• 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.

Question about Pentium 4 chips

dfirestein

Junior Member
Should I be getting "Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 650 w/ HT Technology 3.4GHz 800MHz FSB 2MB Cache" or "Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 550 w/ HT Technology 3.4GHz 800MHz FSB 1MB Cache"? What's the difference? Will one last me longer than the other without upgrading?
 
Between the two, I would get the 650. It includes 64 bit instructions and has a larger cache. Is this a new rig or an upgrade?
 
The 6xx series support 64-bit operation, and have twice the L2 of the 5xx series.
They also run cooler, I believe, allowing higher overclocks.
 
As the others said, the 650 has 64bit extensions, and runs a tad bit cooler, and obviously it has 2mb of cache compared to 1mb..550 is still compatible with an LGA775 865/875 chipset based board, 650 needs 915/925x chipset board.
 
I'd definitely prefer a 6xx chip over a 5xx one. They are simply engineered much better, so they don't run like furnaces and support Data Execution Prevention and 64-bit. That being said, I'd much rather have either an Athlon 64 or a dual core chip (again, Athlon X2 is preferred but Pentium D is still better than a single core P4 in the long run). After all, for the $400+ that a 650 costs, you could buy one hell of a single core A64 (4000+) or for $100 more you could buy an X2 4200+, which friggin rocks. You could even grab a 3.0GHz Pentium D, probably for under $400. If you don't want to upgrade a lot, then dual core is really the way to go, since in a year you'll definitely regret not having one if you decide to buy a single core now instead. Also, if you like gaming, THEN GET AMD!!!!!!
 
6xx prescott with 64, 5xx precott w/o. If you're bent on Intel, the 6xx is going to be better.

Without knowing what you're doing with the system I can't make an AMD/Intel recomendation, but dual core would be the way to go with any system I would build these days.
 
The 650 is a better cpu than the 550 for the reasons stated already. But as also mentioned earlier, if you're upgrading and don't already have a 915/925 or 945/955 board, I believe any board older than those will not support an Intel 6xx cpu. And the 550 maybe your only option.

If that's not the case, then you'll be happier w/ a 650. Even though, I do have a 640 for sale. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: BitByBit
The 6xx series support 64-bit operation, and have twice the L2 of the 5xx series.
They also run cooler, I believe, allowing higher overclocks.

Much cooler ~20%.
 
For the curious, yes this is a new computer. I wasn't going AMD because, frankly, AMD confuses the crap out of me as to what is actually an upgrade. That and I've always had a Pentium processor. Almost no chance of me changing over to AMD at this point because it would require more research and I've already spent about a month and a half researching this computer.
 
3500+ =(about) 650 in a fair test.
3500>650 in gaming, and uhhhh, browsing the internet? (anyone else notice the mozilla benches?)
650>3500 in multitasking, content creation

This is obviously oversimplified, but probably hits the important stuff. The last thing is most (if not all) people here would agree AMD gives better bang for the buck.
 
And if you look anywhere on the web for benchmarks, the 4200+ or the 4400+ (with a mild OC to 2400 or 2500) will blow ANY of the P4 chips away stock, and for multithreaded, will beat any of then even OC'ed. I think it is not a very good way to spend your money ($1000-$1500 total ??) saying "AMD confuses the crap out of me as to what is actually an upgrade. That and I've always had a Pentium processor." Thats like saying "I allways liked my 1955 oldsmobile, so why change"
 
Originally posted by: dfirestein
For the curious, yes this is a new computer. I wasn't going AMD because, frankly, AMD confuses the crap out of me as to what is actually an upgrade. That and I've always had a Pentium processor. Almost no chance of me changing over to AMD at this point because it would require more research and I've already spent about a month and a half researching this computer.

Topic Summary: Unsure about the differences between 650 and 550

Don't you see the irony here?
 
Originally posted by: dfirestein
For the curious, yes this is a new computer. I wasn't going AMD because, frankly, AMD confuses the crap out of me as to what is actually an upgrade. That and I've always had a Pentium processor. Almost no chance of me changing over to AMD at this point because it would require more research and I've already spent about a month and a half researching this computer.

:thumbsup:

Stick w/Intel bud.
 
Between the two, the 650 is better. That is, if price is no concern. If price was important, I'd tell you to stick with the 550, since 64-bit apps aren't even out yet.

But...I don't think you're giving AMD a fair chance by saying that you've always had an Intel. You're willing to spend the extra hundreds of dollars just because you've had the brand before? I'm sure that in your research, you saw AMD's overall superiority, both in the benchmarks and in your wallet. Intel only wins in office applications and some content creation. AMD takes the prize for overall performance, especially in gaming and most workstation applications.
 
Originally posted by: fatty4ksu
Originally posted by: dfirestein
For the curious, yes this is a new computer. I wasn't going AMD because, frankly, AMD confuses the crap out of me as to what is actually an upgrade. That and I've always had a Pentium processor. Almost no chance of me changing over to AMD at this point because it would require more research and I've already spent about a month and a half researching this computer.

:thumbsup:

Stick w/Intel bud.

Stick to THG bud.

 
Back
Top