Pentium 4's with HT. Since apps are now multithreaded, does it help a lot now?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
TurtleCrusher

TurtleCrusher

Lifer
Apr 20, 2008
10,067
990
126
This is something a LOT of people are asking. Usually we said they sucked a couple years ago because games were single threaded and that HT didnt do anything.

Well, games can use that second core pretty well now. Looking on AT reviews of the P4 3.06ghz HT, it saw an approximate 10% gain above the gain created by the clock speed. Since most games use two threads well, does a P4 seem like a decent choice for low end gaming again?

Anand:
Hyper-Threading in its current form is very much an infant technology, the potential for it is huge and it can grow into something much larger than what we see here today. It is impressive that we are able to see some serious performance gains in encoding and 3D rendering applications, as well as in isolated multitasking scenarios but the true benefit of Hyper-Threading comes much further down the road. With compiler optimizations and programmers developing with Hyper-Threading in mind, we'll see much more dramatic performance increases in the future.

Today, Hyper-Threading still comes at a fairly high cost as you have to purchase Intel's flagship Pentium 4 processor to get the technology. The beauty of it is that at < 5% die cost, Intel won't hesitate to migrate the technology across their entire line of CPUs. What will be interesting to see is whether or not the value Celeron line of processors gets the technology as well.
Click to expand...

http://www.anandtech.com/show/1031/22
 
Last edited:
fffblackmage

fffblackmage

Platinum Member
Dec 28, 2007
2,548
0
76
You can probably find an Athlon X2 with a mobo for around $50. That will utterly pwn your P4 with HT.
 
TurtleCrusher

TurtleCrusher

Lifer
Apr 20, 2008
10,067
990
126
Lol. I don't own a Pentium 4 anymore. Got s939 as my lowe end pc's.

I'm talking about people with theyr old dells looking to get into gaming. Could a 3ghz P4 paired with a 3650 (or so) play most games on low still?
 
StrangerGuy

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
My P4 2.4C cannot even maintain a minimum 60 fps in UT99 (Now a 11 year old game) with full bots. Now imagine it running newer games...
 
M

Mr. Pedantic

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2010
5,027
0
76
No. It doesn't. What is the point of having a Pentium 4, even one with hyperthreading, when true dual cores are dirt cheap at the moment, run clock for clock faster even with single-threaded apps and beat the living daylights out of it in multithreaded apps, and run cooler to boot?
 
B

bunit

Member
Apr 25, 2010
78
0
0
I have experience with this funnily enough
using an old Compaq Presario, its at least 5+ years old. It was $400 bucks back then.
The socket is too old to pop in a dual core, and the computer in general is not really worth upgrading other than as a cheap, quick fix.

So what I decided to do is put in a cheap AGP 8x card. I found a half off deal funnily enough. I did have to buy a new PSU too though, but I bought a cheap 450w? or 500w? CoolerMaster PSU that was on sale for $30.


P4 2.8GHZ HT "Prescott"
HIS ATI Radeon 4650 (DDR3!!!) AGP 8x (I actually got this cheap for $60)


I can play MW2 @ 1680x1050 pretty decently (50ish avg FPS?), but I turn it one or two notches down in resolution when playing/try-harding in multiplayer just because I feel like it gives me a better consistent FPS (rock solid 60+). I turn down the CPU-intensive effects though. Oh and textures are set on high, spec/normal map on low. I feel like I could push the settings more possibly with some AA/increasing settings but I'm happy with what I have now and it gives me enough frames to where I"m not computer-crippled in multiplayer anymore.

Would I recommend doing this? Depends on what games you want to play.
My system is noticeably louder fan-wise now though, I think it's the PSU fan?
 
Last edited:
toyota

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
bunit said:
I have experience with this funnily enough
using an old Compaq Presario, its at least 5+ years old. It was $400 bucks back then.
The socket is too old to pop in a dual core, and the computer in general is not really worth upgrading other than as a cheap, quick fix.

So what I decided to do is put in a cheap AGP 8x card. I found a half off deal funnily enough. I did have to buy a new PSU too though, but I bought a cheap 450w? or 500w? CoolerMaster PSU that was on sale for $30.


P4 2.8GHZ HT "Prescott"
HIS ATI Radeon 4650 (DDR3!!!) AGP 8x (I actually got this cheap for $60)


I can play MW2 @ 1680x1050 pretty decently (50ish avg FPS?), but I turn it one or two notches down in resolution when playing/try-harding in multiplayer just because I feel like it gives me a better consistent FPS (rock solid 60+). I turn down the CPU-intensive effects though. Oh and textures are set on high, spec/normal map on low. I feel like I could push the settings more possibly with some AA/increasing settings but I'm happy with what I have now and it gives me enough frames to where I"m not computer-crippled in multiplayer anymore.

