• 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.

Dual P3 versus single XP, who would win?

S

Syborg1211

Diamond Member
My friend and I are in a light dispute over who would win in a video rendering competition. In this we would put my system (XP1600@1.6 ghz(153fsb), 512 mb ddr) up against his system (dual P3 733 @ 1ghz, 1 gb of sdram). He is now saying he could still take me with his processors at 733 and I'm finding that very hard to swallow. Who would win?


Edit: We would be using Premier 5 or 6 which is supposed to be highly optimized for duals?
 
Apparently your friend can't add very well if he thinks his 733's running at 733 would actually beat your 1.6GHz.

The Athlon wins, hands down, since the P3s have to use the same path to the memory and the hard drive, both of which are very important in video rendering.

Nick
 
The XP, hands down.

PIII's running in SMP aren't very efficient. At best, the second CPU offers 30-40% additional performance.
 
well in a perfect scenario the P3s would win, but that is assuming that your operating system can actually handle 2 CPUs properly

if you are talking about Windows then the Athlon would destroy the P3
 
BingBongWongFooey wrote:

"the XP would win at that but honestly i'd rather have the dual p3 system."

Any particular reason?

Besides a pair of 733's being slower than a single XP, you are stuck with old ECC SDRAM (slow, slow) and a SDR FSB. Combined together, you are receiving dismal performance. I've used dual PIII rigs of various configurations in the past, and I can honestly say they were nothing to talk about.
 
AXP, no contest.

Aside from the clock advantage of your CPU against his two, an AXP is likely to run on a much more modern platform as well, mostly DDR SDRAM, and a newer chipset.
And the AXP's are faster than P-III's clock for clock as well, especially when on a fast chipset such as the KT266A.

And finally, extremely few apps scale linearly with added CPU's, a pure number cruncher, such as SETI@Home, or RC5, along with some science apps, will scale linearly, while most apps, including video editing ones, won't scale as good.
 
What's the rendering ability of an XP in premiere 5? Is an 8 minute video supposed to take 2 hours to render? Windows is only reporting a mem usage of 121 while rendering... can someone explain?
 
I agree that the XP would in all likelyhood smoke the dual P3's... that said though, no one seems to be taking into account that the P3's are 733's running at 1GHz. That does change the equation some.... not only does it give it a higher MHz in total, but the FSB would have to be running at around 181 MHz.

Hmmm....Syborg1211, are you SURE your friend is running 733's at 1GHz? If I'm not mistaken, the 733's are 133 FBS models with a low multiplier. If he has 700's or 750's I'd be more prone to believe that he was running at a Gig, since that would put his FSB at around either 143 or 133, depending on which chip he had.

Joe
 
LOL....

Hey Sunner, don't you post over at... some sort of hippy joint?

If so, and if you know what I'm talking about, PM me the link... I lost it!

Good seein' ya! 🙂

Joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top