Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › GHZ dont matter no more?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

GHZ dont matter no more? - Page 3

post #21 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nasgul
I think you missed part of my point:
The W-H-O-L-E architecture. Some have have 256KB, 512KB, 1MB and 2MB. Some have HT some don't HT, some have 533mhz fsb and some have 800mhz fsb.

As for the 3.0ghz Celeron D? Of course it's going to be faster than the 2.4ghz P4, why? because the Celeron D will be on a 533mhz fsb just like the 2.4ghz and the 2.4ghz does not have 4x the L2 cache that the D is. The P4 2.4ghz only comes with a 512KB and the Celron D 3.06ghz comes with 256KB. So the extra 606mhz would make the difference in performance not the cache.

Also remember that a 560 is not faster than a 660 despite double the ammount of L2 cache. The 6 series are better in terms of heat and 64-bit, other than that, it's the same.
The architecture is exactly the same on all Pentium 4 and Celeron models. Changing the L2 cache or FSB does not change the architecture. The Celeron WILL not beat the 2.4Ghz P4. And a 660 will slightly edge the 560 in many programs, but not all.
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 #22 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nasgul
Also remember that a 560 is not faster than a 660 despite double the ammount of L2 cache. The 6 series are better in terms of heat and 64-bit, other than that, it's the same.
I beg to differ. The second 1MB Level 2 Cache of the 6xx vs. the single 1MB level 2 Cache of the 5xx series in a comparative analysis on canned benchmarks (that do not make use of even the full single 1MB level 2 cache) will not show a difference.

However, if one were to load an (for example and there are many examples of this) 150MB Oracle database and perform a filter once loaded there would be a marked improvement of the 6xx series over the 5xx series processor.

When performing graphics manipulation i.e. rendering of newly created textural graphics there would be a marked difference as well.

In Sisoft Sandra's benchmarks there would be No difference. In PCMark there would be little difference etc... This is why canned benchmarks do NOT show the reality of the outside world’s computer work and why in point of fact; a stopwatch and real life programs will always show a more complete reality.

Edit: Typo errors.

R
Roped In
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k P8P67 Pro Rev (3.1) @ B3 XFX Radeon HD 6950 XXX 16GB G.SKILL Ripjaws 9-11-9-28 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 X Callisto Deluxe 25nm 60GB Plextor PX-B910SA 4x Blu-ray DVD-RW Win7 64 2 x Samsung 275T+ 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Corsair HX10000 Antec 1200 Logitech G7 
Mouse Pad
Splatter Game Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
Roped In
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k P8P67 Pro Rev (3.1) @ B3 XFX Radeon HD 6950 XXX 16GB G.SKILL Ripjaws 9-11-9-28 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 X Callisto Deluxe 25nm 60GB Plextor PX-B910SA 4x Blu-ray DVD-RW Win7 64 2 x Samsung 275T+ 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Corsair HX10000 Antec 1200 Logitech G7 
Mouse Pad
Splatter Game Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi
The architecture is exactly the same on all Pentium 4 and Celeron models. Changing the L2 cache or FSB does not change the architecture. The Celeron WILL not beat the 2.4Ghz P4. And a 660 will slightly edge the 560 in many programs, but not all.
So basically you think that the P4 @ 2.4ghz with a 533fsb and 512KB cache will be faster than a Celeron D @ 3.06ghz with a 533fsb and 256KB of L2 Cache?

That way of thinking is like saying that a 630 will be faster than a 560. Just because it has an extra 1MB of L2 cache.

The Celeron D with the advantage of 600mhz will be faster than the 2.4ghz, just like the 561 will be faster than the 630, megahertz wise and both CPU running on the same front-side-bus, the one with the highest mhz will be faster despite double the cache in the one with the lowest speed.

If you had said a 2.8ghz P4 against a Celron 3.2ghz, then maybe there would've been a difference but in the case of the Celeron D @ 3.06ghz against a P4 @ 2.4ghz and both with the same FSB, no the Celeron D will be faster, the extra 256KB of L2 cache will not make the difference for the extra 606mhz difference.

If you still don't want to belive that the mhz count, check this 805 @ 3.7ghz faster than an 840.....advantage? 500mhz: SEE LINK. ah! Disadvantage of 1MB of L2 cache for the 805.
post #24 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nasgul
So basically you think that the P4 @ 2.4ghz with a 533fsb and 512KB cache will be faster than a Celeron D @ 3.06ghz with a 533fsb and 256KB of L2 Cache?

That way of thinking is like saying that a 630 will be faster than a 560. Just because it has an extra 1MB of L2 cache.

The Celeron D with the advantage of 600mhz will be faster than the 2.4ghz, just like the 561 will be faster than the 630, megahertz wise and both CPU running on the same front-side-bus, the one with the highest mhz will be faster despite double the cache in the one with the lowest speed.

If you had said a 2.8ghz P4 against a Celron 3.2ghz, then maybe there would've been a difference but in the case of the Celeron D @ 3.06ghz against a P4 @ 2.4ghz and both with the same FSB, no the Celeron D will be faster, the extra 256KB of L2 cache will not make the difference for the extra 606mhz difference.

If you still don't want to belive that the mhz count, check this 805 @ 3.7ghz faster than an 840.....advantage? 500mhz: SEE LINK. ah! Disadvantage of 1MB of L2 cache for the 805.
It is called the Law of Dimminishing Returns. Going from 256k to 512k represents far greater gains than going from 1Mb to 2Mb. Also, like Ropey said, not all benchmarks fully utalize the 1Mb in a 5XX processor, which would further make the 2mb less significant. But the extra L2 in the P4 over the celeron is benificial.

And the Pentium D 805 has the same amount of L2 as a 840. The only difference between the two processors is the FSB and the Core frequency.
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 › GHZ dont matter no more?