ANova Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 Yeah, I can see that the Pentium M is good at gaming, but even then, can you compare a stock Pentium M with a stock Athlon 64 and still say that it kicks the AMD64's ass? I wouldn't think so.My point is, if Tom's has to OC a processor to be able to give it such high praise, then it really doesn't reflect how good the processor is. The guy doing that review should be doing stock vs. stock or OCed vs. OCed. 586013829[/snapback] A Pentium M performs better then an FX-55 at gaming overclocked to around 2.5 GHz. Yes you can overclock the FX-55 as well however 2.5 GHz on a Pentium M is somewhat conservative also as I have seem them get as high as 3.2 Ghz, and it draws around 10-15 watts less. Obviously the Athlon 64 is quite a bit faster then the Pentium M at other applications like encoding or rendering, but then again the Pentium 4 is better still then the Athlon 64 at that too. My point is, no current processor atm is best all around, they all have their advantages and disadvantages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyrilix Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 A Pentium M performs better then an FX-55 at gaming overclocked to around 2.5 GHz. Yes you can overclock the FX-55 as well however 2.5 GHz on a Pentium M is somewhat conservative also as I have seem them get as high as 3.2 Ghz, and it draws around 10-15 watts less. Obviously the Athlon 64 is quite a bit faster then the Pentium M at other applications like encoding or rendering, but then again the Pentium 4 is better still then the Athlon 64 at that too. My point is, no current processor atm is best all around, they all have their advantages and disadvantages. 586013947[/snapback] Your points are good...but where'd you catch the Pentium M at 3.2 GHz on air? I know FX-55s have gone up to 4 GHz on extreme cooling, but that doesn't count, really. The San Diegos can usually do 2.8-3.0 GHz on good air/water cooling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TensioN Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 I think a AMD 3700+ San Diego is enough for a good gaming PC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argote Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 The Pentium D is based completely on Netburst and it has the long pipes, high clock speeds and problems of the P4's... Yonah is the Intel Dual Core processor that is based on the P-M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broken Hope Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 My understanding was that the dual-core Pentium Ds were more similar to a Pentium M then they were to a desktop Pentium 4 (shorter pipelines, no hyperthreading, SpeedStep technology (though it is disabled on the 820), decent power consumption (considering that there are two cores after all). 586013254[/snapback] You're thinking of Yonah, which is basically based on the Pentium M. Pentium D is just 2 prescotts glued together on the same chip, they aren't even a single die, it's 2 pieces of silicon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeboy Posted June 4, 2005 Author Share Posted June 4, 2005 I agree with cyrilix when he says that the reviwes should be done OCed vs OCed and stock vs stock, I have never seen a Pntium M in my life higher than 2.5ghz (that is with OC) but I have seen AMD 64 OCed to 2.5ghz and they kick Pentium Ms butt! At rendering enconding, and even gaming, hell, the AMD XP my uncle has compared to a P4 3.2 a friend of mine has, the AMD is supperoir on every single detail. (dont remember the number of the XP, lemme find out) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted June 4, 2005 Veteran Share Posted June 4, 2005 The Pentium D is based completely on Netburst and it has the long pipes, high clock speeds and problems of the P4's... Yonah is the Intel Dual Core processor that is based on the P-M 586014153[/snapback] You're thinking of Yonah, which is basically based on the Pentium M. Pentium D is just 2 prescotts glued together on the same chip, they aren't even a single die, it's 2 pieces of silicon. 586014178[/snapback] Thanks for the corrections. Yea, I was probably thinking that the Pentium D was the Yonah. That's what happens when you read stuff from the theInquirer.net, spot an Intel announcement and extrapolate a conclusion. I thought the fact that the 830 and 840 supported SpeedStep (a feature usually reserved for mobile CPUs was a bit of a tipoff). Instead, it would seem to be a red herring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeboy Posted June 5, 2005 Author Share Posted June 5, 2005 what is the SpeedStep thing? what does it do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broken Hope Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 Thanks for the corrections. Yea, I was probably thinking that the Pentium D was the Yonah. That's what happens when you read stuff from the theInquirer.net, spot an Intel announcement and extrapolate a conclusion.I thought the fact that the 830 and 840 supported SpeedStep (a feature usually reserved for mobile CPUs was a bit of a tipoff). Instead, it would seem to be a red herring. 586014570[/snapback] The 600 series have support for speedstep and since the 800 series is based on the 600 series they have all the same features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted June 5, 2005 Veteran Share Posted June 5, 2005 The 600 series have support for speedstep and since the 800 series is based on the 600 series they have all the same features. 586019665[/snapback] Except for the Pentium D 820. Intel has disabled SpeedStep on that model. what is the SpeedStep thing? what does it do? 586019426[/snapback] "SpeedStep: A technique used by Intel in its microprocessors for portable computers in order to save battery power. It allows the processor to operate at its fastest clock speed when the computer is plugged into mains power, but forces it to cut back to a slower speed (using less watts) when running on the battery alone." http://www.techwriter.co.nz/nerd-ns.html Intel has also started using it on desktop CPUs to save electical usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeboy Posted June 5, 2005 Author Share Posted June 5, 2005 so, this SpeedStep is only efficient on laptops, since desktops dont run on battery power. i dont see the point on reducing the processors power to save electrical usage on a desktop! It sure is a great idea for laptops. Hopefully one day, we will have dual core laptops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted June 5, 2005 Veteran Share Posted June 5, 2005 so, this SpeedStep is only efficient on laptops, since desktops dont run on battery power. i dont see the point on reducing the processors power to save electrical usage on a desktop! It sure is a great idea for laptops. Hopefully one day, we will have dual core laptops. 586020129[/snapback] It reduces heat and lowers your monthly hydro bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circaflex Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 I agree with cyrilix when he says that the reviwes should be done OCed vs OCed and stock vs stock, I have never seen a Pntium M in my life higher than 2.5ghz (that is with OC) but I have seen AMD 64 OCed to 2.5ghz and they kick Pentium Ms butt! At rendering enconding, and even gaming, hell, the AMD XP my uncle has compared to a P4 3.2 a friend of mine has, the AMD is supperoir on every single detail.(dont remember the number of the XP, lemme find out) 586014557[/snapback] Somethings wrong with that statement, we all know the p4 northwoords were better than the XP series, but lets not turn it into a flame war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny McCormick Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 I'm going to build a new computer sometime after the summer with a AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeboy Posted June 5, 2005 Author Share Posted June 5, 2005 ok, you are right, I am not supposed to post that kind of statement, Im just saying, that my uncles computer outperforms my friends. I aint saying P4 aint good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeboy Posted June 8, 2005 Author Share Posted June 8, 2005 just founf this little review, to help people evaluate the situation a little better http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=141 here are the results with a little ocing in the 4400+ http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=141&type=expert&pid=17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takezo Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Pentium D also suports EM64T. The reason why Intel droped the price for the Pentium D below the Single core pentiums is because of two things. One is becaue The want to take the enthusiast market away from AMD. Why when they have 80% of total market, becuse intel is evil thats why. But intel's Pentium D will not be so hot in x64 environment. Why because the lowly 800mhz FSB will be a major botle neck. In fact intel has used their power ful perswasive method to hinder x64 development until AMd found suport from Microsoft, Intel's bigest partner, had to add x64 support. Pentium D was never ment to be a 64-bit processor but a 32-bit processor. Thus when x64 takes over you can bet that AMD's innovations will totaly mop the floor. BTW most encoding apps are pentium optimized, Yet AMD comes very close with processing power alone. In native built from the ground up 64-bit apps. That is when AMd will rule all. And Inel will be left in the stone age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Will everyone please stop with the DRM with the Pentium D. it's completely false! :wacko: http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050603_132207.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Im usually an AMD fanboy, but for the price for a dual, the 820 seems like the sweet spot right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Thanks for the corrections. Yea, I was probably thinking that the Pentium D was the Yonah. That's what happens when you read stuff from the theInquirer.net, spot an Intel announcement and extrapolate a conclusion.I thought the fact that the 830 and 840 supported SpeedStep (a feature usually reserved for mobile CPUs was a bit of a tipoff). Instead, it would seem to be a red herring. 586014570[/snapback] Pentium D is actually called "Smithfield" :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doli Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 looking in the fry's ad Pentium D 830 with a Gigabyte GA-81945P-G motherboard $449. I was just thinking gamer-wise, does it really matter you well above the minimun and recommended requirements in a processor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Help Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Will everyone please stop with the DRM with the Pentium D. it's completely false! :wacko: http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050603_132207.html 586151290[/snapback] It's not false, it's true. They just don't want the general to know about it. :ninja: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyrilix Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 looking in the fry's ad Pentium D 830 with a Gigabyte GA-81945P-G motherboard $449. I was just thinking gamer-wise, does it really matter you well above the minimun and recommended requirements in a processor. 586151336[/snapback] No, it doesn't...for the time being. But what about in two years? Whereas the Intel processor might be obsolete for gaming in 2 years, the AMD processor might take 3 years, meaning that it will last longer. Lasting longer = saving more money = better performance all the way until it falls below min reqs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doli Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 No, it doesn't...for the time being. But what about in two years? Whereas the Intel processor might be obsolete for gaming in 2 years, the AMD processor might take 3 years, meaning that it will last longer. Lasting longer = saving more money = better performance all the way until it falls below min reqs. 586151351[/snapback] well the Pentium D 830 is 3.0 Ghz, i think it will be a long time before that becomes the minimun requirement in games more than 2 years, but who knows the minimun requirement could take a sharp rise but that would be silly. I would like a AMD 4400 by the end of the year but im still open for Intel also Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyrilix Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 well the Pentium D 830 is 3.0 Ghz, i think it will be a long time before that becomes the minimun requirement in games more than 2 years, but who knows the minimun requirement could take a sharp rise but that would be silly. I would like a AMD 4400 by the end of the year but im still open for Intel also 586151394[/snapback] Think about it this way. Battlefield 2 is already at 1.7 GHz. We're coming closer and closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts