Overclock.net banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
having 'upgraded' from an Athlon 64 3500+ (single core )<br><br>
to a new Pentium D Presler dual-core 3.4ghz, I was expecting the system to fly<br><br>
however, it is SLOWER on any single application, I expected that to be about the same speed , as Athlon was rated at 3500, and Intel is 3400mhz.<br><br>
the system loads in data noticably slower, there is definately a lag to doing everything, that wasnt there with the Amd<br><br>
the Intel IS better, at multi tasking, as I expected, BUT remember, that all this talk of multi tasking, no one seems to mention, that data being read of the hard disk, can only be read so fast<br><br>
IE hard drives dont read any faster, so thats the bottle neck<br><br>
most of the time when I multi task, I open up a browser, copy and paste some text, or photos, open up word, or psp, etc etc I open up what I need at the time<br><br>
THIS IS NO FASTER with the dual core system<br><br>
sure, once the apps are loaded, than the system does run smoother in multi tasking, but its smoother and slower per individual app......<br><br>
the one area where I notice an improvement, is on video encoding, seems about 50% faster than the AMD, so a big plus in this area.........<br><br>
my point is really, if you have an existing AMD 64 system, and fancy more power, get a x2 64 chip...............thats what I wish I had done now.............<br><br>
went through a lot of hassle changing board etc, for a system that boots slower, runs slower, but multi tasks faster ( once apps are loaded in )<br><br>
I went for the Intel, due to great spec of the chip and price was good<br><br>
the x2 amd was more expensive, but I think it would have been the better choice by far<br><br>
just thought anyone with AMD 64 should know !!<br><br>
BOOGS
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,036 Posts
Dual Core is only beneficial when you run multiple programs at the same time, if you have apps or games that utilise dual core you will see great performance over a single core cpu.<br><br>
Ppl get misled by dual core technology thinking that say a AMD64 x2 3800 will perform twice as fast as a single core 3800+, this is very incorrect. As in the case of x2 3800+ it uses inferior cores (much slower individually) when compared to a true single core cpu. Hence why for the most part single core is still the most popular choice amongst gaming enthusiats who want the best frame rates possible. Although this will change very soon when games will start to take advantage of dual core technology.<br><br>
Although imo, if anyone wishes to buy a Dual Core cpu get a Core 2 Duo over the AMD64 X2 platform. They are vastly superior in every way. Although i shall be upgrading to a Core 2 Quadro (Kentsfield) as soon as my system becomes too slow. (which i can't see happening for some time)
 

·
 
Joined
·
29,532 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Mhill2029</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Dual Core is only beneficial when you run multiple programs at the same time, if you have apps or games that utilise dual core you will see great performance over a single core cpu.<br><br>
Ppl get misled by dual core technology thinking that say a AMD64 x2 3800 will perform twice as fast as a single core 3800+, this is very incorrect. As in the case of x2 3800+ it uses inferior cores (much slower individually) when compared to a true single core cpu. Hence why for the most part single core is still the most popular choice amongst gaming enthusiats who want the best frame rates possible. Although this will change very soon when games will start to take advantage of dual core technology.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
This is very true. People think that 2x 3.2 GHz cores means 6.4 GHz. (Go figure, eBay)
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
64,287 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>gonX</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">This is very true. People think that 2x 3.2 GHz cores means 6.4 GHz. (Go figure, eBay)</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Yes i come across that alot its untrue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
This is great information. Thanks for writing this up.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top