Am I going to notice a difference?

[stebesplace]

I am thinking of upgrading from a 1.5 GHz to a 2.4 GHz processor. I am running a p4, with 400MHz FSB. Will I notice a good improvement? I work mostly with 3d and rendering, so the more processor power the better. I figure I can get one for no more than 160 bucks, maby less. This will be a major upgrade to the system. The next would be ram, but I may hold back till next fall when I built a new system.

Thoughts?

-Steve

 

[mechBgon]

You would definitely notice lower render times, but before committing, you should probably investigate whether your motherboard is using Socket 423 instead of the present Socket 478. Here is a tool to help:

• Intel CPU identification utility

Run the utility and note the CPUID string (in this example the CPUID string woud be 0F077), then go to the Intel S-Spec list for Pentium4's and look at the different 1.50GHz P4's listed until you find the one that has the CPUID string you discovered. This will tell you whether it's Socket 423 or Socket 478.

 

[stebesplace]

I am deff running 478 for sure. It jumped on board because i knew that it would be the better of the two once 478 was first announced.

What about application use? 2d work like Photoshop and Office XP? What about the OS of which i am using Windows XP Pro?

-Steve

 

[ChampionAtTufshop]

wasnt the 1.5 a pos like the 1.3? (or 1.2...whatever it was..)
or am i thinkinng socket 423?

 

[mechBgon]

What's your present system like? How much RAM and what type (RDRAM, DDR?) and what drives do you have? I don't have Photoshop but I hear it is best to have PS's scratch disk on a drive that's not used for the operating system, or the operating system's swapfile, or Photoshop itself. In other words, ideally you would want a spare hard drive just for Photoshop's scratch disk, and the faster the better.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: ChampionAtTufshop
wasnt the 1.5 a pos like the 1.3? (or 1.2...whatever it was..)
or am i thinkinng socket 423?

The Williamette-core P4's were rather lackluster, yep. Hopefully stebesplace's motherboard takes Northwoods like the 2.4.

 

[stebesplace]

I have the following computer right now.

p4 1.5 GHz 400MHz FSB 478
Abit TH7-2 ATA-100 P4 478
768 Megs pc800 RDRAM
Ibm 60 gig deskstar HD
WD 20 gig HD
16x Pioneer DVD
8x Generic Burner
400 Watt PWS
Windows XP Pro
Nvidia Quadro 4 550 XGL
2x19" Viewsonic p95fb+

Thats about all of the majors.

I work with Maya, Photoshop, Combustion, Shake, a few other majors.

Steve

 

[mechBgon]

Because the 2.4GHz processor has 512kb of L2 cache, it will probably have about twice the CPU performance of your 1.5GHz, which has 256kb of L2 cache Not a bad way to spend the money!

If you use Photoshop and it hits the scratch disk a lot, having a faster scratch disk (and preferably one that's dedicated to that purpose only) would make a difference in that scenario. The ultimate solution is to have enough RAM that you don't need to hit the scratch disk in the first place, and the same holds for Office... if you have enough RAM, Windows will start cacheing your apps in RAM after you launch them the first time, and will re-launch them from RAM later when you want them again. You've probably noticed that after you open Word the first time from disk, it pops back very quickly when you launch it a while later, for instance.

It sounds like you do serious work with your system and it probably would be a good excuse to invest in a SCSI controller and, say, a couple Maxtor Atlas 10k IV's (or even better, a couple Seagate Cheetah 15k.3's!). They're warranted for 5 years of 24/7 operation and will definitely light a fire under anything involving the hard drive. The heavier the I/O load, the more pronounced their advantage will be. Click the Sort button here for perspective on how your IDE drives stack up to fast SCSI drives (the 60Gb IBM is down about 28 places on the first list there).

 

[stebesplace]

Well thats a bummer about my HD. But overall you would think that the upgrade to my cpu to a 2.4 would be a good route to go, at least for now. Perhaps in the fall or next spring, i will do a major HD overhaul when i get a new MB/CPU?

I think for now my ram is alright. i mean i could use more, but this stuff is expensive, and i want to keep what i have, and wait for either a really good deal, or at least wait for when i do the major upgrade. if i find a good deal for a 512 (2x256) then i may go for it, sub 150 bucks. Otherwise i think this processor will be the major do.

Thanks,

-Steve

 

[Intelman07]

Wait the 2.4 uses the 533mhz bus and the 1.5 uses the 400mhz bus. Its just a thought.

 

[stebesplace]

they made the 400 FSB up to 2.6 i belive, but i know 2.4 has it for sure. 2.4 B of the 533 FSB is where the 533 started i belive as well.

-Steve

 

[mechBgon]

I would definitely spend the $160 on a 400MHz-bus 2.4 for what you're doing. We have a 1.3GHz Williamette at work (only P4 in the fleet) and it is a sorry excuse for a CPU... my 1.0GHz Duron "service loaner" computer feels at least as fast, and that's with plain PC133 SDRAM on a K7S5A. The Northwood 2.4 is sure to be a huge and very noticable improvement at render time and probably the rest of the time as well.

 

[stebesplace]

Good deal, well that is what i will order for the next year or so. I am not that big on the best and fastest, mostly because i only have 'so much' on budget. So, thank you for your advice.

-Steve