Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Confirmed: Pentium D 900 @ 4GHz beats FX60
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Confirmed: Pentium D 900 @ 4GHz beats FX60 - Page 5

post #41 of 71
A bit off topic, But, will a 9XX intel @ around 3-3.5 ghz be ready for vista, and be able to handle all of it whilst multitasking? Sorry for the off topic, just wondering.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opty 165 CCBWE 0551UPMW MSI K8N NEO4 Platinum/SLI x1900 (545/828) 2GB (2 x 1GB) Corsair 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250/160 gig WD/320 gig seagate 'cuda perp. write Pioneer DVD burner (Dual Layer) XP sp.2 / vista dual boot Samsung 19" 931BW LCD. 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Eclipse 2 Antec True 550watt 36 amp Chenming 901B (Black) Logitech MX518 
Mouse Pad
ain no thing but a chikkin wing 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opty 165 CCBWE 0551UPMW MSI K8N NEO4 Platinum/SLI x1900 (545/828) 2GB (2 x 1GB) Corsair 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250/160 gig WD/320 gig seagate 'cuda perp. write Pioneer DVD burner (Dual Layer) XP sp.2 / vista dual boot Samsung 19" 931BW LCD. 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Eclipse 2 Antec True 550watt 36 amp Chenming 901B (Black) Logitech MX518 
Mouse Pad
ain no thing but a chikkin wing 
  hide details  
Reply
post #42 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Higgins
I think its so funny that, no matter what the benchmarks say, Intel people always say that their super beefed up Inte system beats an average Joes AMD system. And of course if you OC a Pentium D 1.4ghz its probably going to beat a stock AMD CPU. furthermore, why do you compare Intel and AMD CPUs using a Intel favoring Program???

Intel has a new CEO, and hes droping the P4 totally in the nest year or so. and hes pushing new CPUs, such as ViiV, which will probebly suck too.
Thats what I was saying

And as far as the person flaming him about his spelling, last time I checked this wasn't an English class.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4430 MSI H81M-P33 MSI GTX960 2x4GB GSKILL DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse
Samsung EVO 850 256GB Win 10 EVGA 500B Zowie EC2-A 
Mouse PadAudioOther
Zowie GSR SHP 9500S + FIO E10K ASUS VG248QE Black 24" 144Hz 1ms  
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4430 MSI H81M-P33 MSI GTX960 2x4GB GSKILL DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse
Samsung EVO 850 256GB Win 10 EVGA 500B Zowie EC2-A 
Mouse PadAudioOther
Zowie GSR SHP 9500S + FIO E10K ASUS VG248QE Black 24" 144Hz 1ms  
  hide details  
Reply
post #43 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remonster
LOL! pauldovi Im not surprised, though I did hope this wouldn't happen. I have said this a few times already but, all I did was prove that an overclocked 930 beats a stock FX60, the only reason this matters is because I have seen replies in threads stating this which were then met with general skepticizm so I decided to come back with proof, albeit not really fair, that it is possible. So everyone please leave this thread and forget it exists
O_o.. Ok. Heres this then.. Find some benchmarks from a reliable source proving it.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon 3600+ X2 Biostar Tforce 550 BFG 7600GT OC Corsair XMS DDR675 2x1024 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 160GB + WD 80GB SATA Windows XP Pro Compaq MV720 Logitech 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
FSP FX600-GLN Aspire X-Cruiser Black Razer Copperhead Tempest Ratzpad GS 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon 3600+ X2 Biostar Tforce 550 BFG 7600GT OC Corsair XMS DDR675 2x1024 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 160GB + WD 80GB SATA Windows XP Pro Compaq MV720 Logitech 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
FSP FX600-GLN Aspire X-Cruiser Black Razer Copperhead Tempest Ratzpad GS 
  hide details  
Reply
post #44 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jori
O_o.. Ok. Heres this then.. Find some benchmarks from a reliable source proving it.
A benchmark from a oc.net user like Remonster is a lot more trustworthy to me than some website who can tarnish the scores easily. Good luck trying to find any benchmarks from an official site comparing a 930 overclocked a full 1ghz to 4ghz against a stock FX-60. When review sites overclock CPUs and GPUs, they just increase them by a minimal ammount, not 1000mhz.
Main Gaming Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.8ghz Asus P8P67 Deluxe Sapphire 7970 1200/1600 8GB GSKILL SNIPER 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
128GB OCZ Vertex 4 LG 24X SATA Windows 7 Pro x64 Dell 22/24/22 LCDs 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G110 Toughpower 1000watt 108A Corsair 800D Logitech G700 
Mouse PadAudio
SteelSeries QCK+ XFI XtremeMusic 
  hide details  
Reply
Main Gaming Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.8ghz Asus P8P67 Deluxe Sapphire 7970 1200/1600 8GB GSKILL SNIPER 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
128GB OCZ Vertex 4 LG 24X SATA Windows 7 Pro x64 Dell 22/24/22 LCDs 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G110 Toughpower 1000watt 108A Corsair 800D Logitech G700 
Mouse PadAudio
SteelSeries QCK+ XFI XtremeMusic 
  hide details  
Reply
post #45 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigval
A benchmark from a Overclock.net user like Remonster is a lot more trustworthy to me than some website who can tarnish the scores easily. Good luck trying to find any benchmarks from an official site comparing a 930 overclocked a full 1ghz to 4ghz against a stock FX-60. When review sites overclock CPUs and GPUs, they just increase them by a minimal ammount, not 1000mhz.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/01/...ult/page7.html

Have fun reading through.. Wins some, loses some..
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon 3600+ X2 Biostar Tforce 550 BFG 7600GT OC Corsair XMS DDR675 2x1024 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 160GB + WD 80GB SATA Windows XP Pro Compaq MV720 Logitech 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
FSP FX600-GLN Aspire X-Cruiser Black Razer Copperhead Tempest Ratzpad GS 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon 3600+ X2 Biostar Tforce 550 BFG 7600GT OC Corsair XMS DDR675 2x1024 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD 160GB + WD 80GB SATA Windows XP Pro Compaq MV720 Logitech 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
FSP FX600-GLN Aspire X-Cruiser Black Razer Copperhead Tempest Ratzpad GS 
  hide details  
Reply
post #46 of 71
lalwz

In3l pwnz0rz t3h Amd

and th3r35 n0 pr00f t@t Amd is g00d.



Cyrix pwns Intel+AMd
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardOSMonitor
Intel 3.4ghz prescott asus p4p800-e deluxe windows prof. Sony sdm-hs75 17" lcd 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
logitech wireless 480w Antec neo Antec p-180 logitech wireless 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardOSMonitor
Intel 3.4ghz prescott asus p4p800-e deluxe windows prof. Sony sdm-hs75 17" lcd 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
logitech wireless 480w Antec neo Antec p-180 logitech wireless 
  hide details  
Reply
post #47 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by =Sprint=
lalwz

In3l pwnz0rz t3h Amd

and th3r35 n0 pr00f t@t Amd is g00d.



Cyrix pwns Intel+AMd
Cyrix? Dinosaurs died a long time ago

I think the 900 could be the next 2.4 prescott, I may just have to pick one of these up someday. 4 megs of l2 cache = t3h w1n
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opty 165 CCBWE 0551UPMW MSI K8N NEO4 Platinum/SLI x1900 (545/828) 2GB (2 x 1GB) Corsair 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250/160 gig WD/320 gig seagate 'cuda perp. write Pioneer DVD burner (Dual Layer) XP sp.2 / vista dual boot Samsung 19" 931BW LCD. 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Eclipse 2 Antec True 550watt 36 amp Chenming 901B (Black) Logitech MX518 
Mouse Pad
ain no thing but a chikkin wing 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opty 165 CCBWE 0551UPMW MSI K8N NEO4 Platinum/SLI x1900 (545/828) 2GB (2 x 1GB) Corsair 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250/160 gig WD/320 gig seagate 'cuda perp. write Pioneer DVD burner (Dual Layer) XP sp.2 / vista dual boot Samsung 19" 931BW LCD. 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Eclipse 2 Antec True 550watt 36 amp Chenming 901B (Black) Logitech MX518 
Mouse Pad
ain no thing but a chikkin wing 
  hide details  
Reply
post #48 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by r3tard
Cyrix? Dinosaurs died a long time ago

I think the 900 could be the next 2.4 prescott, I may just have to pick one of these up someday. 4 megs of l2 cache = t3h w1n
9xx FTW!
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardOSMonitor
Intel 3.4ghz prescott asus p4p800-e deluxe windows prof. Sony sdm-hs75 17" lcd 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
logitech wireless 480w Antec neo Antec p-180 logitech wireless 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardOSMonitor
Intel 3.4ghz prescott asus p4p800-e deluxe windows prof. Sony sdm-hs75 17" lcd 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
logitech wireless 480w Antec neo Antec p-180 logitech wireless 
  hide details  
Reply
post #49 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jori
O_o.. Ok. Heres this then.. Find some benchmarks from a reliable source proving it.
I have repeatedly posted the review by overclock Australia, and the last time I checked, they were not on Intel's payroll .... Maybe you guys should acually take the time to read it!

