• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD64 4000+ vs. P4 560J

L

lauwingchun

Junior Member
er....in fact i am not really considering an upgrade now.
but i just wonder how these 2 CPUs, with a price difference of about 90US,
differ in performance.

i am a quite n00bie..so how should i make a comparison...

4000+: SOCKET939 / 2400MHz / 1024KB
560J: LGA775 / 3600MHz / 1024KB

especially about the MHz....560J does seem to have a higher MHz though.

how much difference should i expect when playing games on these CPUs? i am talking about half-life 2, doom 3...games that challenges the system.

(in fact i am currently using a P4 2.8GHz @ 3.0GHz, geforce 6800 GT, 1GB PC3200 RAM)
 
And another MHz freak. You see, the "4000+" means that Intel would need 4000 MHz to counter this processor. For gaming, the 4000+ fits your needs.
 
To be honest, you won't see that much of an improvement, even with the 4000+.
Graphics cards seem to be much more decisive regarding gaming performance than processors at the moment, and your P4 shouldn't be much of a bottleneck.

On the subject of processor frequency, the clock speeds of the P4 and Athlon can't be compared. A simple (if somewhat crude) analogy is to think of two car engines of different capacity. The smaller engine will have to rev higher than the larger engine to achieve the same power output.

Originally posted by: Vegitto
And another MHz freak.
Click to expand...
He made it clear he was new to this. Learn to be a little more civil.
 
Originally posted by: BitByBit
To be honest, you won't see that much of an improvement, even with the 4000+.
Graphics cards seem to be much more decisive regarding gaming performance than processors at the moment, and your P4 shouldn't be much of a bottleneck.

On the subject of processor frequency, the clock speeds of the P4 and Athlon can't be compared. A simple (if somewhat crude) analogy is to think of two car engines of different capacity. The smaller engine will have to rev higher than the larger engine to achieve the same power output.
Click to expand...

hmm....in fact someone has tried to explain this to me but i was not really able to understand them. that analogy posted sounds more sensible to me. thx for that.

if so, does it mean that further overclocking (without special coolers) my 2.8GHz to 3.2 or 3.4 GHz won't even do a bit in gaining gaming performance, right?



 
Of those two, the 4000+ will be far better in games.

Really though, your current setup is not bad at all.

As was mentioned, you could likely OC it for better performance & wait a bit longer till you can do a more noticeable upgrade.
 
A faster CPU will certainly help improve your gaming performance. Ideally you will run your games at settings that will allow both the CPU and graphics cards to operate efficiently without bottlenecking each other.

For example....with a given CPU and graphics card you will find that reducing the resolution and quality settings in your 3D games yeilds little or no performance benefit so you find that sweet spot in performance. Increasing the speed of the CPU typically allows your games to run faster at those same settings and can allow you to increase the quality settings or resolution of your games.

Likewise if you plan to upgrade your graphics card to a very high end card you may find little performance benefit unless you have a very high end CPU because the CPU becomes the bottleneck of the system.

With a 6800GT your 2.8GHz P4 is the bottleneck at the resolutions the card is capable of running. Upgrading your CPU is a good move. I'm assuming it's an AGP card and not a PCIe card so that presents a new dilemma that is very common among upgraders these days. If you upgrade your CPU and motherboard you will be forced to use an older AGP system to keep your graphics card and this will restrict your future graphics card upgrade options.

I don't know what motherboard/chipset you are currently using but if you can get a faster P4 CPU and drop it into your current motherboard you may find that to be a more economical route and much easier since you won't need to change the rest of your system or reinstall your OS.

If you go with AMD you can wait a month or so for the new ULI boards to come out which offer full AGP 8X and PCIe on one motherboard. This is the first and only option ever to allow full speed graphics using either standard on one board. There is an article about it within the last few weeks on this website. With AMD you will be able to continue to use your current RAM also.

BTW....for gaming the Athlon64 is going to easily outperform the P4 in the same price range. Although your system is not a slouch, moving to an Athlon64 4000 and a new motherboard could create a significant performance increase.

Hope this helps
 
You may see a very slight benefit, if you are lucky.
If you can reach those speeds safely without having to resort to elaborate cooling and large bumps in Vcore, then by all means.
When multithreaded games become mainstream, you'll want to upgrade to dual core, as single cores will start to become a bottleneck. Until then, you're probably better off keeping what you've got, as upgrading now isn't worth the effort IMO.

<Edit>
You might want to look at these recent gaming benchmarks to see what kind of benefit you could expect. Once framerates hit 70 or so FPS, then anything over that becomes superfluous, as your monitor isn't able to refresh that quickly (and most users couldn't tell the difference anyway)
</Edit>
 
WTF did Intel stop making the 2.4C? IMO that was an awesome budget processor, and now they stopped making it!
 
The reason Intel don't make Northwoods anymore is the die size, I believe. Northwoods used a 130nm process while Prescotts use a 90nm process.
But yes, a Hyperthreaded, 2.4GHz Prescott wouldn't go amiss. The current version lacks HT and uses a slow 533MHz FSB.
 
For $400? Nah don't do it. You won't notice enough difference. But if you have to upgrade, the 4200+ is the best bang for the buck (Double Processor).
 
Err do you guys even read the full post? He said he isn't considering upgrading, he just wants to know how they compare..

Basicly Intel doesn't have anything that can really compete with the 4000+ in most applications. AMD uses a more effecient design, so while the frequency is lower, it does more work per clock cycle than the Intel CPU. Say you have one car that has to go 15 miles to get somewhere, and another has to go 5 miles to the same place. The car that only has to go 5 miles doesn't have to go as fast to get there at the same time as the other car that has to go 15.

Intel increased the length of the pipeline in order to get the higher frequency. AMD kept a shorter pipeline, but also added the memory contorller to the proccessor itself, greatly reducing the amount of time it takes to get info from the ram to the CPU. The architecutes are totaly differant. Thats why you can't compare the clock speed alone.

The pentium-m also uses a more efficient design, and can compete with the AMD chips fairly well at gaming, but doesn't keep up as well at other tasks.

Prescotts also tend to run pretty hot and are a lot more power hungry than A64's. I had to water cool my 3.4ghz prescott to keep it from throttling. They were supposed to make it to 4ghz, but never did, because the heat issues are too much. Thats also the reason why Intels dual core chips are running at the lower speeds, the heat is just too much. Presler and Cedar Mill on the 65nm proccess are likely going to be the last netburst chips, they are prescotts shrunk to 65nm, but are supposed to have some changes that keep the temps under control.

Merom and Conroe will be there replacements, and are supposed to be a differant architecture more similar to the Penitum-M, but there really isn't much info on them yet.
 
Originally posted by: Hacp
WTF did Intel stop making the 2.4C? IMO that was an awesome budget processor, and now they stopped making it!
Click to expand...

Yeah, they stopped making northwoods quite a while ago, almost a year ago now. 2.4c was a great chip, I had one that ran at 3.1ghz, and still ran cooler on air than my water cooled prescott.
 
Originally posted by: stevty2889
Basicly Intel doesn't have anything that can really compete with the 4000+ in most applications. AMD uses a more effecient design, so while the frequency is lower, it does more work per clock cycle than the Intel CPU. Say you have one car that has to go 15 miles to get somewhere, and another has to go 5 miles to the same place. The car that only has to go 5 miles doesn't have to go as fast to get there at the same time as the other car that has to go 15.
Click to expand...

I assume you're talking about pipeline depth in that analogy.
While it is true that lengthening the pipeline does tend to have a detrimental effect on IPC, there is certainly no direct relationship between the two. Prescott's pipeline is 50% longer than Northwood's, yet its IPC is usually within a few percent of Northwood's.
The reason the Athlon can get more work done at lower clock speeds has much less to do with pipeline depth and much more to do with execution core width and decoder bandwidth. The Athlon can issue 3 instructions per clock to its 3 integer units or FPUs. The P4 can at best issue 2 instructions, if its Trace Cache contains the data needed. If that isn't the case, then the P4's decode rate can fall to one instruction per clock.
Of course, there are other factors to consider when comparing the P4's and Athlon's performance, but I've mentioned the most important factors when comparing the IPC of the two.


 
Originally posted by: lauwingchun

how much difference should i expect when playing games on these CPUs? i am talking about half-life 2, doom 3...games that challenges the system.
Click to expand...

At 1024x768 the 4000+ is 15-20% faster. With a 6800GT at 1280x1024 with 4xAA/16xAF in HL2 or Doom3 the cpu is not very important.





 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top