Chose the Q9550 instead. (Was: E8400 and video editing (using Premiere)?)

[francisA]

Currently using E5200 clocked at 3.663GHz (333x11). My rig will actually see mixed use from regular web-surfing, MS Office stuff, plus Gaming (Crysis) and Video Editing/Encoding.

I'm using Premiere Pro right now capturing video via the 1394 interface.

Been reading about the E8400 and with 4MB more cache, was thinking it might help on the video editing/encoding front. From what I've read so far, the additional cache may not really make much difference in gaming but my question is more on the Video Editing/Encoding piece.

Do you think the E8400 will have an edge over the E5200 if I keep all variables at par, say clock them both at 3.663GHz?

Thanks in advance

 

[polarbear6]

hey listen
u managed to get a oc of 44% on this e5200
and u think u will only be getting a oc of 20% ??
u can easily get may be over 4.0 ghz(may be and i know for 4.0 ghz he has to oc his mother board too but odds are high that he will make it).

and another thing i also heard stuff that e8400 has high latency cache.

if u r really into video editing ditch duos and buy a quad.
or if god permits wait for a while and u might get the Q9650(if prices really drop, which obvious will ).
just keep all the options open, cause i have a feeling that nice parts will be soon available at lower prices (intel's price cuts)

 

[yh125d]

I think that could be worth the upgrade, with the price cuts coming soon. I don't have any benchmarks comparing, but usually what I hear from others on AT regarding cache and games, is that doubling the cache (when you're low on cache) can account for ~10% performance. I really don't know what the effect on your encoding would be.

Add on to that that you should be able to clock the e8400 to 4-4.1gHz as easily as you got that e5200 to 3.6, and there will be a pretty significant boost

 

[francisA]

Thanks for the replies.

Oh no, I'm not implying I'm keeping the E8400 at 3.663GHz {i most certainly won't be able to hold myself back }. Just pointed that out to highlight the difference in cache which as mentioned are of higher latencies.

Actually, I was able to push the E5200 up to 360fsb x 10 for an 80% fsb overclock stable for 8hrs on Orthos, 30 IBT passes, and 2hrs OCCT so I'm hopeful that the E8400 (E0) will clock well with my UD3P, at less voltage

Was looking at the quads but as my son needs a new pc, I will hand off the E5200 to him so he can build his own pc and get me the E8400. Too bad the quads are still way up there in price, Q9650 specifically, or that will be my top choice. Maybe a 2009 Christmas gift for me.

Sounds like a E8400 will serve me well for 1-yr. It's really a 4:1 ratio between gaming and video editing, or maybe even more, so gaming gets more focus really. Just editing home videos.

Edit:
Checking out my local microcenter, they have the E8400 for $165 but also saw a Q9300 for $180. Just doesn't make it any easier

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Honestly, for video encoding I don't think the extra cache from the E8400 is going to make a difference. The higher clockspeed you could possibly reach when overclocking would have a bigger impact. However, a quad core should be faster than your overclocked E5200. If the Q9300 is only $180, it is a no-brainer decision. Get it, overclock it, and you'll have better performance than you can get out of any dual core. You'll also be able to do more multitasking.

 

[conlan]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
Honestly, for video encoding I don't think the extra cache from the E8400 is going to make a difference. The higher clockspeed you could possibly reach when overclocking would have a bigger impact. However, a quad core should be faster than your overclocked E5200. If the Q9300 is only $180, it is a no-brainer decision. Get it, overclock it, and you'll have better performance than you can get out of any dual core. You'll also be able to do more multitasking.

+1

 

[heyheybooboo]

Do you think the E8400 will have an edge over the E5200 if I keep all variables at par, say clock them both at 3.663GHz?

Not worth it.

Even a Q8200 would whomp it. You need cores for multiple threads and multiple disks for read/write I/O.

 

[Denithor]

Price cuts are here, guys. Go look at mwave or newegg.

Q9550
mwave $274
zipzoomfly $281FS
newegg $295FS

Q9400
mwave $224
zipzoomfly $229FS
newegg $240FS

Newegg & ZZF offer free shipping on those, mwave doesn't (their price may still be lower, ymmv).

 

[demiurge3141]

what about good old Q6600? that would eat your E8400 alive for encoding

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: conlan

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
Honestly, for video encoding I don't think the extra cache from the E8400 is going to make a difference. The higher clockspeed you could possibly reach when overclocking would have a bigger impact. However, a quad core should be faster than your overclocked E5200. If the Q9300 is only $180, it is a no-brainer decision. Get it, overclock it, and you'll have better performance than you can get out of any dual core. You'll also be able to do more multitasking.

+1

+2


I believe some review sit tested this awhile back and said L2 cache would hav elittle benefit when it came to encoding due to the linear nature and large files.....

1)more cores...hopefully your app will take advantage of more then 2....some are not very effective after 2 cores...

2) faster speed cores

3) multiple drives...perhaps RAID setup

 

[francisA]

Thanks all. Your insights are very much appreciated.

I was set on E8400 until I saw that Q9300 at microcenter. But, someone just snagged the last Q9300 they got so am waiting now.

Am really torn between the E8400 and Q9xxx because of my split needs of the rig. One side tells me to upgrade the CPU without sacrificing gaming performance while one side tells me to get the one that will speed up video editing/encoding tasks. I do understand though that at 3.6GHz (E5200) right now and a Q9300 @ 3.375GHz (450x7.5), I would not see much difference in gaming as I do game at 1920x1200 at high settings so it's the GPU (4850) that's doing most of the work.

Of course, this assumes that I can in fact oc the board and Q9xxx to 450fsb. My RAM is already able to do DDR864 so maybe it can do DDR900 with a voltage bump.

The Q9300 at $180 was really a sweet price point, but a goner for now

With the $$$ I have now, I can even get the Q9550 but it's still $300 at microcenter. Once they drop the price to newegg level ($282), then maybe I'll even consider the Q9550 as with barely 425fsb, I can reach my current frequency with the E5200.

 

[Duvie]

Large L2 cache pools seem to make a bit more advantage in gaming though....The E5200 is pretty low....plus the E5200 is not truly a core 2 duo architecture.....

I think the E5200 vs the E8400 would have some difference but IMO not worth a change out for video editing...maybe gaming....The Quad core can be a huge advantage if you are encoding HD content as it can regularly use more then 2 cores....

 

[yh125d]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Large L2 cache pools seem to make a bit more advantage in gaming though....The E5200 is pretty low....plus the E5200 is not truly a core 2 duo architecture.....

I think the E5200 vs the E8400 would have some difference but IMO not worth a change out for video editing...maybe gaming....The Quad core can be a huge advantage if you are encoding HD content as it can regularly use more then 2 cores....

Yes the e5200 is a true C2D, as is the e2x00 series.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie
Large L2 cache pools seem to make a bit more advantage in gaming though....The E5200 is pretty low....plus the E5200 is not truly a core 2 duo architecture.....

I think the E5200 vs the E8400 would have some difference but IMO not worth a change out for video editing...maybe gaming....The Quad core can be a huge advantage if you are encoding HD content as it can regularly use more then 2 cores....

Yes the e5200 is a true C2D, as is the e2x00 series.

It is listed everywhere as not a core 2 duo but a 45nm Pentium Dual core....

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...pdc-e5200_3.html#sect0

READ THIS AND DO SOME RESEARCH....becuz it is not a core 2 duo...

 

[AsusGuy]

Yeah I don't think the 8400 will be worth the upgrade. Either stick with the 5200 or go with a quad. That E5200 at 3.6Ghz is going to be about as good as it gets with C2D. I would stay with what you have and invest money in a quad when they drop more in price.

 

[yh125d]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie
Large L2 cache pools seem to make a bit more advantage in gaming though....The E5200 is pretty low....plus the E5200 is not truly a core 2 duo architecture.....

I think the E5200 vs the E8400 would have some difference but IMO not worth a change out for video editing...maybe gaming....The Quad core can be a huge advantage if you are encoding HD content as it can regularly use more then 2 cores....

Yes the e5200 is a true C2D, as is the e2x00 series.

It is listed everywhere as not a core 2 duo but a 45nm Pentium Dual core....

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...pdc-e5200_3.html#sect0

READ THIS AND DO SOME RESEARCH....becuz it is not a core 2 duo...

As taken from that article "All PREVIOUS processors sold as Pentium Dual-Core were based on 65nm Conroe cores with severely limited functionality"..."uses a 45nm core from Wolfdale family"...

The e5200 is a true 45nm C2D, just with smaller cache than the rest. It is named Pentium DC for pricing/model purposes, but it is on the full Wolfdale architecture


Nice research

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie
Large L2 cache pools seem to make a bit more advantage in gaming though....The E5200 is pretty low....plus the E5200 is not truly a core 2 duo architecture.....

I think the E5200 vs the E8400 would have some difference but IMO not worth a change out for video editing...maybe gaming....The Quad core can be a huge advantage if you are encoding HD content as it can regularly use more then 2 cores....

Yes the e5200 is a true C2D, as is the e2x00 series.

It is listed everywhere as not a core 2 duo but a 45nm Pentium Dual core....

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...pdc-e5200_3.html#sect0

READ THIS AND DO SOME RESEARCH....becuz it is not a core 2 duo...

As taken from that article "All PREVIOUS processors sold as Pentium Dual-Core were based on 65nm Conroe cores with severely limited functionality"..."uses a 45nm core from Wolfdale family"...

The e5200 is a true 45nm C2D, just with smaller cache than the rest. It is named Pentium DC for pricing/model purposes, but it is on the full Wolfdale architecture


Nice research

maybe it is my mistake....but very deceiving....how many times does he say it is like, but not like....there hasn't been a generation like this core....If anything it appears to perhaps be based on a mobile chip platform....

I found him saying based on same core on page 11 overclocking.......

Again maybe my bad.....been easier to just call it an core 2 duo....Everyone knows the E2 series is a budget line but yet nor a celeron....so why add "pentium" in the mix?

 

[yh125d]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie
Large L2 cache pools seem to make a bit more advantage in gaming though....The E5200 is pretty low....plus the E5200 is not truly a core 2 duo architecture.....

I think the E5200 vs the E8400 would have some difference but IMO not worth a change out for video editing...maybe gaming....The Quad core can be a huge advantage if you are encoding HD content as it can regularly use more then 2 cores....

Yes the e5200 is a true C2D, as is the e2x00 series.

It is listed everywhere as not a core 2 duo but a 45nm Pentium Dual core....

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...pdc-e5200_3.html#sect0

READ THIS AND DO SOME RESEARCH....becuz it is not a core 2 duo...

As taken from that article "All PREVIOUS processors sold as Pentium Dual-Core were based on 65nm Conroe cores with severely limited functionality"..."uses a 45nm core from Wolfdale family"...

The e5200 is a true 45nm C2D, just with smaller cache than the rest. It is named Pentium DC for pricing/model purposes, but it is on the full Wolfdale architecture


Nice research

maybe it is my mistake....but very deceiving....how many times does he say it is like, but not like....there hasn't been a generation like this core....If anything it appears to perhaps be based on a mobile chip platform....

I found him saying based on same core on page 11 overclocking.......

Again maybe my bad.....been easier to just call it an core 2 duo....Everyone knows the E2 series is a budget line but yet nor a celeron....so why add "pentium" in the mix?

to distinguish between a 2.6gHs e5300 and a 2.66gHz e7300 for $25 more

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie
Large L2 cache pools seem to make a bit more advantage in gaming though....The E5200 is pretty low....plus the E5200 is not truly a core 2 duo architecture.....

I think the E5200 vs the E8400 would have some difference but IMO not worth a change out for video editing...maybe gaming....The Quad core can be a huge advantage if you are encoding HD content as it can regularly use more then 2 cores....

Yes the e5200 is a true C2D, as is the e2x00 series.

It is listed everywhere as not a core 2 duo but a 45nm Pentium Dual core....

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...pdc-e5200_3.html#sect0

READ THIS AND DO SOME RESEARCH....becuz it is not a core 2 duo...

As taken from that article "All PREVIOUS processors sold as Pentium Dual-Core were based on 65nm Conroe cores with severely limited functionality"..."uses a 45nm core from Wolfdale family"...

The e5200 is a true 45nm C2D, just with smaller cache than the rest. It is named Pentium DC for pricing/model purposes, but it is on the full Wolfdale architecture


Nice research

maybe it is my mistake....but very deceiving....how many times does he say it is like, but not like....there hasn't been a generation like this core....If anything it appears to perhaps be based on a mobile chip platform....

I found him saying based on same core on page 11 overclocking.......

Again maybe my bad.....been easier to just call it an core 2 duo....Everyone knows the E2 series is a budget line but yet nor a celeron....so why add "pentium" in the mix?

to distinguish between a 2.6gHs e5300 and a 2.66gHz e7300 for $25 more

I think that can be done with the 66mhz added clock, 1066fsb bus versus 800fsb, and 2mb of L2 cache versus 3mb of L2...

Seems like enough there to justify the 25 bucks....

dont need to muddy the waters with another name....

 

[Tempered81]

yah conroe / penryn is the way to go, IMO. Pentiums of the E2xxx and E5xxx are conroe/penryn, and even celerons are single core versions of conroe & penryn (which is the arch of all core 2's) these days, and did you know that a Q9650 is two E8400's under one IHS? an E7200 is a lower binned E8500 of a different stepping with half of the l2 cache disabled on a different bus. L2$ does make a pretty big performance difference

op: quad is the way to go for video editing/encoding.

 

[francisA]

Does look like I'll just waste $$$ on an E8400 considering I might just get it up to 4GHz if I'm lucky and maybe slight difference due to cache.

So bottom line for me is a quad. Now, the Q9550 seems to be the way to go to which can probably last me another year or so. And if my board does let me oc to 450, then I can potentially have 3.83GHz on tap which is way good enough for the type of gaming I do. But will yield much better performance with video encoding.

I'm itching to now drive down to microcenter and just get the Q9550 before they're gone. If they match Egg's price, then that's icing on the cake

 

[yh125d]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: Duvie
Large L2 cache pools seem to make a bit more advantage in gaming though....The E5200 is pretty low....plus the E5200 is not truly a core 2 duo architecture.....

I think the E5200 vs the E8400 would have some difference but IMO not worth a change out for video editing...maybe gaming....The Quad core can be a huge advantage if you are encoding HD content as it can regularly use more then 2 cores....

Yes the e5200 is a true C2D, as is the e2x00 series.

It is listed everywhere as not a core 2 duo but a 45nm Pentium Dual core....

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...pdc-e5200_3.html#sect0

READ THIS AND DO SOME RESEARCH....becuz it is not a core 2 duo...

As taken from that article "All PREVIOUS processors sold as Pentium Dual-Core were based on 65nm Conroe cores with severely limited functionality"..."uses a 45nm core from Wolfdale family"...

The e5200 is a true 45nm C2D, just with smaller cache than the rest. It is named Pentium DC for pricing/model purposes, but it is on the full Wolfdale architecture


Nice research

maybe it is my mistake....but very deceiving....how many times does he say it is like, but not like....there hasn't been a generation like this core....If anything it appears to perhaps be based on a mobile chip platform....

I found him saying based on same core on page 11 overclocking.......

Again maybe my bad.....been easier to just call it an core 2 duo....Everyone knows the E2 series is a budget line but yet nor a celeron....so why add "pentium" in the mix?

to distinguish between a 2.6gHs e5300 and a 2.66gHz e7300 for $25 more

I think that can be done with the 66mhz added clock, 1066fsb bus versus 800fsb, and 2mb of L2 cache versus 3mb of L2...

Seems like enough there to justify the 25 bucks....

dont need to muddy the waters with another name....

Well whatever reason they have I don't know. Why is the sky blue? Why are boobs good? Noone knows, it just is.

What I know is that the e5200 is a full C2D wolfdale. The fsb difference isn't a real hardware difference, it's just as capable of 1066 FSB as the other C2D's. The L2 difference is the same as e8400 -> e7200 cache cutting, just a bit more

 

[scruffypup]

The difference between the 5xxx and 7xxx/8xxx lines is not just the extra cache, but the 5xxx line does not have the sse4.1 instructions that the 7xxx, 8xxx lines have that are able to give about a 5% boost in some applications,.. encoding of types and such,....

Part of the reason why the 7300 is $25 more than a 5300 at same speed with just 1mb more cache,....

 

[francisA]

Well, I can't help myself so off called MicroCenter and reserved a Q9550 for me. Started with 6 in the morning and when I called, there were only 3 left. So snagged one up. It's the SLB8V S-spec which from my research is the E0 stepping. Hope this turns out a good chip.

Oh and their price was $299 but I told them Egg had it for $282.99. Guy didn't believe me but agreed to check Egg and voila, I was right. So they price-matched. So for an extra $117, I got me 2 extra cores!!!

Figured, if I can get at least 450fsb with the UD3P and Q9550, then I'm at 3.83GHz which is faster than what I got out of the E5200 so gaming will not affected but I got 2 extra cores for multitasking stuff.


Thanks again all. Will report back how this chip does.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Duvie

maybe it is my mistake....but very deceiving....how many times does he say it is like, but not like....there hasn't been a generation like this core....If anything it appears to perhaps be based on a mobile chip platform....

I found him saying based on same core on page 11 overclocking.......

Again maybe my bad.....been easier to just call it an core 2 duo....Everyone knows the E2 series is a budget line but yet nor a celeron....so why add "pentium" in the mix?

Intel lists the e5200 as a Pentium Dual Core and not a C2D. While it may have started as a Wolfdale, the cache isn't the only thing different. For example, SSE4 does not work on the chip...
Therefore, it isn't really a C2D...

BTW, as SSE4 is quite helpful with video encoding and editing, I think that fact alone is quite important