Which is better P4 or Core 2

[tjcinnamon]

Okay stupid question time:

I am capturing a some DVR output with a screen recorder.

I'm thinking about updating the processor and motherboard on the capture machine. As it stands it has a P4 3.4Ghz oc'ed to 4.1Ghz, and 3GB of PC2 6400 with no PageFile, with two SATA drives, and GEforce7300 512MB (GDDR2 I think).

Do you think there would be a performance increase if I move to a Core 2 with less Processor speed on each core but more cores?

Thanks, JOe K.

 

[Billb2]

Depends on whether the app you're using to do the capture supports multi-core.

 

[tjcinnamon]

Good call.

If there are 2 processor intensive programs running would XP know to put one on each core?

 

[Rottie]

yes of course

 

[QueBert]

Originally posted by: tjcinnamon
Good call.

If there are 2 processor intensive programs running would XP know to put one on each core?

I don't think XP is that smart, I know on my box I had to C+A+D and tell XP to allow Sony Vegas to only use 1 core of my C2D. The system was almost unusable before I did this and Vegas had both cores at about 100% constantly while I was rendering some video. Same problem with a few other problems, I have to assume it's XP not the software. If XP is suppose to automatically adjust core usage to even things out mine sure doesn't

 

[tjcinnamon]

So long as I can set it myself, I really don't care. I have some tax return dollars plus I sold my Wii.



I'll probably move my e6600 and P5B to my capture (mess around) machine and do a q6000 with a mobo that I haven't selected yet.

Any recommendations for a motherboard (ASUS) I have 4GB of PC2-8500 Corsair Dominator to stick into it?

Thanks, JOe K.

 

[gooseman]

I have an Abit IX38 QuadGT with a Q6600 and 4 GB of OCZ Platinum and have no complaints so far.

 

[Griswold]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: tjcinnamon
Good call.

If there are 2 processor intensive programs running would XP know to put one on each core?

I don't think XP is that smart, I know on my box I had to C+A+D and tell XP to allow Sony Vegas to only use 1 core of my C2D. The system was almost unusable before I did this and Vegas had both cores at about 100% constantly while I was rendering some video. Same problem with a few other problems, I have to assume it's XP not the software. If XP is suppose to automatically adjust core usage to even things out mine sure doesn't

That sounds like too high priority for that program. Render jobs should run at low or lowest priority to prevent things like that (if you want to work with your machine at the same time, otherwise it doesnt matter, obviously). In this case, it seems that the software requested normal priority - and got it.

 

[graysky]

How are you capturing the video (codec)? Have a look at my x264 encoding benchmark which measured encoding speed (different from what you're doing). All the P4 systems are waaaaay slower than the c2d system.

The fastest p4 in the table is 3.0 GHz and completed the test in 5-1/2 min vs. a c2d clocked to 3.0 GHz that came in around 1-3/4 min or so.

Would you be interesting in downloading and running the benchmark on your 4.1 GHz machine? PM me the data or post it to the anandtech x264 results thread.

Thanks.

 

[mentalcrisis00]

I know that you can't set programs to different cores in XP while having it save. XP for some reason resets the core settings after reboot without a secondary program like Program Explorer. From what I've read the only operating systems that allow you to save core presets are Windows Server Edition and Linux. I've tried saving core sets in Vista and can't get it to work either. I realize just because I couldn't do it doesn't mean that it's not possible but it's so difficult that I gave up. I will say that vista seems to auto select core's depending on cpu load, in the task manager I see certain programs being bound to core 00 and 01 automatically.

 

[DerwenArtos12]

Originally posted by: tjcinnamon
So long as I can set it myself, I really don't care. I have some tax return dollars plus I sold my Wii.



I'll probably move my e6600 and P5B to my capture (mess around) machine and do a q6000 with a mobo that I haven't selected yet.

Any recommendations for a motherboard (ASUS) I have 4GB of PC2-8500 Corsair Dominator to stick into it?

Thanks, JOe K.

you need crossfire or sli support?

If no, DFI LP DK p35

If crossfire DFI LP UT X38

If SLI, wait for DFI LP UT or DK 790i

I'm not a DFI fanboy or anything though

 

[tjcinnamon]

Alright here is the scenario.

Machine 1:
e6600
Asus p5b deluxe
4GB of corsair 8500 dominator

Machine 2:
3.4Ghz
P5wd2-premium (so no c2d support)
3gb of pc2-6400

I am definitley getting rid of the processor (p4) and mobo (wd2) and getting a q6600 on machine 2 should I:

a) move the e6600 and p5b to machine 2 and get a better mobo than the p5b for the q6600 going into machine 1?
b) should I get a weaker or comprable mobo to the p5b to put the e6600 in machine 2 and leave p5b in the machine 1?

so basically should I get a better mobo than the p5b or is it unnesecesary?

Also, keep in mind that on machine 2 I want to trior even quad boot - Ubuntu Studio, XP, Vista, OSX Leopard. I think the X-Factor on the decision will be possible limitiations for running OSX on a PC however, as much as I am against Apple I want it for some obsure VJ programs.

Also would a graphics card help my cause at all. The only thing I do video editing and some rudimentary vj'ing at this point. So I don't think a 3d heavy card would be necessary. I have been always baffeled by the fact that graphics cards rarley help out video editing or 2d video performance.

Thanks, JOeK.

 

[Billb2]

Originally posted by: tjcinnamon
...should I: ...get a better..

Also would a graphics card help my cause at all.

Yes, always "get a better"
NO, not really, just futureproof, maybe

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: tjcinnamon
Good call.

If there are 2 processor intensive programs running would XP know to put one on each core?

I don't think XP is that smart, I know on my box I had to C+A+D and tell XP to allow Sony Vegas to only use 1 core of my C2D. The system was almost unusable before I did this and Vegas had both cores at about 100% constantly while I was rendering some video. Same problem with a few other problems, I have to assume it's XP not the software. If XP is suppose to automatically adjust core usage to even things out mine sure doesn't

I don't get the problem. It sounds like you had a multithreaded workload, and XP was using both cores for it. Sounds perfectly normal. If you DONT want XP using all cores, then yes, you need to limit the processor affinity for a process.

 

[Markfw]

I am pretty sure that c2d @ 3.2 (easy OC) would be faster than a 4 ghz P4, even if the task was single-threaded. it is something like P4@ 4.0 = C2D (only counting one core) @ 2.0 its really that much faster. And most apps are multi-threaded. So @ 3.2 a C2D gives you over 3x the power of a P4 @ 4.0

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
I am pretty sure that c2d @ 3.2 (easy OC) would be faster than a 4 ghz P4, even if the task was single-threaded. it is something like P4@ 4.0 = C2D (only counting one core) @ 2.0 its really that much faster. And most apps are multi-threaded. So @ 3.2 a C2D gives you over 3x the power of a P4 @ 4.0

Ha ha, understatement of the year

Welcome to July 14, 2006

I think its just been so long now that most everyone has forgotten just how piss poor the P4 was. It gets royally thumped by a K8, let alone a C2D. Single threaded I am talking. 4MB of L2 cache will do that for you, or anyone for that matter.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Markfw900
I am pretty sure that c2d @ 3.2 (easy OC) would be faster than a 4 ghz P4, even if the task was single-threaded. it is something like P4@ 4.0 = C2D (only counting one core) @ 2.0 its really that much faster. And most apps are multi-threaded. So @ 3.2 a C2D gives you over 3x the power of a P4 @ 4.0

Ha ha, understatement of the year

Welcome to July 14, 2006

I think its just been so long now that most everyone has forgotten just how piss poor the P4 was. It gets royally thumped by a K8, let alone a C2D. Single threaded I am talking. 4MB of L2 cache will do that for you, or anyone for that matter.

If you extrapolate based on those, I think my estimation is correct, I may even be low ! At least that ptoves my point.

Thanks IDC !

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Markfw900
I am pretty sure that c2d @ 3.2 (easy OC) would be faster than a 4 ghz P4, even if the task was single-threaded. it is something like P4@ 4.0 = C2D (only counting one core) @ 2.0 its really that much faster. And most apps are multi-threaded. So @ 3.2 a C2D gives you over 3x the power of a P4 @ 4.0

Ha ha, understatement of the year

Welcome to July 14, 2006

I think its just been so long now that most everyone has forgotten just how piss poor the P4 was. It gets royally thumped by a K8, let alone a C2D. Single threaded I am talking. 4MB of L2 cache will do that for you, or anyone for that matter.

If you extrapolate based on those, I think my estimation is correct, I may even be low ! At least that ptoves my point.

Thanks IDC !

ha ha, sorry about that, my quoting you was to add support your prior post, not to suggest "you" were the one making the understatement of the year.

I went from a P4C at 2.8GHz to my vapoLS 3.7GHz QX6700 in 2006. That was an amazing experience.

 

[Gaurav Duggal]

the lowest clocked c2d @1.6ghz (e2140) equals a dual core pentium D @3.0ghz (basically 2 pentium 4's glued together)

 

[JustaGeek]

And don't forget about the "dual-core" patches for XP:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896256

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/909944/

 

[DerwenArtos12]

Originally posted by: tjcinnamon
Alright here is the scenario.

Machine 1:
e6600
Asus p5b deluxe
4GB of corsair 8500 dominator

Machine 2:
3.4Ghz
P5wd2-premium (so no c2d support)
3gb of pc2-6400

I am definitley getting rid of the processor (p4) and mobo (wd2) and getting a q6600 on machine 2 should I:

a) move the e6600 and p5b to machine 2 and get a better mobo than the p5b for the q6600 going into machine 1?
b) should I get a weaker or comprable mobo to the p5b to put the e6600 in machine 2 and leave p5b in the machine 1?

so basically should I get a better mobo than the p5b or is it unnesecesary?

Also, keep in mind that on machine 2 I want to trior even quad boot - Ubuntu Studio, XP, Vista, OSX Leopard. I think the X-Factor on the decision will be possible limitiations for running OSX on a PC however, as much as I am against Apple I want it for some obsure VJ programs.

Also would a graphics card help my cause at all. The only thing I do video editing and some rudimentary vj'ing at this point. So I don't think a 3d heavy card would be necessary. I have been always baffeled by the fact that graphics cards rarley help out video editing or 2d video performance.

Thanks, JOeK.

what are the exact uses for each board? are you attempting to eliminate an expensive board for budget reasons?

Quite frankly if you want an upgrade I would just ditch the cpu/mobo combo in machine 2, move the cpu/mobo from machine 1 to machine 2 and just start from scratch with machine 1. Thats a little expnsive though. You certainly *could* get a less expensive motherboard for machine 2, move machine 1's CPU to it, keep the existing motherboard in machine 1 and plug your quadcore into it but, it's actually going to be slightly more work that way and the least expensive enthusiast board out now is about $90 so, why quibble over $50 to get yourself a good level enthusiast board to pair with your new processor?

EDIT: oh an if you're even considering going to high-def recording or encoding any time soon, get up to either an 8500gt or a 3850 or, given their prices a 9600GT would be a beautiful match. Your 7300GT will not handle all the high def standards and the one it does handle it only handles medocre at best. I put an 8500GT in my HTPC and I've been incredibly impressed with it so far for high def encoding and playback.

 

[tjcinnamon]

I will def go an quality board and q6600 in machine 1 and move the remaining stuff into 2.

I will look into the graphics card. That is still a big question. Also one of the next big questions is what components will be compatible with OSX on a PC. I am gonna start VJ'ing and there is some MAC exclusive software. (Even thought I hate Apple, or mainly apple users).

Thanks for the help,
JOe K.

P.S. If you have any suggestions for MAC compatible gear feel free to let me know