Start a Conversation

Unsolved

This post is more than 5 years old

13589

September 3rd, 2006 06:00

Pentium D vs. Core 2 Duo & Core 2 Extreme

I currently have a five year old PC with an Intel Pentium 2.8GHz with HyperThread.
 
I've ordered an XPS 700 with the Pentium® D Processor 930 with Dual Core Technology (3.00GHz, 800FSB)
 
Since I've ordered I've been reading up on the Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme Intel processors. I really am confused now if I'm ordering the right processor for this PC. I want a gaming PC that can handle pretty much anything but now I'm confused. 
 
I guess the question is this:  Is the 3.00GHz Pentium D with the Dual Core going to be that much of an improvement on the 2.8GHz w/HT that  I already have?  And if it is not, then is the 2.67GHz Core 2 Duo faster than 2.8GHz w/HT?
 
I know that it's RAM and components that make a PC fast, and as a last resort I may consider the 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme. If the 2.67GHz Core 2 Duo though is appreciably faster than the 2.8GHz w/HT that I currently have, then I would probably get the better video cards. If I get the 2.93GHz, I probably wouldn't be able to do that.
 
I don't really do much multi-tasking so would the 3.80GHz w/HT that is available be another option for me to consider?  (kinda want the Core 2 technology though)  :smileywink:
 
I've never had a Dell before, so any help you can give me would be much appreciated. The goal here is to have a sweet gaming machine that I won't have to upgrade at all for a long time.
Thanks.

6 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 06:00

This may be of some use. You can choose 2 different processors and compare them in a variety of benchmarks including games, rendering, etc. The Core 2 Duo is pretty much top of the list every time.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

40 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 07:00

thanks. doesn't look like there is a $505 difference between the 2.67GHz and the 2.93GHz. but thanks for the link   :smileyhappy:

23 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 07:00

Unless you're into to serious OCing there isn't a $500 (is actually closer to $700 here in Europe) difference between E6700 and X6800, with benchies suggest just approx 5% faster

So I stayed with the E6700 and put the money into better video cards which is always the better ROI for large screen, high eye-candy gaming.

 

 

40 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 08:00

I agree. If I get the E6700 I'll probably be able to get 4GB of memory and the dual GTX vid cards. :smileyhappy:

453 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 12:00

Your computer can't be 5 years old because a P4 2.8GHz with HT didn't exist then. Also, you wouldn't have been able to upgrade to that CPU when it became available. My guess is that it's 2-3 years old. But since you want to upgrade, forget about the Pentium D. It's obsolete technology. The Core2 Duo is tons faster despite its lower clock speeds. Clock speed doesn't matter anymore as both Intel and AMD have moved to dual core CPUs and increased efficiency. You really can't look at clock speed when comparing different CPUs. It only matters when comparing the same CPUs as in a Pentiun 4 2.8GHz vs. a 3.2GHz. The architecture of the Core2 CPUs are entirely different. They can execute 4 parallel instructions per clock vs. 3 for the Pentium 4. The pipeline of the Core2 is only 14 stages long vs. 31 stages for the Pentium D. In sum, it's a FAR more efficient CPU.
 
You could get a the E6600 Core 2 CPU which would be much less than even the E6700 but not a lot slower. It's the sweet spot of the Core2 lineup. The Core2 Extreme is only for those who just want the fastest no matter what the cost. Save the money, get an E6600 and a great video card. You'll be happy you did!

39 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 13:00

I also went with the E6700, the bit of overclocking I might do will put it close the the x6800 and I'm going to use the money saved for extra ram. I'm running Vista on my Sony laptop and I plan on putting Vista on my XPS 700 when I get it. Vista needs loads of ram.

354 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 14:00

There is a fairly significant different between the older Pentium D technology and the newer Core 2 Duo technology.  Pentium D will soon go the way of the Pentium 4, in the history books as a strong processor that ran hot!

2.6K Posts

September 3rd, 2006 15:00

What confuses me is you can find these forums (not just you, lots of people) but you can't find site that review systems and CPU's to explain the differences in laymans terms.

Apparently Intel did a better job of spreading FUD about clock speed than I ever thought! Oh well, I wonder if Chris M can add to the faq a list of web sites for people to go to for reviews?

hardocp.com
anandtech.com
tomshardware.com
legitreviews.com
extremetech.com
firingsquad.com
arstechnica.com
sharkeyextreme.com
hexus.net

All are www's and these are just a few that do the work so you can read all the new stuff.

240 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 18:00

ya pentium d is old technology...but so will core 2 duo in about 2 months. since intel is planning to release quad core in Q4 of this year instead of next. google it. check intels site.

so much for xps 700s with the core 2 duos.

887 Posts

September 3rd, 2006 18:00

and I suspect some of those people who shelled out over $1000 for an X6800 will be disappointed when in a couple of months the X8000 3.33/1333 will be out...at about the same price.  It never made sense from a cost standpoint to buy the top end processor(s), especially now when the low/mid-range Core2 gives so much performance for the cost.

2.6K Posts

September 3rd, 2006 18:00

I just read some bad news about the quad cores (to me at least) will be over 100WATT CPUs maybe even 130+ which is back to where the Pentium D and EE were! Well I'll pass if thats the case because the Core 2 Duo/E line are plenty fast for me, have two cores, and at 75W and less are where I'm staying.
AMD just announced there quad cores (not out till middle of next year at a minumum) will maintain low wattage so that looks way better to me.



@XPS_MAYHEM wrote:
ya pentium d is old technology...but so will core 2 duo in about 2 months. since intel is planning to release quad core in Q4 of this year instead of next. google it. check intels site.

so much for xps 700s with the core 2 duos.


Community Manager

 • 

54.7K Posts

September 4th, 2006 02:00

tphillips63,

I will add them on tuesday.

2.6K Posts

September 4th, 2006 02:00



@Anonymous-ChrisM wrote:
tphillips63,

I will add them on tuesday.




Thanks just make sure to get the legal statement so its not an endorsement from Dell just information :)

240 Posts

September 4th, 2006 03:00

ya the watt #'s are large. but so will be the performance.it will be a big jump from the core 2 duos. but if you dont mind having old technology then even the pentium D is good enough. i wanna be able to see the frames my system spits out in a game LOL.

2.6K Posts

September 4th, 2006 04:00

This is why I went with a Precision 690, I get quad core now (two dual core Xeons) each with a dedicated FSB of 1333MHz, and a guaranteed upgrade path to the quad core Xeons should I want to upgrade down the road, so I could get eight real cores soon! I just might to since I'm a fool for technology. :)
If apps, especially DVD ripping and mp3/4 audio start to support all the threads it will pay off.

PS Quad Core Xeons will be on the 1066FSB according to latest roadmaps.
No Events found!

Top