Conroe

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gscope

Baseband Member
Messages
43
I'm trying to really determine how to compare conroe with a regular 3.20 GHz Pentium 4 processor with a 800 MHz system bus and 1 mb L2 Cache.


I looked at the available models on new egg. They range from 1.86 GHz to 2.66 GHz. So I'm having a real conflict of knowledge here. What is really going to matter with the sepcs.


Is it the Front side bus or Clock speed that determines which is better or which influences speed? The main thing that puzzles me that the P4 processor I have is 3.2 Ghz and these ones are 1.86, is it that each core in the conroe operate at 1.86 so it basically doubles ? I'm assuming that each core will operate different processes by themselves as single processors.
 
Conroe 1.83Ghz > Pentium 4.0Ghz

Ghz don't matter. FSB doesn't matter. Cache doesn't matter. Conroes obliterate Pentium 4's.

And dual core doesn't mean you just multiply the clock speed by two.
 
It has to matter.... Im not just looking for this one answer its for future refrence from what the specs say not just someone telling me conroes are better. I already know that but I want to know what exactly makes them better besides the fact that it has 2 cores.
 
It is how they process the information is how they have the speeds. And it has 2mb of L2 cache but what really matters is that it is awsome.
 
It's more efficient. That's all there is too it. More calculations per clock cycle.

Specs really don't matter. If you want to compare processors in the future (this is the "for future referance" part ;)) we have websites like www.anandtech.com and www.tomshardware.com to read benchmarks and see how they compare. Looking at clock speeds won't do anything.
 
So .... your saying if a processor that has all better specs than another one doesnt make it better?

Thats odd, why would they even have the specs of it if it wasnt used for things like that. Also its the benchmark tests that matter and not the specs?
 
I think, what he meant was that while the specifications play a role in the performance of a CPU, any new generation of CPUs come with better architecture and/or the way they process data. So basically, they get a raw performance boost from both increased specs, but also increase the efficiency with which they go about doing their job.
 
Even though the specs drop below old technology. I see, Its just a hard rule to implement into your mind that new technology is better then previous models. So basically when comparing processors using specs... is usually used within the generation of certain processors and cannot be used with older technology.


That is very helpful Thank you very much :]
 
Core 2 Duos are not similar to P4s at all. P4s use Netburst architecture, which really relied on high clock speeds to get any kind of performance. C2Ds, on the other hand, don't rely on high clock speeds for their performance, as they have a new architecture. This is where confusion arises because of the lower clock speeds in conroes.

That is part of the reason Intel has done away with using clockspeeds to distinguish between different CPUS. Now they have names like E6300 and E6400 and X6800, etc, etc. They want to show the independence of clock speed and performance.

Have a look at Tomshardware's interactive CPU charts to see how each CPU stacks up:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=432&model2=436&chart=186

I compared a 3.6GHz Pentium D (Netburst) with a 2.4GHz C2D and the C2D still performs better, in spite of having 1.2 GHz for clock speed.

What the General was referring to about benchmarks mattering more than specs, is that when you use a computer, it isn't going to perform better just because it's box has more impressive numbers on it. The only way to find out exactly how well a CPU is gonna perform is by benchmarks, not by what it says on the box. For example, if you are looking for the best gaming CPU, then look up some gaming benchmarks, and see what has the highest FPS.

Got it now:D?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom