Performance difference between c2d & PD

Over_maher · May 22, 2007

Hi all

im sure ive miss something here because overwise everyone would be doing this. how exactly are the c2d more efficient ?

Provided that a new 650i/680i chipset will do huge fsb of 400+ and have the ability to bring down the multiplier? does it not make something like a 945D running at a very high fsb and a very low multiplier comparable to the c2d ???

Can the new MB reduce the multipliers on these cpu given that i think its locked or is this impossible! which seems more likely ???????

945D = 3.4 (200*17) 800mhz
- OC potential fsb 400+, low multi providing a 1600fsb with a stepping of 4. still has 2 cores running 2mb per core.

E6600 = 2.4 (266*9) 1066mhz
- OC average 3.2 so around 350*9 = 3.2ghz and 1400fsb. 2 cores, 2mb per core.

My real question is will something like the asus P5N-E 650i allow me to change the multiplier down on the 945D so that i can run the higher fsb in my example ?

And if this is the case, how exactly are the c2d better ???

Does someone know the answer to this question

Burdman27911 · May 22, 2007

IIRC, you can only lower the multi on the core 2 duos, and not on the pentium line.

Also, as for performance. Check out a review from when conroe first came out: here. You can see the results from gaming and encoding and such. The core 2 duo line up is much much better than the older stuff per clock. You'll see a nice increase with an upgrade.

inkfx · May 22, 2007

This is like comparing a Mustang to a Ferrari. The Mustang is still good and fast but the Ferrari is going to be superior. These C2D chips are a brand new architecture which was not used in the Pentium D chips.

nd4spdbh2 · May 22, 2007

inkfx said:
This is like comparing a Mustang to a Ferrari. The Mustang is still good and fast but the Ferrari is going to be superior. These C2D chips are a brand new architecture which was not used in the Pentium D chips.

i think its a lil worse than that.... considering the worlds fastest super pi 1m time before c2d, was a 7.something Ghz pentium 651 (or 650) prescott (the pentium d's are same stuff just 2 cores) and it would do a 17sec super pi run at that clock.... now adays a c2d like mine @ 3.0ghz will run super pi 1m in 16.953 secs without even tweaking anything at this clock speed.... and when i had my moment of fame with my c2d @ 4ghz (or air :beer:

) we are talking 12.609 secs!

JCLW · May 22, 2007

Burdman27911 said:
IIRC, you can only lower the multi on the core 2 duos, and not on the pentium line.

You can force the low multiplier on any chip that supports SpeedStep, including Netburst P4s.

Burdman27911 · May 22, 2007

Thanks for the info JCLW. I never really knew that.

Regardless, the E6600 will kick an oc'd P4 in the rear in performance.

Over_maher · May 23, 2007

Hi all

thanks for that, im going to be using the asus P5N-E 650i board so should i theotheritically be able to change the multiplier down ?

Im just trying to get the last drops of performance out of the 945D before the price cut in july so i should be able to buy a quad without breaking the bank!

GigaHertzAddict · May 23, 2007

If you plan on overclocking your Quad to the max your current board won't do... I'd get a new P5K with a Quad..

batboy · May 23, 2007

The Pentium D multiplier can drop down to 14X if your motherboard supports it. There is no way a PD can match the performance of a C2D though. My old overclocked 940 had a best Super Pi time of 28 seconds while my overclocked E6600 posted a time of 14 seconds (twice as fast). While a PD might adequately handle your computer requirements (my wife is happy with my old 940), there is no way it can come close to matching the performance of a C2D.

splat · May 23, 2007

i agree with batboy and all the others who have said it too. You'd be much better simply buying a setup like a e4300 and a biostar tforce965pt than spending the money on a 650i/680i mobo to try and OC an old p4 architecture chip. Even the e4300 OCed to 3ghz is better than what you have now, if not simply for the power savings.

Sam__ · May 25, 2007

does that mean i can drop my PD945 from x17 to x14 on the right mobo. hmmm....17x200=3400 to 14x245=3430 would be nice.

hUMANbEATbOX · May 25, 2007

^^ yes, that's exactly what it means.

but i don't think it would be worth it, buying a new mobo JUST for that reason. mind you, you've got an asrock, so you will probably want to replace it at some point anyways.

Sam__ · May 25, 2007

im looking to replace it asap lol....could i change the multiplier with an Asus P5N-E SLI NF650i SLi?

Will Eatforfood · May 26, 2007

actually he could get a better board, and oc the crap out of his current chip then step up to quad when he has the money.

JCLW · May 26, 2007

Sam__ said:
does that mean i can drop my PD945 from x17 to x14 on the right mobo. hmmm....17x200=3400 to 14x245=3430 would be nice.

Yes.

In fact a 945D should be able to do 245 x17 = 4165. I don't know how fast mine will go, because my i955X board tops out at 275, but my 945D does 275 x17 = 4675 without much effort.

As Will Eatforfood mentioned, you can get a good board now and then upgrade your processor later.

I'd have a good look at the P5K boards.

hUMANbEATbOX · May 26, 2007

hUMANbEATbOX said:
^^ yes, that's exactly what it means.

but i don't think it would be worth it, buying a new mobo JUST for that reason. mind you, you've got an asrock, so you will probably want to replace it at some point anyways.

self correction, i don't know what i was thinking, that asrock board should be able to do 300fsb. so, really you wouldn't have to get a new mobo to do that, you can try it right now.

Sam__ · May 26, 2007

i cant change the voltage on it so i can only get it up to 235-240fsb....thats another reason why i need a new mobo.
wouldnt 350*14=4900 be better than 288*17=4896???? I think so.

BlackSphinx · May 26, 2007

Performance, as a whole, is as such.

4GHz Pentium D = 1.86Ghz C2D.

Well, my 805 at 4GHz has about the power of an E6300 stock. With 3 times the current consumption/heat generation.

If you're about to build a new computer, either go C2D or grab an X2 5000+ or such, they are almost giving them out at the moment.

Sam__ · May 26, 2007

does the performance not differ relative to the C2D from the PD8xx to the PD9xx??

Omsion · May 27, 2007

Sam__ said:
does the performance not differ relative to the C2D from the PD8xx to the PD9xx??

9xx only run cooler then the older 8xx, but no performance differance iirc.

Performance difference between c2d & PD

Registered

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Registered

Member

Senior Moment

ASCII Moderator

Member

Contributing Member

Member

Member

Member

Contributing Member

Member

Registered

Member

Member

Similar threads