But, that is probably to much to ask, so I will post the results:

Quote:
The idea for our overclocking tests was to apply “regular” conditions and look for results that are achievable for every user with high-end air-cooling. Instead of the generic Intel and AMD cooling devices we used Thermaltake’s acclaimed “Big Typhoon” heatpipe based cooler together with a powerful 120mm fan with more than 100 CFM. It goes without saying that all processors would achieve higher frequencies with water or phase-change cooling.
Quote:
Overclocking “stability” was defined as successfully completing all application and gaming benchmarks at least 3 times and running 24 hours with 100% processors load on both cores. We used Stanford’s Folding at Home client for the 24-hour stability test. Crashing, freezing, or “Early Unit Ends” (miscalculations) during the 24-hour run were regarded as test failure.
STOCK BENCHMARKING RESULTS:

(Note, I cannot post all the benchmark results as the pictures do not have independent URLs, go here to view them.)

Quote:
AMD's purpose in releasing the FX-60 shortly after Intel launched the 955 Extreme Edition was apparently to make sure that the dual core speed crown remains with AMD. And there is no doubt that AMD succeeded in this. In all our gaming benchmarks, and almost all application based benchmarks, the FX-60 is faster. The relative position however has changed: while the 840 XE could not beat the FX-57 in any benchmark, the 955 XE has moved much closer, and is actually faster in a few applications. The situation for the 920 looks a bit different: The X2 3800+ is faster in all our gaming benchmarks, but the difference to the new Pentium D has become rather small, much smaller than before between 3800+ and 820. The biggest difference we found was around 10% in battlefield. In “Call of Duty 2” and “F.E.A.R” the difference with a resolution of 1280x1024 and high quality video settings was almost zero. Running games at lower resolutions would show for CPU-bound games a wider gap between an X2 and a “Presler” system, but we do not think that anybody is playing the contemporary 3D games we were running at below a resolution of 1024x768. The situation in productivity benchmarks looks like a tie with as slight advantage for the 3800+: It performed better in Cinebench, LAME MP3, and Business Winstone. The 920 did better in “DVD Shrink” and in Photoshop CS2. In the remaining 3 benchmarks both processors are performing more or less identical. All in all: The 3800+ remains faster in gaming, albeit with a reduced lead, otherwise it’s a close call between these 2 processors.
OVERCLOCKING:
(Results of benchmarks found here)

Quote:
Both 920 were stable running with air-cooling above 4.0 GHz. One 920 sample was stable at 14 x 290 MHz = 4066 MHz, the other one at 4036 MHz. That is around 45% above the 920 default frequency. The memory was running at 1:1 with timings of 3-3-3-8.
Quote:
The 955 Extreme Edition comes like the FX-60 with an unlocked multiplier. It's good that AMD and Intel understand that if you spend that much money for a processor, you should have some additional “benefits”. Upping the multiplier can sometimes be helpful to bypassing overclocking bottlenecks because it allows running the FSB with lower frequencies which is reducing stress for system and peripherals. The 955 XE is by default clocked at 13 x 266 MHz = 3460 MHz. We found that the 955 XE sample was overclocking best with a 14x multiplier. It did boot into XP at 14 x 342 MHz = 4800 MHz, and was stable at 14 x 312 MHz = 4.37 GHz. Increasing the chipset voltage gave us with both motherboards (Intel 975XBX and Asus P5WD2-E) better stability, increasing the front- side-bus voltage did not have any impact. We also found that that increasing the core voltage above around 1.40 volt did not have any further positive impact.
Quote:
It is obvious, not only by our results but many other user reports, that “Presler” has huge overclocking potential. One report shows a phase-change cooled Pentium D 920 booting into Windows XP at well above 5.0 GHz. Benchmarking a phase-change cooled 920 seems to be possible between 4.7 and 4.8 GHz. Other reports show phase-change cooled 955 XE samples benchmarked at 5.6 GHz. It seems that even better results are achievable with “Cedar Mill”. OCAU members are reporting to have aircooled samples benchmarking-stable running 60% above default frequency. It is clear that the change to 65nm has given the Pentium 4 a new lease on life - until it will be replaced at the end of 2006. The enormous upward frequency potential gained with the change to 65nm looks also very promising in regard of “Conroe” and “Merom” to be released later this year.