Would I recommend doing this? Depends on what games you want to play.
My system is noticeably louder fan-wise now though, I think it's the PSU fan?
Click to expand...
I seriously doubt you are averaging 50 fps with that 2.8 P4 when techreport got just 32fps with a 3.8 P4 and gtx260. I doubt turning any cpu related settings down would get them to 50fps even with the 3.8 P4 so I just dont see it possible with a 2.8 P4. http://techreport.com/articles.x/18448/8
 
Last edited:
B

bunit

Member
Apr 25, 2010
78
0
0
I'm not sure what else to say other then...I do? lol.
When I'm not really moving a lot the yellow FPS indicator on Fraps goes as high as 90 and I haven't notice it dip below 50 when gaming @ 1280x800 with textures @ high, all effects off, and spec/normal map on low. I have less observations @ 1680x1050 because I haven't played much at that res, but from my sample size I feel like gameplay was comparably smooth to me playing at 1280x800 where I definitely have kept track of frame rates on the fraps indicator.

I"m pretty sure multiplayer gives you more FPS than campaign cause of less explosions and that could be why?


From the article you linked:
We tested this game at a relatively low 1024x768 resolution, with no AA, but otherwise using the highest in-game visual quality settings.

I think that's why. When I first booted it up the default settings had it @ 2xAA, Textures Extra, Spec/Normal map extra as well. I found the spec/normal map settings absolutely killed my FPS, and I'm guessing the AA did as well (saw dips as low as 30). Res is more GPU dependent I think? So yeah.

If there's any easy way to prove this I"m totally down.


edit//
okay.
I did 6 trials with the Fraps benchmarking software. Maps were Terminal/Quarry, TDM, air support and explosions were scattered aplenty. This is my first time doing that, and apparently it gives it to you in excel spreadsheet form? Anyways here are the max/min/avgs:


p4 2.8GHZ HT
1GB DDR3 ATI 4650 @ AGP 8x
1.5GB DDR Ram
nothing else matters

1280x800. Textures: High, Normal/Specular Map: Low. All effects off, No AA.
I'll probably do some runs @ 1680x1050 just for fun later, if anybody cares I"ll post the results.



1. Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg
3877 60000 51 83 64.617

2.Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg
3836 60000 46 86 63.933

3. Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg
3447 60000 35 80 57.45

4. Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg
3476 60000 35 86 57.933

5. Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg
4034 60000 44 87 67.233

6. Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg
3728 60000 46 79 62.133

Hmm, turns out mins were lower than I thought. I think they're pretty momentary dips (explosions?) though, but still thats not good ):




SCREENSHOTS:

-This isn't definite proof but there isn't much else I could do.











Conclusion: Well, it works for me (obviously the game doesn't look that good though). This is just the family computer which we've had for..at least 6 years I'd say? It's been through a lot, to say the least.

I'll be building a brand spankin` new $1500 budget build for myself in June/July, but until then, yeah.

edit/
1680x1050 looks noticeably better, frames are around the same with lower mins. Still averages in the 60s/high 50s though.
iw4mp2010042602202573.png
 
Last edited:
F

faxon

Platinum Member
May 23, 2008
2,109
1
81
if you're still running a p4 i would trash it. the chip is so slow compared to now that even if HT gave a 100&#37; speed boost it would still be the suck compared to current stuff. fry's regularly sells dual cores + boards in combos for $50-70, if you live near one i would highly recommend checking into that tomorrow since we sometimes have refresher combos on monday, if not check next friday when the main add for the week goes live. these combo's usually give you a CPU and mobo for less than the cost of the CPU itself, and we take a huge loss on them, so if you see it's there and you want it, you really gotta haul ass in quickly. sometimes these combos go within the first few hours of store opening, somtimes they last all week, it really depends on how good the combo is. for example, i just finished a build with a phenom 2 965 and a gigabyte MA785GMT-UD2h that i got for $165. the chip itself sells for $189.99 in store normally, and the board sells for $89. that's a huge fucking discount, and a great deal considering it's an excellent chip and a pretty nice board for what it is.

ed: seems you arent, but for anyone consdering it what i said still stands! that + 2gb of ram is like $120 after tax for the el cheapo, $260 if you get something like what i got and find a deal online cheap for 4GB DDR3 (what i did). i built my friend a system with the following specs, cause his netbook caught fire and i wanted to game with him again since i couldnt for like 5 years (cant afford a desktop)

ph2 965
MA785GMT-UD2H
4GB 1600MHz Gskill Ripjaws DDR3
OCZ agility 60GB
antec neopower 430w
HD5770
CM690
barracuda 500gb (3.5 years old now) for storage.

had the case, PSU, and HDD free, got win7 free from MSDN for him through my college. he now has a 3.6GHz (and still rising, not done with it yet) quad and a GPU with an unknown OC, he already has a 1920x1080 LCD he got to use with his PS3, and i have a plethora of spare game copies for him to play to boot. did all that for about $800 total, $600 of my own money, and is i noticed i got a lot of spare or free stuff, which many people usually have lying around. with the cost of a cheap gaming rig, even for anyone not near a frys, approaching $900 for a system with a high end quad and a good mid range DX11 graphics card, far cheaper the more stuff you reuse or get on sale/combo, i dont see any reason for anyone to try and rig somethign together using old hardware. once you pass even the $200 mark for a few things, which most will, you are within throwing distance of a cheap dual + mATX OCing board + 5770 for about $300, with a chance of unlocking to a tri or quad, and a good OC, it just doesnt make sense.
 
Last edited:
B

bunit

Member
Apr 25, 2010
78
0
0
^
Definitely agree with all of that for most people. For me though it was all about: How little can I spend to give this computer just a bit more life?
I was contemplating buying a mobo/dualie combo to put inside the Compaq but then I realized all the issues I'd likely run into (driver related, OS, etc) and also realized that I was basically building a new computer, which would be pointless since I am actually building one in a few months. So I just stuck with the minimum, basically, which was the graphics card and the PSU to be safe.

Also, you actually work at the Fry's I go to normally, it's the one thats pretty close to your competitor right? (Microcenter heh). Will definitely be hitting up (both) places, Fry's first of course, come build time in July ^_^ Some awesome deals, for sure.
 
Last edited:
F

faxon

Platinum Member
May 23, 2008
2,109
1
81
yea dude, you cant miss me in there. look for the tall ass guy with red hair. if im not there anymore, there's a place next door called neighborhood tech support, find me in there, as i probably got a better job LOL. work in the components department to boot, if you want me to let you know about any sick combo's send me a PM with how to contact you

ed: should make sure you're thinking of the right one. the one nearest to microcenter is the sunnyvale store, i work at the palo alto store, and there's also one in campbell and san jose, as well as freemont. the microcenter i know of is the one in santa clara
 
Last edited:
B

bunit

Member
Apr 25, 2010
78
0
0
Oh that's right, its the Sunnyvale store. Well, both of them are fairly close to me, about a 15minute drive to either of them so I still may drop by haha.
Anyways to keep on topic

I tested out the benchmarking thing @ 1680x1050. Like..9 runs? Maps: Underpass, Estate.
The averages were passable, if it a bit lower. The problem was with the min frame rates, which dipped to the LOW 30s in many of the runs. Maxes were the same, actually going up to 89. Average frame rates ranged from 50 to 68, some runs just went really well and others not so much. The low MINs definitely make this not an optimal resolution for Multiplayer I think. Probably not ideal for the fast-pacedness that is MW2, I'll try other resolutions for myself later. Or maybe I can OC? I find it really funny that I"m contemplating OC-ing something in this $400 6+ year old prebuilt computer, but hey, why not? Thermals could be an issue though.

But yeah, point still stands that the P4 HT, while extremely old, can run some modern games with a decent graphics card. Not sure if its due to the HT capability or what, but whatever, it runs, so I"m happy.

edit/
Avgs @ 1680x1050, same settings.
57.7
68.8
51.9
53.3
64.9
63.2
50.1
55.8
54.3

and heres a SS of it @ 1680x1050, looks quite a bit better I think. Like I said the Maxes still hit like 89, just this SS doesn't happen to show it.
 
Last edited:
HybridSquirrel

HybridSquirrel

Diamond Member
Nov 20, 2005
6,161
2
81
toyota said:
at stock speeds yeah its starting to look a little slow especially when only 2 or less cores are used. overclock it though and its still a very good cpu that can hang with the big boys.
Click to expand...

yeah i run it at 2.7 im scared to take it over 3 on air.
 
C

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Well my P4 Gallatin 3.4 Extreme can still hold its own :). Especially if I added a better video card. For everday use, light gaming with a resolution around 10x7 or 12x10, and a decent video card you could get by. I am not going to run Batman or Crysis on it, but I can still play some Quake, HL, and Unreal Tourney.
 
sandorski

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,778
6,338
126
If the Games/Apps of the time were Multithreaded as they are today, it certainly would have helped the P4 compete at that time. That said, I'm not surprised that some P4s still are capable of playing Current Games, my X2 3800, albeit is better than a P4, still does a decent Job with most current Games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom