Core Duo or Pentium D 805

[perdomot]

Both of these are dual core cpus from intel but the Core Duo is about $239 while the 805 is $133. The Duo has slightly more L1 cache but the 805 is clocked at 2.66 compared to the 1.66 of the Duo. Is there something about the Duo that justifies the much higher price?

 

[AzNPinkTuv]

newer and more efficient.. id do the duo

 

[Avalon]

The Duo is based off the Pentium-M architecture, not Netburst like the Pentium-D. As such, you'll see a difference in clock speeds, but each clock on the Duo is much more efficient than that of the Pentium-D.

The Duo will also run much, much cooler.
I'd go with it.

 

[perdomot]

My main interest in these two would be for a pc that does video encoding so I think the 805's higher clock speed would be more beneficial there.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: perdomot
My main interest in these two would be for a pc that does video encoding so I think the 805's higher clock speed would be more beneficial there.

Then you still don't quite understand. They are totaly differant architectures, you can not base any decision on comparing the clock speeds. The 1.66 core duo will wipe the floor with a 2.66ghz Pentium-D. Once the desktop boards become available, I am replacing my 1.6ghz Dothan with a 1.83ghz Core Duo(and of course overclocking the crap outta it). At 2.4ghz, my Pentium-M is faster at gaming, and several other things than my P4 was at 3.8ghz(even with hyperthreading on). Temp wise you will also see a massive differance. My 805 is running at 3.7ghz(and still slower than my X2@2.6ghz) hitting 57c under load on water cooling. My X2 on the stock heatsink runs at 50c@2.618ghz, my Pentium-M with the itty bitty tiny heatsink that comes with the Asus CT-479 adaptor, which is overclocked to 2.4ghz on stock voltage, runs at around 45c..

 

[perdomot]

Sounds like the difference between AMD and Intel rather than between 2 intel cpus.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: perdomot
Sounds like the difference between AMD and Intel rather than between 2 intel cpus.

The core duo is a lot more similar to the AMD chips than to the pentium-d, thats the point I was trying to get across, you can't compare the clock speed of the core duo to the pentium-d because they arent' even close to the same architecture. The core duo is a far more efficient design, and clock for clock pretty similar to the AMD X2.

 

[AkumaX]

Originally posted by: perdomot
My main interest in these two would be for a pc that does video encoding so I think the 805's higher clock speed would be more beneficial there.

GG Intel marketing!

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: AkumaX

Originally posted by: perdomot
My main interest in these two would be for a pc that does video encoding so I think the 805's higher clock speed would be more beneficial there.

GG Intel marketing!

Yeah, now they gotta undo all that marketing since Netburst is dead.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: AkumaX

Originally posted by: perdomot
My main interest in these two would be for a pc that does video encoding so I think the 805's higher clock speed would be more beneficial there.

GG Intel marketing!

Yeah, now they gotta undo all that marketing since Netburst is dead.

performance per watt!!!11!!1

 

[Socrilles]

ummm, actually encoding usually benefits more by pure megahurtz speed, and therefore he/she is right in believing the 805 is a better processor for his/her needs

here is a link showing the 805 is a fairly good performer at encoding. (perorming within 10% of the opty 165 when neither are OCed).

Here are some more encoding bench marks while some of the slower AMD chips can hang in there, the P4 architecture is doing just fine.

I have seen 805 combos (mobo/cpu) going for $200 or less, while the core duo's sell for over $200 and the boards that have been released are all over $200. Add in the OC capability of the 805 and its a no brainer

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: Socrilles
ummm, actually encoding usually benefits more by pure megahurtz speed, and therefore he/she is right in believing the 805 is a better processor for his/her needs

here is a link showing the 805 is a fairly good performer at encoding. (perorming within 10% of the opty 165 when neither are OCed).

Here are some more encoding bench marks while some of the slower AMD chips can hang in there, the P4 architecture is doing just fine.

I have seen 805 combos (mobo/cpu) going for $200 or less, while the core duo's sell for over $200 and the boards that have been released are all over $200. Add in the OC capability of the 805 and its a no brainer

Sure a higher clocked chip of the same architecture is going to perform better than a lower clocked chip of the same architecute, but if you look closely at the links you sent, even the 3.2ghz pentium-D's are loosing to the 2.2ghz AMD's..I have a 920, an 805, and an X2, and I can gurantee you the X2 is faster, and the 805 is running at 57c water cooled, while the X2 is running at 51c on the stock heatsink..the pentium-d needs to get to around 4.2ghz to catch up to an X2 @2.6ghz. The pentium-m based chips performs very similarly to the X2 clock for clock. The 805 is at the bottom of the charts against all the other dual cores, and a 1.66ghz core duo is still going to be faster, yes a little more expensive, but it doesn't run like a flame thrower either.

 

[AzNPinkTuv]

DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURE like stevty said.. you cant compare... its like comparing nvidia to ati.. but NO the ATI core speed is higher! it must be faster!

the core duo is next gen and alot more efficient then the p-d's.

 

[perdomot]

The divx and mp3 encoding charts was what caught my attention in those links. Considering that the X2 3800+ only scored 1.4 frames better than the 805 yet costs 2 1/2 times as much, I'd have to say the 805 looks like a better value, especially if OC'd.

Stevty 2889, how much faster is your x2 than the 805? I mean if you encode the same size file on each rig, by how much does the X2 rig beat the 805? I would think the 805 running at 3.7Ghz would be a close match to the x2 4200+ running at 2.6. Can you test this out for us?

 

[Markfw]

I have an 820 (almost the same as an 805) runing at 3.43 (the best I can get) and in some of my previous benchmarks, the 3800@2500 beat my 820@3.43 by as much as 50%. Not to mention the flames coming out of the box on the 820, and the cost after the extreme cooling required put them much closer in total cost. Also, I couldn;t use a real video card (1 meg PCI) due to the PCI buss being overclocked. A good overclocking motherboard is $200 for these puppies !

Get a 3800 or the core duo. I don't know the cost of the Yonah setups, but they do perform well and cool I think.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: perdomot
The divx and mp3 encoding charts was what caught my attention in those links. Considering that the X2 3800+ only scored 1.4 frames better than the 805 yet costs 2 1/2 times as much, I'd have to say the 805 looks like a better value, especially if OC'd.

Stevty 2889, how much faster is your x2 than the 805? I mean if you encode the same size file on each rig, by how much does the X2 rig beat the 805? I would think the 805 running at 3.7Ghz would be a close match to the x2 4200+ running at 2.6. Can you test this out for us?

For most things I tested, the X2 was 10-15% faster at 2.6ghz than the 805 @3.7ghz. AutoGK, DVDshrink, Cinebench. Don't have exact numbers at the moment. Wish I had as much software as Duvie so I could do some better testing. My 920@3.43ghz is way behind in everything than either of them.

 

[AkumaX]

Originally posted by: perdomot
The divx and mp3 encoding charts was what caught my attention in those links. Considering that the X2 3800+ only scored 1.4 frames better than the 805 yet costs 2 1/2 times as much, I'd have to say the 805 looks like a better value, especially if OC'd.

Well, you looked at the benchies, and you know the prices. Just try to factor in everything: heat, power consumption (not going to argue about paying for electricity...), future proofing(?), and the rest of the components that you have to buy. You're not planning to overclock, so you can get cheap motherboards for both sides. You'd get DDR PC3200 for AMD and DDR2 PC2-4200+ for the Intel. Even at stock speeds, the P-D 805 will still run hot, so you'd best be investing in aftermarket cooling (I went to a friend's house recently (he just got a Celeron D), and his idle temps were 70c!!).

But if you're going to be running divx and mp3 encoding most of the time, maybe a P-D 805 would be cheaper for you for now. But if you do a lot of the other types of encoding, and business apps, then just try to weigh in as much as you think. Good luck!

 

[hans007]

i have no idea what kind of crap cooling other people have.

i have a celeron D 331 which is a 2.66 ghz cpu with stock cooling and it is nowhere near 70C, i think its around 38C. perhaps your friend has a improperly mounted heatsink. i also have an 820 in a BTX case witha retail btx cooler, and idle its about 42C.

that said, the yonah probably is not the greatest encoding cpu. if there was anything netburst was designed for it was for streaming media decode/encode. it has a very good fpu and streaming media doesnt branch (there are no like conditionals in media obviously) and isn't really a latency dependant thing , so the 805 would probably be the better choice.

granted you will use more power. but dothan boards are like $200. so its going to cost you $200 more to get the dothan board + cpu and it will be slower at video encoding.

the 3800 would probably also be a good choice too, but with a board its also about the same cost as the yonah (a bit less, but i think a 3800 is like $300 right now still so assuming boards cost about the same thats about $170 more than a 805 and $140 more than an 820) and for JUST media encoding would likely be slower or the same as the 805.


i just googled "media encoding 820" and this was the first thing that came up.

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3513091__7

im not sure just how respected sharky's is at this point, but im sure they are reasonably credible and most places probably will agree with the whole, p4s and media encoding thing.

now for those of you about to point out that the AMD cpus on that chart are single core, yes i know, but thats ok, the 650 series p4 is as well.

 

[Brunnis]

Originally posted by: hans007
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3513091__7

im not sure just how respected sharky's is at this point, but im sure they are reasonably credible and most places probably will agree with the whole, p4s and media encoding thing.

now for those of you about to point out that the AMD cpus on that chart are single core, yes i know, but thats ok, the 650 series p4 is as well.

The problem is that none of the non-Extreme Edition dual core Pentium Ds have HyperThreading activated. This makes AMD (and Intel's own Core) gain a lot of ground when going to dual core, compared to most of Intel's dual cores. Here's a link to Sharky Extreme that actually compares dual cores from both manufacturers:

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3576616__6

I'd say that the Pentium D 805 is not a good choice for media encoding, compared to a 1.66GHz Yonah. I definitely think that the added price is worth it, considering the stupid power consumption of the P-D. Even though the price premium of the Yonah CPU won't be completely made up for by the lower power consumption, it certainly will make the difference much smaller in the end.

 

[perdomot]

Lots of good info here so thanks folks. I do plan on using an after market cooler for the rig so that is not an issue as most stock cooling sucks and I usually OC my rigs. My current main rig has an A64 3200+ Venice running at 2.4Ghz which puts me around the 3800+ level. Using the first link, the 805 would beat my current cpu by quite a bit especially if I can OC to around 3.2-3.4 which seems very doable according to the posters on another thread I made about this topic. The second link is very good for comparing dual core cpus and I noticed that the 3800+ dualie is only slightly faster than the 820. Interpreting this for an 805 result and factoring in the 2 1/2 times price difference of the AMD cpu, I can't see a problem with the 805. Granted it runs hot and uses up power, but I have a premium PSU and HSF so those arent issues for me. As for cost, the 805 and the mobo Anandtech used to test for the article are only $260 and that is still less than a X2 3800+ cpu.
Stevty 2889: Could you possibly try a run of DVD Shrink on both machines and tell us the results? I use that app a lot and would appreciate that. Thanks.

 

[stevty2889]

I'll do a run of DVD shrink for ya when I get a chance this weekend(gotta love working 12 hour shifts at night) and post the results. I'll run it on my X2, 805, and 920(the 920 is at 3.4 and thats probably about what you'll get the 805 to with good air cooling, so the results should be similar. Just be sure that once you start to OC you keep the temps below ~67c, or you'll start throttling, and kill any performance gain you got from the OC.

 

[gobucks]

the 805 wouldn't really be that much of a step up from your 3200+. There would be a few multithreaded apps that might take advantage of the dual cores, but smithfield's dual core performance is less than exciting, plus you have a tremendous clock speed disadvantage for single threaded applications. The 805 would need to be OC'd to like 3.8GHz in order to compete in stuff like games. Even at 3.2GHz, it would still be slower in single threaded apps, plus the FSB would only be 640MHz, meaning your memory bandwidth would be extremely bus limited, and Pentium Ds are very bandwidth hungry (goes with being a netburst chip).

As for the Core Duo, those are kinda nice, but right now they are mobile chips, and 32-bit only. That means desktop mobos are extremely rare - in fact, i only know of the one asus one, and thus will be expensive. The asus board also has very limited overclocking options.

Don't you think you'd be better off either:
1) selling your 3200+ and buying either an opty 165 or X2 3800+? These chips both OC pretty well, you can keep your existing mobo, and would be cheaper than a core duo + mobo and close to the same price as the 805 + mobo. I mean, i can see why you might want to jump ship to intel when they bring out conroe, but their current offerings aren't exactly that enticing.
2) keep your 3200+ and try OCing it further. my 3000+ winchester OC'd to 2.55GHz, i can't imagine a venice 3200+ being stuck at 2.4GHz. A fast single core will generally beat a slow dual core in most tasks. Besides, this option is free, and if it doesnt work, you can always try one of the other ones.

 

[perdomot]

Thanks stevty 2889, I appreciate it and the advice about the temps.
gobucks: I intend to keep my 3200+ rig and am planning for a second rig which is why I was looking at the 805 setup. Based on the benchmarks in the links in this thread, it looks like the 805 will be perfect for a video encoder which is what I want it for. Not a gamer but I can use my 3200+ rig for that if I so choose so that isn't an issue. What really catches my eye is the low price of the cpu and how it performs in encoding especially when OC'd.

 

[Socrilles]

if you wait until tomorrow/this weekend there is a good chance fry's/outpost.com will have a combo with the 805 for $200

 

[zephyrprime]

First off, the people who are saying that the 805 and the yonah cannot be compared because they are different architechtures are absolutely ridiculous. OF COURSE THEY CAN BE COMPARED! Just run some benches and you will know who performs better.

Sure, yonah is a good architecture but guess what? The SSE implementation on the Banias/Yonah is a bad performer so in video encoding, the Core Duo is weak. (by the way, the sse implementation in the P4/PD & the K8 is not very good either but still better than the Yonah implementation. The Conroe implementation sounds like it's going to be great on the otherhand. The K8L will probably be good also.)

check out the benches

The 805 is the best choice in this situation. Sure it runs like a flamethrower but so what? It will have better performance in this situation. What's more, it's cheaper.