Pentium D & AMD Sempron

[Symcy94]

But how come E6600 is much faster, if the Pentium D have higer clock, kinda same L2 etc.

And also, "alot faster" ... how much faster? Like 30% or something? I'm trying to get some benchmark resaults of using real programs. Something like responding of PC when watching YouTube films, watching normal films, basic PC response ... running chrome,firefox ... flash games etc.
Any kind of that benchmark resaulst ?

 

[Durvelle27]

But how come E6600 is much faster, if the Pentium D have higer clock, kinda same L2 etc.

And also, "alot faster" ... how much faster? Like 30% or something? I'm trying to get some benchmark resaults of using real programs. Something like responding of PC when watching YouTube films, watching normal films, basic PC response ... running chrome,firefox ... flash games etc.
Any kind of that benchmark resaulst ?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2045/8

 

[NTMBK]

But how come E6600 is much faster, if the Pentium D have higer clock, kinda same L2 etc.

The important thing you want to consider is "instructions per clock", or IPC. Roughly speaking, total performance is IPC * clock speed. The Core 2 has a way, way higher IPC than the Pentium D.

 

[Symcy94]

The important thing you want to consider is "instructions per clock", or IPC. Roughly speaking, total performance is IPC * clock speed. The Core 2 has a way, way higher IPC than the Pentium D.

and what is exact number of those IPS in E6600 and in D925 if you maybe know ?

 

[Symcy94]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2045/8

Generally it seems that E6600 is 54% better then D925, so it's probably worth to upgrade it hehe

 

[nenforcer]

Generally it seems that E6600 is 54% better then D925, so it's probably worth to upgrade it hehe

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/93?vs=61

No question.

 

[NTMBK]

and what is exact number of those IPS in E6600 and in D925 if you maybe know ?

Unfortunately, IPC isn't a fixed number. It's entirely dependent on what code you are running on your processor- how often its going to main memory, whether it uses lots of vectorized operations or not, if it is integer heavy or floating point heavy. It's fairly common for chip A to have higher IPC than chip B in one application, and chip B to have higher IPC than chip A in another. But the difference between the Core architecture and the Netburst architecture's IPC is like night and day.

 

[Matt1970]

Recently I found Pentium D 925 CPU (http://ark.intel.com/products/27517/Intel-Pentium-D-Processor-925-4M-Cache-3_00-GHz-800-MHz-FSB)

And I'm wondering how beter is it if we compare it with AMD Sempron 3000+ 1,6GHz.

I saw some benchmarks:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Pentium+D+3.00GHz&id=1127

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Sempron+3000+&id=411

And it seems wery weird to me, why is so little difference.
That AMD Sempron seems to have 1 core 1,6GHz while D925 have 2 cores 3,0GHz .... for my opinion the difference should be biger.

So now I'm wondering if that D925 will be way better then AMD Sempron 3000+ at 1,6GHz ?
I know those are old components, but i need to build some pc like this for my little sister.

So that PC would be used mostly for web browsing, downloading and watching movies, some word and excel ... That would be mostly all.

So coment pls what do you think about those 2 processors

If you already have a board for that Pentium D chip than look up the specs and see if it will take a Core2Duo which even the slower ones will run circles around that Pentium D.

 

[Arkaign]

If you already have a board for that Pentium D chip than look up the specs and see if it will take a Core2Duo which even the slower ones will run circles around that Pentium D.

Well, it's not quite that simple, though I do echo the recommendation for sure.

Core 2 Duo 2MB were around 105% faster per clock on average than Pentium D, so there's actually somewhat of a wash with certain models (much better power/heat on the C2D obviously that's still worth it imho).

In other words :

Pentium D 960 3.6Ghz is about the equal of a 1.7-1.8Ghz C2D chip. In benchmarks, the 1.8Ghz Core 2 Duo E4300 is about dead even with that. Now the PD will suck power and pump heat like mad, and even with mild OC the C2D will run far far away in performance, but stock v stock they're shockingly close. At the same time, AMD 3800+ X2 is also nearly indistinguishable from these at stock.