Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Is This Processor So Cheap?!  
User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2229 times:

This processor is a 3.4Ghz dual core and its costing £ 105, there are other's on this site for £ 150 with 2.4Ghz


There must be a catch somewhere but what is it and do I need it ?

INTEL 3.4GHZ - £ 100

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx...=1&cl=4294963687&InMerch=1#reviews

I am aware that its in the clearance zone but its not used.

INTEL 2.4GHZ - £ 150

http://www.ebuyer.com/UK/product/112706/rb/27658155468

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePortcolumbus From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1614 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2209 times:

Core 2 Duo > Pentium D

The Core 2 Duo may have lower clock speeds, but it will still outperform the Pentium D by a mile.


User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2197 times:

In what ways?
The Cache ?


User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3948 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2182 times:

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Reply 2):
In what ways?
The Cache ?

The Pentium D is based on the (failed) netbust technology - it simply does not scale well and has a huge long pipeline (31 parts in the last netburst core verses ~10 for other processors) which makes both branch prediction and utilisation a nightmare. Thus its slower than its contemporaries, even at higher clock speeds.

Spend the extra on an AMD or a Core2Duo - but wait until end of June to buy if you are buying a Core2Duo system....


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21470 posts, RR: 53
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2136 times:

The Pentium D is one of the least efficient and most power-hungry CPUs out there. Up-front acquisition is the only thing that's cheap about it.

As Moo already explained, it's one of the last remnants of the Pentium 4 architecture which Intel has retired by now. They only fill a niche in the channel at the lower end to keep AMD under price pressure even below the new Core 2 CPUs.

Clock frequencies are indeed deceiving here. The current Core 2 is much faster and still consumes much less power than the old Pentium 4 at the same clock speed. Cache, pipeline and execution unit layout are some of the reasons for that.

Pentium D - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Intel Core 2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2085 times:

Quoting Moo (Reply 3):
but wait until end of June to buy if you are buying a Core2Duo system

Why? I only have around no more than £ 170 to spend


User currently offlineKaiGywer From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 12251 posts, RR: 35
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2030 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
The Pentium D is one of the least efficient and most power-hungry CPUs out there. Up-front acquisition is the only thing that's cheap about it.

As Moo already explained, it's one of the last remnants of the Pentium 4 architecture which Intel has retired by now. They only fill a niche in the channel at the lower end to keep AMD under price pressure even below the new Core 2 CPUs.

Clock frequencies are indeed deceiving here. The current Core 2 is much faster and still consumes much less power than the old Pentium 4 at the same clock speed. Cache, pipeline and execution unit layout are some of the reasons for that.

Pentium D - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Intel Core 2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did I just see a post from Klaus that didn't mention either Apple or Mac? The world is coming to an end... Big grin



911, where is your emergency?
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21470 posts, RR: 53
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1997 times:

Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 6):
Did I just see a post from Klaus that didn't mention either Apple or Mac? The world is coming to an end... 

It seems someone's got an unhealthy fixation, and it's not me.  mischievous 


User currently offlineRichPhitzwell From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1991 times:

Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 6):
Did I just see a post from Klaus that didn't mention either Apple or Mac

Because Mac is now Intel based Big grin


User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 43
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1989 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
The Pentium D is one of the least efficient and most power-hungry CPUs out there.

I can definitely confirm that... unfortunately I have a PC with a Pentium 550 (single core 3.4 GHz, NetBurst) and the thing it's best at is heating my room. That CPU has a Thermal Design Power, which is the amount of heat that it produces, of 115W.  sarcastic 



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineRichPhitzwell From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1980 times:

Has anybody compared the AMD equivalent yet? I have a Turion 64 x 2, and overall I'm happy with it, but I have never set up a side by side comparison.

As for Pentium 4 and D, they are incredibly slow compared to my Turion. Proving that clock speed is not everything.


User currently offlineAC773 From Canada, joined Nov 2005, 1730 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1976 times:

Quoting Aloges (Reply 9):
I can definitely confirm that... unfortunately I have a PC with a Pentium 550 (single core 3.4 GHz, NetBurst) and the thing it's best at is heating my room. That CPU has a Thermal Design Power, which is the amount of heat that it produces, of 115W.

That reminds me...

Klaus (or anybody, really) - what's the prevalence that you know of of Speedstep-like technologies in desktop processors? You know, something that throttles down the clock speed when more power isn't needed.

The reason I ask is because I run an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ processor that's a special energy-efficient version. It's rated at 65w and has the aforementioned throttling technology. Is this a standard feature set on some desktop CPUs or just relegated to certain versions?

(If this post has substandard spelling or grammar, it's because I typed it on a G4 PowerBook, which has probably one of the most vague keyboards I've ever used. Grrrr!)  biggrin 



Better to be nouveau than never to have been riche at all.
User currently offlineKaiGywer From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 12251 posts, RR: 35
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1922 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Dell has some good sales going again.

What can be said about the AMD Turion and Sempron?



911, where is your emergency?
User currently offlineORFflyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 6):
The world is coming to an end...

Not yet - you're still posting....  biggrin 


User currently offlineAC773 From Canada, joined Nov 2005, 1730 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1912 times:

Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 12):
What can be said about the AMD Turion and Sempron?

They're not bad for the money (Sempron def. beats Celeron, which is still based on NetBurst). Anecdotally, the Pentium M actually had to be based on a modified version of the Pentium III because NetBurst was so hot & thirsty.

Just a guess, but maybe the sale is partly due to AMD's Phenom debut today.



Better to be nouveau than never to have been riche at all.
User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6041 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1902 times:

I bought a Dell in late December of '05 that has the original Pentium D 2.8ghz dual core. Given the graphics card I have in it (FX6600,) the only game that I've found that can NOT run very well on it is EverQuest (the designers at SOE can't seem to restrain themselves in the design and layout department. Plus, everything has just run slow in the game since they started mandating DX9.) FSX, one of the most demanding games out there, works just fine with everything turned up.

Now, that said, unless you are doing things such as: decoding the human genome, modelling quarks, and calculating a jump to light speed so you can avoid meteors, comets, and the occasional blown-up planet—you're not going to need the absolutely most power CPU on the market.

Heck, the Linux server I'm setting up right now only has a P4 Celeron 1.8 ghz processor.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineAC773 From Canada, joined Nov 2005, 1730 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1886 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 15):

Everyone has their own definition of fast. I can also tell you that most games will run fine on systems like that; you just won't get a lot of detail that you will see with better systems. It may work well for you, but getting a Pentium 4-vintage processor has been a bad idea for quite a while now, largely because of the better, cheaper processors out there.

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 15):
FSX, one of the most demanding games out there, works just fine with everything turned up.

With an FX6600? I'll believe in God before I believe that.



Better to be nouveau than never to have been riche at all.
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21470 posts, RR: 53
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1874 times:

Quoting AC773 (Reply 11):
Klaus (or anybody, really) - what's the prevalence that you know of of Speedstep-like technologies in desktop processors? You know, something that throttles down the clock speed when more power isn't needed.

As far as I'm aware most CPUs today use some form of this technology, to varying degrees.

But there are also significant differences in the baseline power consumption and of course in the way the opportunities are exploited by the motherboard and the operating system.

Quoting AC773 (Reply 11):
(If this post has substandard spelling or grammar, it's because I typed it on a G4 PowerBook, which has probably one of the most vague keyboards I've ever used. Grrrr!)

Your post looks fine to me. Maybe your PowerBook isn't all that dyslexic after all...!


User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6041 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1868 times:

Quoting AC773 (Reply 16):
With an FX6600? I'll believe in God before I believe that.

Or was it a 6800? I'll have to double check the specs when I get home. Either way, it runs smooth. Granted, it's a PCI-Ex16 card with 512 graphics RAM, complimented by 2 gigs of DDR2 on the main board.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineAC773 From Canada, joined Nov 2005, 1730 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1850 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 18):
Or was it a 6800?

Ah, you must have the 6800 something-or-other. The FX series is 4 generations old by now, and your card is newer than that.



Better to be nouveau than never to have been riche at all.
User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6041 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1844 times:

Quoting AC773 (Reply 19):
Ah, you must have the 6800 something-or-other. The FX series is 4 generations old by now, and your card is newer than that.

After browing the nVidia website, I can see your confusion. I'm used to calling anything with an nVidia chipset in it as FXxxx because of their long-running (now low-end) numbering scheme.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Is This Site So Slow? posted Thu Oct 4 2001 07:42:35 by Hoons90
Why Is This Site Suddenly So Slow? posted Thu Mar 8 2001 15:30:22 by AgnusBymaster
Why Is The Chat So Famous? posted Fri Apr 27 2007 20:22:40 by WILCO737
Why Is This Man Smiling? posted Thu Apr 12 2007 23:03:22 by Maiznblu_757
Why Is The Water So "cold" In Eilat, Israel? posted Thu Dec 7 2006 17:29:39 by LY777
Why Is Being A Liberal So Bad? posted Fri Jan 6 2006 04:47:15 by Jafa39
Why Is Olympic Attendance So Low? posted Tue Aug 17 2004 07:24:06 by TheCoz
Why Is This War On Terror A Bad Idea..... posted Mon Dec 31 2001 01:34:25 by Wardialer
Why Is Airliners.net So Slow All Of Sudden? posted Sun Sep 30 2001 03:08:40 by Boeing757fan
Airport Tycoon - WHY Is This Happening?!? posted Tue Mar 13 2001 00:11:03 by L'EspaceA340