The FX-60 is clocked by default at 13 x 200 MHz = 2.60 GHz. Like all other FX products it comes with an unlocked multiplier. We tried various variations of multiplier and FSB/HTT frequencies. At the end we settled for 14 x 207 MHz = 2.90 GHz with the core voltage set to 1.45 volt. Anything higher than that would result in a lack of stability during our 24-hour endurance test. The fact that even with additional voltage “only” around 300 MHz are possible indicates that the AMD’s Toledo core is pretty much maxed out with 90nm technology. The X2 3800+ has become for many enthusiasts the dual core processor of choice because it offers plenty of overclocking headroom and comes for an attractive price. Like all X2 processors its multiplier is locked. The X2 3800+ was stable running the 24-hour FAH test with up to 10 x 256 MHz = 2560 MHz.
Quote:
All benchmarks at default frequencies were repeated with the overclocked Intel and AMD systems. The 955 XE and in particular the 920 provide a very substantial performance gain when running up to 45% above default frequency. The impact is not linear and not identical for all applications and games though. The 920 for example is gaining almost 35% in Battlefield, but only 25% in Quake. The rendering time in Photoshop CS2 improved 27%, the compression time with WinRAR by around 20%. Knowing already that both the 920 and 955 XE had better relative overclocking headroom than the X2 3800+ and in particular the FX-60, it did not come as a surprise that the performance ranking between these CPU looked different from the results we had obtained at default frequencies. The 955 XE clocked at 4360 MHz was faster than the FX-60 clocked at 2900 MHz in 6 out of 7 application benchmarks. Only encoding with LAME was done faster with the FX-60. In gaming the overclocked 955 XE was faster in “Call of Duty 2” and Battlefield, and neck-to-neck in Quake 4 and F.E.A.R. The comparison between the overclocked 920 and X2 3800+ looks similar: The 920 running at 4066 MHz was beating the X2 3800+ clocked at 2560 MHz in 6 out of 7 applications, and 2 out of 4 games.

Quote:
We have to emphasize here that “beating” does not mean that the difference would be actually noticeable for the user. In fact, in none of the tests with the overclocked systems did we “feel” or “see” any difference. We think that it would take at least a 20% lead to produce a noticeable difference for the user.
RESULTS:

Quote:
The move to 65nm production technology is all good news for Intel. “Presler” and “Cedar Mill” were immediately retailing after the launch announcement. This is indicating that high-yielding dies in large quantity were available right from production start - something which is not always a given, considering how many “paper” launches we have seen from both Intel and AMD in recent years. Performance is up, and heat slightly reduced. Commercially the move to 65nm is beneficial for Intel as more dies can be produced from one wafer. Presler’s high overclocking potential indicates that 65nm technology will allow Intel to ramp up core frequency even further, be it for the existing 9xx series or later for “Conroe”. Unlike the move from 130nm to 90 nm 2 years ago, this time Intel got it right.

On the other hand: Despite all improvements the Pentium D cannot beat the dual core competition from AMD. Intel could narrow the gap, but for the time being AMD’s FX-60 remains the fastest dual core desktop processor. AMD will introduce a new platform with DDR2 support and a new socket in June 2006. The M2 platform will make the current Toledo based FX-60 somewhat obsolete, as it cannot run on the upcoming, faster motherboards. It’s questionable that someone will spend more than 1,000 US$ or 1,500 AUS$ for a processor he cannot run on a soon to be released faster platform. Not less important for the FX-60 and 955 XE target group of PC “enthusiasts” is that the “Toledo” based FX-60 core seems to be largely maxed out. The 955EE has far higher overclocking potential. At the maximum stable frequency of 4.360 GHz we achieved with air-cooling, it was besting a FX-60 at 2.90 GHz in most benchmarks. For dual core entry-level products we see the situation like this: The X2 3800+ runs faster in gaming than a Pentium D 920. In applications both processors run neck-to-neck with a slight advantage for the 3800+. On the other hand a Pentium D 920 is between 15% and 20% cheaper and overclocks clearly better: We achieved with air-cooling a 45% frequency increase and believe that 40% (or around 3900 MHz) are achievable with almost every air-cooled 920. Overclocked to its maximum stable frequency we found the 920 outrunning a maxed out X2 3800+ in almost all benchmarks.
To sum it up: The general battle order between Intel and AMD has not changed with the introduction of the 9xx series, but Intel’s single and dual core desktop products have improved their relative position quite a lot to their advantage.
Quote:
For the time being we recommend a buyer considering an entry level dual core processor to have a good look at Intel’s Pentium D 920.



There is your legit review of the AMD and Intel dual core system, which in my opinion is the best around. Thankyou OCAU for the excellent review!

Now after you read that, think logically about it, and forget about for favorite processor brand, please feal free to discuss the dual core battle between AMD and Intel. Please also note that Intel is price cutting the Presler line on April 24, and on April 30th, they are introducing the Pentium D 960 (3.6Ghz). They are also moving to the C-1 core, which will make the Preslers more power efficient. You can read up on that here.

Now please show those reviews that demostrate AMD crown?
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #50 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jori
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/01/...ult/page7.html

Have fun reading through.. Wins some, loses some..
The results in that review are strange? An stock 840 beats an OCed 955EE? And they never overclock the Intel 920? In that "review" all AMD cpus are overclocked, yet only some of the Intel ones are?
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Confirmed: Pentium D 900 @ 4GHz beats FX60