2.4 GHz Dual Core CPU: Faster than Old 3.0 GHz Pentium?

I am preparing to retire my Dell XPS after almost four years of
service. This old machine has a 3 GHz Pentium 3 single core CPU. A
nice chip, in its time.

Without paying a fortune, I see that the most advanced CPU I can get
is the Intel 2.4 GHz dual core. I am a bit concerned about the
reduction in clock speed. It is rather unpleasant to trade "up" to a
slower computer. I also don't expect a lot of benefit from the dual
core, because much of my work is single-threaded. I simply don't have
much software that is able to keep both cores working simultaneously.

I understand the party line that the new CPUs do more work per clock
cycle than the old CPUs. I understand the party line that the memory
systems in today's computers are better than those of three or four
years ago.

Still, I have this nagging doubt. What do you folks think? Is a new
XPS-710 with a 2.4 GHz dual core Intel CPU going to be faster than an
old 3 GHz Pentium?

Thanks in advance for your observations.
--
David Arnstein (00)
{{ }}
^^

"David Arnstein" wrote in message
...
I am preparing to retire my Dell XPS after almost four years of
service. This old machine has a 3 GHz Pentium 3 single core CPU. A
nice chip, in its time.

Without paying a fortune, I see that the most advanced CPU I can get
is the Intel 2.4 GHz dual core. I am a bit concerned about the
reduction in clock speed. It is rather unpleasant to trade "up" to a
slower computer. I also don't expect a lot of benefit from the dual
core, because much of my work is single-threaded. I simply don't have
much software that is able to keep both cores working simultaneously.

I understand the party line that the new CPUs do more work per clock
cycle than the old CPUs. I understand the party line that the memory
systems in today's computers are better than those of three or four
years ago.

Still, I have this nagging doubt. What do you folks think? Is a new
XPS-710 with a 2.4 GHz dual core Intel CPU going to be faster than an
old 3 GHz Pentium?

Thanks in advance for your observations.
--
David Arnstein (00)
{{ }}
^^



This may help.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

From what I have read if the application does not take advantage of
multicore then there is little benefit to dual core, but as that is the way
of the future, applications will eventually catch up.

Bill

"Bill" wrote in message news:N7Vxh.1033$%e3.170@bigfe9...

"David Arnstein" wrote in message
...
I am preparing to retire my Dell XPS after almost four years of
service. This old machine has a 3 GHz Pentium 3 single core CPU. A
nice chip, in its time.

Without paying a fortune, I see that the most advanced CPU I can get
is the Intel 2.4 GHz dual core. I am a bit concerned about the
reduction in clock speed. It is rather unpleasant to trade "up" to a
slower computer. I also don't expect a lot of benefit from the dual
core, because much of my work is single-threaded. I simply don't have
much software that is able to keep both cores working simultaneously.

I understand the party line that the new CPUs do more work per clock
cycle than the old CPUs. I understand the party line that the memory
systems in today's computers are better than those of three or four
years ago.

Still, I have this nagging doubt. What do you folks think? Is a new
XPS-710 with a 2.4 GHz dual core Intel CPU going to be faster than an
old 3 GHz Pentium?

Thanks in advance for your observations.
--
David Arnstein (00)
{{ }}
^^



This may help.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

From what I have read if the application does not take advantage of
multicore then there is little benefit to dual core, but as that is the
way of the future, applications will eventually catch up.

Bill


That's not entirely true, as XP and Vista will schedule different system
processes on different CPUs.

The Core 2 Duo 2.4 is light-years faster than a P4-3.0. No comparison.

"Tom Scales" wrote in message
...

"Bill" wrote in message news:N7Vxh.1033$%e3.170@bigfe9...

"David Arnstein" wrote in message
...
I am preparing to retire my Dell XPS after almost four years of
service. This old machine has a 3 GHz Pentium 3 single core CPU. A
nice chip, in its time.

Without paying a fortune, I see that the most advanced CPU I can get
is the Intel 2.4 GHz dual core. I am a bit concerned about the
reduction in clock speed. It is rather unpleasant to trade "up" to a
slower computer. I also don't expect a lot of benefit from the dual
core, because much of my work is single-threaded. I simply don't have
much software that is able to keep both cores working simultaneously.

I understand the party line that the new CPUs do more work per clock
cycle than the old CPUs. I understand the party line that the memory
systems in today's computers are better than those of three or four
years ago.

Still, I have this nagging doubt. What do you folks think? Is a new
XPS-710 with a 2.4 GHz dual core Intel CPU going to be faster than an
old 3 GHz Pentium?

Thanks in advance for your observations.
--
David Arnstein (00)
{{ }}
^^



This may help.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

From what I have read if the application does not take advantage of
multicore then there is little benefit to dual core, but as that is the
way of the future, applications will eventually catch up.

Bill


That's not entirely true, as XP and Vista will schedule different system
processes on different CPUs.

The Core 2 Duo 2.4 is light-years faster than a P4-3.0. No comparison.


Tell that to gamers who get no benefit from dual cores. Like MS FSX. They
admit that the application does not make use of multi core so there is no
benefit. The application needs to be optimized to get maximum benefit.

I would imagine if it affects games it very well will affect other
applications

Bill

"Bill" wrote in message
...

"Tom Scales" wrote in message
...

"Bill" wrote in message news:N7Vxh.1033$%e3.170@bigfe9...

"David Arnstein" wrote in message
...
I am preparing to retire my Dell XPS after almost four years of
service. This old machine has a 3 GHz Pentium 3 single core CPU. A
nice chip, in its time.

Without paying a fortune, I see that the most advanced CPU I can get
is the Intel 2.4 GHz dual core. I am a bit concerned about the
reduction in clock speed. It is rather unpleasant to trade "up" to a
slower computer. I also don't expect a lot of benefit from the dual
core, because much of my work is single-threaded. I simply don't have
much software that is able to keep both cores working simultaneously.

I understand the party line that the new CPUs do more work per clock
cycle than the old CPUs. I understand the party line that the memory
systems in today's computers are better than those of three or four
years ago.

Still, I have this nagging doubt. What do you folks think? Is a new
XPS-710 with a 2.4 GHz dual core Intel CPU going to be faster than an
old 3 GHz Pentium?

Thanks in advance for your observations.
--
David Arnstein (00)
{{ }}
^^



This may help.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

From what I have read if the application does not take advantage of
multicore then there is little benefit to dual core, but as that is the
way of the future, applications will eventually catch up.

Bill


That's not entirely true, as XP and Vista will schedule different system
processes on different CPUs.

The Core 2 Duo 2.4 is light-years faster than a P4-3.0. No comparison.


Tell that to gamers who get no benefit from dual cores. Like MS FSX. They
admit that the application does not make use of multi core so there is no
benefit. The application needs to be optimized to get maximum benefit.

I would imagine if it affects games it very well will affect other
applications

Bill


Not really. Games are a very specialized piece of software. They
essentially take over your machine and revert it to DOS

In 'normal' applications, I see a signficant improvement. For example,
printing a large document/image. It runs on one processor. I run on the
other.

"Tom Scales" wrote in message
...

"Bill" wrote in message
...

"Tom Scales" wrote in message
...

"Bill" wrote in message
news:N7Vxh.1033$%e3.170@bigfe9...

"David Arnstein" wrote in message
...
I am preparing to retire my Dell XPS after almost four years of
service. This old machine has a 3 GHz Pentium 3 single core CPU. A
nice chip, in its time.

Without paying a fortune, I see that the most advanced CPU I can get
is the Intel 2.4 GHz dual core. I am a bit concerned about the
reduction in clock speed. It is rather unpleasant to trade "up" to a
slower computer. I also don't expect a lot of benefit from the dual
core, because much of my work is single-threaded. I simply don't have
much software that is able to keep both cores working simultaneously.

I understand the party line that the new CPUs do more work per clock
cycle than the old CPUs. I understand the party line that the memory
systems in today's computers are better than those of three or four
years ago.

Still, I have this nagging doubt. What do you folks think? Is a new
XPS-710 with a 2.4 GHz dual core Intel CPU going to be faster than an
old 3 GHz Pentium?

Thanks in advance for your observations.
--
David Arnstein (00)
{{ }}
^^



This may help.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

From what I have read if the application does not take advantage of
multicore then there is little benefit to dual core, but as that is the
way of the future, applications will eventually catch up.

Bill


That's not entirely true, as XP and Vista will schedule different system
processes on different CPUs.

The Core 2 Duo 2.4 is light-years faster than a P4-3.0. No comparison.


Tell that to gamers who get no benefit from dual cores. Like MS FSX. They
admit that the application does not make use of multi core so there is no
benefit. The application needs to be optimized to get maximum benefit.

I would imagine if it affects games it very well will affect other
applications

Bill


Not really. Games are a very specialized piece of software. They
essentially take over your machine and revert it to DOS

In 'normal' applications, I see a signficant improvement. For example,
printing a large document/image. It runs on one processor. I run on the
other.

Yes thats the multi tasking benefit of multi core which the OS will control.
It does not necessarily mean the app itself is using more than one core if
its not optimized for it. So the perceived improvement is better handling of
resources.

Anyway thats my understanding of it and I always read that apps need to be
optimized or written accordingly.

Dont know about games reverting to DOS since in the example I gave FS is a
full fledged windows game...And of course uses the current version of DOS,
XP and Vista
Bill

On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 05:02:08 +0000 (UTC), (David
Arnstein) wrote:

I am preparing to retire my Dell XPS after almost four years of
service. This old machine has a 3 GHz Pentium 3 single core CPU. A
nice chip, in its time.

Without paying a fortune, I see that the most advanced CPU I can get
is the Intel 2.4 GHz dual core. I am a bit concerned about the
reduction in clock speed. It is rather unpleasant to trade "up" to a
slower computer. I also don't expect a lot of benefit from the dual
core, because much of my work is single-threaded. I simply don't have
much software that is able to keep both cores working simultaneously.

I understand the party line that the new CPUs do more work per clock
cycle than the old CPUs. I understand the party line that the memory
systems in today's computers are better than those of three or four
years ago.

Still, I have this nagging doubt. What do you folks think? Is a new
XPS-710 with a 2.4 GHz dual core Intel CPU going to be faster than an
old 3 GHz Pentium?

Thanks in advance for your observations.


Do you want the short or long answer?
The short answer is YES.

The long answer is that it really depends on the application but
realistically as well as futuristically, it will be faster. I'm still
not explaining the details here but some other replies gave you a
clue. You might want to check out tomshardware.com (one of many)
sites that can educate you and show you various comparisons of chip
speeds.

Look at it this way, traditionally when you bought new pc's the pc's
always improved and now is NO different even if you don't understand
why. Or you can look at it this way... do you think a pc mfg could
survive in today's world selling pc's that are not as good as before?

So "basically" the answer is YES..... they are and will be faster.

Im Confused.. Arent there 2 main lines of two core Pentiums? The newest
Core 2 Duo, and the slightly older Dual Core Pentium D? Which one is this
thread about, since their both referred to in one way or another as dual
core processors?


RnR wrote in message ...
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 05:02:08 +0000 (UTC), (David
Arnstein) wrote:

I am preparing to retire my Dell XPS after almost four years of
service. This old machine has a 3 GHz Pentium 3 single core CPU. A
nice chip, in its time.

Without paying a fortune, I see that the most advanced CPU I can get
is the Intel 2.4 GHz dual core. I am a bit concerned about the
reduction in clock speed. It is rather unpleasant to trade "up" to a
slower computer. I also don't expect a lot of benefit from the dual
core, because much of my work is single-threaded. I simply don't have
much software that is able to keep both cores working simultaneously.

I understand the party line that the new CPUs do more work per clock
cycle than the old CPUs. I understand the party line that the memory
systems in today's computers are better than those of three or four
years ago.

Still, I have this nagging doubt. What do you folks think? Is a new
XPS-710 with a 2.4 GHz dual core Intel CPU going to be faster than an
old 3 GHz Pentium?

Thanks in advance for your observations.


Do you want the short or long answer?
The short answer is YES.

The long answer is that it really depends on the application but
realistically as well as futuristically, it will be faster. I'm still
not explaining the details here but some other replies gave you a
clue. You might want to check out tomshardware.com (one of many)
sites that can educate you and show you various comparisons of chip
speeds.

Look at it this way, traditionally when you bought new pc's the pc's
always improved and now is NO different even if you don't understand
why. Or you can look at it this way... do you think a pc mfg could
survive in today's world selling pc's that are not as good as before?

So "basically" the answer is YES..... they are and will be faster.

"boostm3" wrote in message
...
Im Confused.. Arent there 2 main lines of two core Pentiums? The newest
Core 2 Duo, and the slightly older Dual Core Pentium D? Which one is
this
thread about, since their both referred to in one way or another as dual
core processors?



Since the OP was talking about the current XPS 710, then he's likely
referring to the (current) Intel Core2Duo CPUs.

You can thank Intel (I have myself,many times) for creating the confusion by
naming the previous generation chip "Intel CoreDuo" (also known or referred
to as the Pentium D). The singles were referred to as "CoreSolo".

I won't even go back to the Intel "hyper-threading" virtual dual core
naming......

Stew

"S.Lewis" wrote in message
...

"boostm3" wrote in message
...
Im Confused.. Arent there 2 main lines of two core Pentiums? The newest
Core 2 Duo, and the slightly older Dual Core Pentium D? Which one is
this
thread about, since their both referred to in one way or another as dual
core processors?



Since the OP was talking about the current XPS 710, then he's likely
referring to the (current) Intel Core2Duo CPUs.

You can thank Intel (I have myself,many times) for creating the confusion
by naming the previous generation chip "Intel CoreDuo" (also known or
referred to as the Pentium D). The singles were referred to as "CoreSolo".

I won't even go back to the Intel "hyper-threading" virtual dual core
naming......

Stew




There are actually THREE lines and that's just for the desktops.

The P4D (original Dual cores)
Core Duo
Core 2 Duo

Each faster than the one before it.