Will dual core be faster than this setup? - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 09-02-2006, 02:38 PM   #11 (permalink)
Camera junky
 
Poizen22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ottawa ontario canada.
Posts: 6,280
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by nitestick
well if i recall correctly even the Pentium D 820 (2.8ghz) beat the FX-57 in encoding quite soundly. the Pentium D 805 will be considerably better than anything you have listed even using only one core. using a multi-threaded encoder there is no contest. this would be quite a good upgrade choice. it is 2.66ghz by the way.
teh fx57 is single core and it isnt a multi tasking cpu it is more a gamming cpu
__________________

__________________

https://www.flickr.com/photos/poizen22/
intel Core I7 8700k@ 5.0ghz-Nvidia GTX1080 ti ftw3-Aorus 5 z370 mobo-16gb ddr4 G-Skill trident Z rgb 3000mhz - 1tb samsung 960 pro, 2tb wd blue- thermaltake rgb 750w gold-Phanteks pro M TG- Samsung CHG70 1440p 144hz 32 inch QLED.
Poizen22 is offline  
Old 09-02-2006, 02:45 PM   #12 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 201
Send a message via AIM to Orayn
Default

I'd suggest Dual-Core, yes. At the very least, it'd make the computer a great multitasker.
__________________

Orayn is offline  
Old 09-02-2006, 09:30 PM   #13 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Nitestick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: смерти для спаме
Posts: 8,473
Default

Quote:
What? Link. A low end cpu claiming to beat a high end AMD cpu is quite a bold claim without backup.
the FX-57 would have a p-rating that calculates to roughly 4700+ i think. given that the Prescott core has always been quite good at encoding (Smithfield is two Prescott cores) and that the 820 is 2x2.8ghz cores is it really that hard to believe? i shall try to find some benchmarks if you need more proof
Nitestick is offline  
Old 09-02-2006, 10:52 PM   #14 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,191
Default

(forgive me gaara)

When you cluster computers theres a fat bottleneck with networking. You can't just add the processors up, what you could do is add the processors up, and divide by 5. That would give you a more accurate depiction of the speed of the cluster. Clusters are mostly used for HUGE calculations and for redundancy.
The General is offline  
Old 09-02-2006, 11:39 PM   #15 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
gurusan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,562
Send a message via MSN to gurusan
Default

fx-57 isn't **** these days.

single core 2.8ghz CPU? no thanks.....it's great..but not enough by todays standards
__________________
|| 2500K @ 5GHz 1 thread, 4.8 2 threads, 4.6 3, 4.5 4 1.284V ||
|| P8P67-M Pro || 8GB @ 2133MHz ||
|| 5850 @ 1000/1225 || XFX 650W || Silverstone FT03B ||
|| 37" LCD TV || CM Hyper 212+ || Samsung 2.1 Soundbar ||
gurusan is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 12:20 AM   #16 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

Quote:
When you cluster computers theres a fat bottleneck with networking.
You are forgiven, but I think you used the term correctly assuming you're talking about the networking throughput versus the throughput of all the computers combined. Networking + memory are the only two areas that are bottlenecks

Quote:
single core 2.8ghz CPU? no thanks.....it's great..but not enough by todays standards
It's still fast by todays standards whether you like it or not. Perhaps not worth the pricetag, but fast nonetheless. FX-57 will still stomp over most everything predating Core (2) save for a few situations

But yes, the dual core will be faster for a variety of reasons already outlined. Memory bandwidth wasn't mentioned but it will be a few times faster than any RD/SDRAM associated with any of those computers. That doesn't even include the memory size, 128mb and 256mb are way too small to be swapping big video files around with

A 3800+ would probably be a better choice than a P-D though and if you've got say $500 floating around you are strongly recommended to look into an E6300
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 12:34 AM   #17 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
gurusan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,562
Send a message via MSN to gurusan
Default

It's fast...don't get me wrong..I had a 3700+ OC'd to 2.9 ghz and it was great...but for multicore games it's no comparison with my current CPU.

And it's no comparison to conroe....

Technology seems to be advancing faster though...in the past the newest CPU would make everything else obsolete.....nowadays the newest CPU stomps everything else...but that doesn't make the other things slower...they are still plenty fast.
__________________

__________________
|| 2500K @ 5GHz 1 thread, 4.8 2 threads, 4.6 3, 4.5 4 1.284V ||
|| P8P67-M Pro || 8GB @ 2133MHz ||
|| 5850 @ 1000/1225 || XFX 650W || Silverstone FT03B ||
|| 37" LCD TV || CM Hyper 212+ || Samsung 2.1 Soundbar ||
gurusan is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.