If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
intel cpu's
Hi Group,
Have just aquuired an intel motherboard (Intel D975XBX 304 Core 2 Duo Quad Extreme Motherboard) and I am now looking for a suitable cpu. Looking through the intel site I find a stack of suitable cpu's, so I am now trying to wade through the list and sort out what is available and at what price. However my problem is: How do I decide from the stack of info which is the better processor at the price. Has anyone a guide list that they may share. Thanks in advance to all those that take the time to reply newbie |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
intel cpu's
medico wrote:
Hi Group, Have just aquuired an intel motherboard (Intel D975XBX 304 Core 2 Duo Quad Extreme Motherboard) and I am now looking for a suitable cpu. Looking through the intel site I find a stack of suitable cpu's, so I am now trying to wade through the list and sort out what is available and at what price. However my problem is: How do I decide from the stack of info which is the better processor at the price. Has anyone a guide list that they may share. Thanks in advance to all those that take the time to reply newbie I can make it simple for you. To a first order approximation, the value is proportional to the core clock speed, times the number of cores present. (Assuming the architecture of the things being compared, is the same. No cheating, by comparing a Pentium4 netburst processor, to a Core2 for example.) For example, if you had a quad 2.4GHz Core2 and a dual 3GHz Core2, the first one is worth "9.6 units", and the second "6 units". If you are interested in overclocking, or view overclocking as part of the value equation, then various people on these groups will suggest things they've found to be good value. In that case, it would be a matter of how far a particular processor overclocks, versus its purchase price. So overclocking versus not overclocking, is an important factor in the decision of what to buy. Overclocking starts with "value processors", preferably with a lower FSB, and overclocking them to higher speeds. As an example, a thing like this would have headroom. It is a Core2 processor in 45nm technology, FSB1066 leaves room for overclocking (potential limit these days is about FSB2000 with the right motherboard). So this might be something an overclocker would buy - cheap, with plenty of potential. I don't keep track of the latest and greatest of these (I'd only get interested, on the purchase day). This would be a snap, to run at 3GHz core speed, when an E8400 costs more. E7200 Wolfdale 2.53GHz/FSB1066/3MB L2 Cache $131 http://processorfinder.intel.com/det...px?sSpec=SLAVN The first review I see here, mentioned it ran at 3.8GHz. So the purchaser got a lot more than he might have got with an E8500. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115052 To use multiple cores, requires a discussion of multithreading or multitasking. To use four cores simultaneously, to 100% loading on each, requires software which is multithreaded, and spreads the load well on each thread. Some games are multithreaded, but one core ends up with most of the computing load, leaving the others at perhaps 30% or so. The gains of using a quad in that case, are not as clear or apparent. (In this case, we're running a single gaming program, and trying to get the best from our new processor.) There is also task level parallelism. For example, doing a DVDShrink, a batch of POVRAY work, editing a Microsoft Word document, and playing a CD, might use one core each. So a person who multitasks, and runs batch oriented computing tasks, will get some benefit from multiple cores. But it is pretty hard for a human to keep the thing fed. Some multimedia applications can chop up a problem, into chunks, and do a chunk on each core. Photoshop has some filters that are multithreaded, so those filters will run faster on a quad. But the other filters are single threaded, so it really depends on which filters you use the most, as to whether it is better to get a quad core or not. Multimedia programs like Photoshop, have better odds of loading the cores equally, for better overall utilization (more of those "9.6 units" get used). (It is actually pretty hard to get useful information about program design, and which programs work well on current processors. I consider this a failing of the companies writing the software.) So that is quick summary of considerations. You can also use things like the Tomshardware benchmarks, but the benchmarks are skewed towards multithreaded tasks, and can be deceptive. It requires an experienced eye, to make the best use of the Tomshardware charts - putting this another way, there is plenty of room for improvements in the benchmarks chosen. The charts would be better, if they were prepared from a potential user's point of view, and not a site sponsor. And that is why I wrote the above, because while I could have just given this link, it would leave the wrong impressions. (The iTunes benchmark, is, as far as I know, the only single threaded benchmark on the charts. A lot of the software you currently own, will be single threaded, and iTunes might actually be a better predictor of how it works for you, than some of the other benchmarks.) http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/p...max-9,369.html If you're primarily a "multimedia guy", then the quad is more of a winner for you than a dual. For a lot of ordinary tasks, a faster dual might be the right answer. Overclocking a quad, to the speed of that faster dual, covers both possibilities. Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
intel cpu's
"medico" wrote...
Have just aquuired an intel motherboard (Intel D975XBX 304 Core 2 Duo Quad Extreme Motherboard) and I am now looking for a suitable cpu. Looking through the intel site I find a stack of suitable cpu's, so I am now trying to wade through the list and sort out what is available and at what price. However my problem is: How do I decide from the stack of info which is the better processor at the price. Has anyone a guide list that they may share. The Q6600 is seen as a good price/performance value. If you favor clock speed over core count, the E6850 is available at about the same price. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
intel cpu's
On Jun 16, 4:50*am, medico wrote:
Hi Group, Have just aquuired an intel motherboard (Intel D975XBX 304 Core 2 Duo Quad Extreme Motherboard) and I am now looking for a suitable cpu. Looking through the intel site I find a stack of suitable cpu's, so I am now trying to wade through the list and sort out what is available and at what price. However my problem is: How do I decide from the stack of info which is the better processor at the price. Has anyone a guide list that they may share. Thanks in advance to all those that take the time to reply newbie I can tell you that if you want to spend your money wisely, pickup the E6420 and overclock it on stock air to 3ghz and you'll be fine. That's what I have now, but I don't overclock it as I don't need to. And I've used it for Photoshop/Lightroom as well as gaming (though not Crysis maxed out never played that one but LOTRO ultra high settings yes) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AW9D-Max and Intel Quad Core CPU's? | S. Smith | Intel | 0 | November 15th 07 10:31 PM |
New Intel CPU's | Keith | Dell Computers | 1 | August 12th 07 11:25 AM |
New CPU's from Intel? | ***** charles | Intel | 14 | June 15th 06 10:59 PM |
Why Intel CPU's not good for PC Games | AMD_CPU-ROCK | Dell Computers | 4 | December 7th 05 03:35 PM |
ASUS P4P800 and Intel Willamette CPU's , will do ? | Frankie | Asus Motherboards | 1 | February 8th 04 08:48 PM |