some 3.2E's for work when they first came out, replacing our 2.8b's mainly for the addition of Hyperthreading. I raced the 3.2E against the 2.8b using the CAM program we use and the 2.8B won. I then sold the 3.2E's and replaced them with some 3.4C's.

If you overclock that chip, it should be faster around 3.6-3.8+ than a northwood. The 3.2E's I had overclocked to around 3.9ish. The 3.4C's we got averaged around 3.6ish. The Prescott's overclock more consistently than the Northwood's if you can tame the heat.

chevyrulz099 · Apr 18, 2005

i have had it up to 3.6 no change in Vcore or anything, i didnt see much of a difference, so clocked back down.

its fast enough for what i need, but you know, must be faster than a 2.8

now tht was a good chip!

Lancelot · Apr 18, 2005

I totally agree, when I started out I had a 2.8C, tried a 2.8E and a 3.2E, went back to a 2.8C M0-step in the end! From what I've seen now, Prescott is for LGA775 boards...

warlock110 · Apr 18, 2005

prescott don't shine till 3.8+ ghz, i have one at 3.8ghz, it smokes all the northwood at around the same range.

chevyrulz099 · Apr 18, 2005

what about on an lga775 platform? i have to get a mobo for it, but i have a 3.0e for 775

is that worth the investment, as i see the 478 pressy isnt!

also will consider going AMD, but i dont game much, compress mp3s, and so on mainly.

i would kinda prefer amd as its cheaper, something 64bit and equal to the performance of a 3.0 p4 i also need a mobo, agp (i know i know), and something that accepts ddr400 DC

ed.howell · Apr 18, 2005

chevyrulz099 said:
what about on an lga775 platform? i have to get a mobo for it, but i have a 3.0e for 775

is that worth the investment, as i see the 478 pressy isnt!

also will consider going AMD, but i dont game much, compress mp3s, and so on mainly.

i would kinda prefer amd as its cheaper, something 64bit and equal to the performance of a 3.0 p4 i also need a mobo, agp (i know i know), and something that accepts ddr400 DC

If you already have the 3.0E for 775, DDR memory and an GOOD AGP Graphics card then go with a "Hybrid" motherboard like the Abit AS8, DFI 875P-T or Asus P5P800.

If you don't have DDR and an GOOD AGP graphics card then I would wait for the 955 chipset and get one of those motherboards, PCI-E GPU and DDR2.

Just my .02

DeepScience · Apr 18, 2005

It probably is slower in games.

VolcanoWarez · Apr 18, 2005

my LGA 775 530 Is a heck of a lot better than my 2.8E if thats any help.. but consider 200MHz difference

warlock110 · Apr 19, 2005

slow downt here peps, the flatform doesn't matter when you're using the same CPU and the same chipset, i don't understand why one flatform would be faster than the other?

hUMANbEATbOX · Apr 19, 2005

warlock110 said:
slow downt here peps, the flatform doesn't matter when you're using the same CPU and the same chipset, i don't understand why one flatform would be faster than the other?

because 775 board can handle the voltage needs a LOT better. you would get better safer overclocks for sure.

MrCooper · Apr 19, 2005

hUMANbEATbOX said:
because 775 board can handle the voltage needs a LOT better. you would get better safer overclocks for sure.

These new mb can handle more power compare to the older ones. In my opinion, you just need to tweak your ram settings a little better. Once you have that done it should feel faster but I doubt it though. The Northwoods are still quick if you can get them at 3.8Ghz.

calcal · Apr 20, 2005

the northwood has more "RAW" speed than the prescotts but when its overclocked the 1mb cache kicks

my 3.0c @ stock scored 24k or something whil emy freinds 3.0e scored 21k

microfire · Apr 20, 2005

Sounds about right, slower.

Someone explain how a prescott at 3.8ghz is faster than a northwood at 3.8ghz?
I don't see it getting any faster. Maybe in some other areas, but overall I could swear my northwood is still better.

Check benchs of my 3.2C @ 3799mhz its kicking the 3.8ghz prescott up the ***.
Click on image for larger picture or click this direct link: http://img244.echo.cx/img244/9514/3799mhznorthwood2sh.jpg

xTrEmEoVrClOcKr · Apr 20, 2005

Im on a 2.6C currently cause my board is in Oregon (Thanks catalyst ^^) I MISS my 3.2e so much ... im at 3.1ghz and this thing feels kinda slow. Kinda shows how much power the 3.2e chips have ...

Blkout · Apr 20, 2005

microfire said:
Sounds about right, slower.

Someone explain how a prescott at 3.8ghz is faster than a northwood at 3.8ghz?
I don't see it getting any faster. Maybe in some other areas, but overall I could swear my northwood is still better.

Check benchs of my 3.2C @ 3799mhz its kicking the 3.8ghz prescott up the ***.
Click on image for larger picture or click this direct link: http://img244.echo.cx/img244/9514/3799mhznorthwood2sh.jpg

I could run several benchmarks with my Prescott at 3.8GHz and show you that your Northwood isn't as fast. I bought a Northwood and Prescott both to overclock and test, around 3.6GHz they are about dead even in most benchmarks, but after that its all Prescott. Sandra is the ONLY benchmark that favors the Northwood, try running PCMark 2004 or 3DMark 2001 and watch the Prescott smoke the Northwood.

warlock110 · Apr 20, 2005

what kindda chip did you have to use to get up to 3.8ghz on a northwood? my 2.4prescott hit 3.8ghz on silent air. cost of the chip is only 100 bucks.

hawtrawkr · Apr 20, 2005

microfire said:
Someone explain how a prescott at 3.8ghz is faster than a northwood at 3.8ghz?
I don't see it getting any faster. Maybe in some other areas, but overall I could swear my northwood is still better.

its not so much that its faster but the extra cache helps to make up for the misses due to the longer pipeline and can help the prescotts to outperform the northwoods. if you have to choose between a 2.8c or a 2.8e and your not going to overclock id get the 2.8c but if your going to overclock and you stand to get around 3.4 or above id go with the prescott everytime. when i first got my 2.8e around the time prescotts first launched it was in my system for a couple days before i put my 2.8c back in out of frustration with the heat/performance but nowadays the prescotts are more user friendly and can clock higher than the northwood alternatives.

3.e E0 seems slower than 2.8c

Registered

Member

Registered

Member

Registered

Member

Member

Registered

Member

Super Kiwi

Member

Member

Contributing Member

Member

Member

Member

member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads