Quick, which is quicker, question.

[Bull]

Hi,
Does a "Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz" out perform a "Pentium 4 (630) - 3.00GHz"?
No overclocking, it's just in an internet server.

Thanks

 

[cooljimy84]

At single thread apps prob not.....
but as a general file server/workhorse it should do.

If my understanding of cores is correct....

 

[Ben M]

At single thread apps prob not.....

Err yeah the core2 is probably faster, because it's so much more efficient. It's so much faster clock-for-clock.

 

[Dark_Angel]

At single thread apps prob not.....
but as a general file server/workhorse it should do.

If my understanding of cores is correct....

The "fight" would be more 1 sided than a 1 limbed midget vs Jet Li.

The core series pounds the netburst based chips in to dust, even the E1200 series would probably beat it.

And op, a little overclocking would never hurt, if the server needs to be up constantly and needs to be 100 percent reliable I would maybe only give it a mild overclock, say to 2.6 GHZ, but then I actually have a thing where I hate default clock speeds

 

[milkinc13]

bit like comparing a veyron with a saxo the Core will compleatly outperform the netburst P4

 

[Janesy B]

netburst is pants. even a cheap c2d will kill a p4

 

[Bull]

OK thanks, I'll think about changing from the P4 then. As it's a hired server, I think overclocking it would be a bit cheeky!

Another silly question; if everything else was equal, would a quad core be twice as fast as a duel?

Thanks

 

[Janesy B]

OK thanks, I'll think about changing from the P4 then. As it's a hired server, I think overclocking it would be a bit cheeky!

Another silly question; if everything else was equal, would a quad core be twice as fast as a duel?

Thanks

no

 

[Bull]

Oh, 10% quicker 50%?

 

[FrenchTart]

What are you actually using this server for?

If the P4 is doing what you need it to do with no problems then there's not much point paying extra for something you don't need.

 

[Janesy B]

Oh, 10% quicker 50%?

no

you'll just have two more cores. if your not doing multi threaded stuff then it will be exactly the same

 

[Dark_Angel]

Depends on the server load really, it could be a huge amount quicker, but then it could make no difference because your server isn't being stressed much anyway.

Try looking at the CPU performance graphs under load and decide if it is always maxed then maybe quad. It may help to tell us what the server is being used for

 

[Bull]

It's a CentOS OS running one Yabb forum. The load average can be 4, 4, 4 or above, at peak times. Top shows more than one instance of Yabb running, so I presume that the Hyper threading is using both threads.

 

[Justintime]

At single thread apps prob not.....
but as a general file server/workhorse it should do.

If my understanding of cores is correct....

It'll murder the P4 in anything and everthing, even if you underclocked it by a few hundred Mhz Another benefit is that it won't be a room heater as well.

 

[-iceblade^]

+1. not to mention the E1 and E2series chips are cheap... just go C2d - you'd be nuts not to...

 

[G_Wizz]

As a rough guide a C2D is (almost) twice as fast clock for clock as a P4

 

[Corasik]

As a rough guide a C2D is (almost) twice as fast clock for clock as a P4

I'd go as far as saying twice as fast clock for clock as a Pentium-D (dual core). As some people still might think that it was the dual core nature of C2D that gives its good performance.

Each core of a C2D is almost twice as fast as the cores on a Pentium(4)-D clock for clock.