Whats my CPU compared to?

[WatchTower]

Now I've clocked my 3200+ to 2.6Ghz would would say it would perform about the same as a 4000+ that has 2.4Ghz? Also what Pentium cpu would it perform similar to. I was just wondering a lot of games say you need a such and such Pentium or a similar AMD cpu so I was wondering what's the equivalent Pentium 4 cpu to my cpu?

 

[Mobius 1]

Depends if the L1 and L2 cache's are the same as the 4000+ (i think)

 

[marcus_667]

it will be similar to the 4000+ but the 4000+ has 1 meg l2 cache so i think the 4000+ would have ure cpu in some areas

 

[Doppleganger]

He is saying that his overclocked cpu is at 2.6Ghz and not the 2.4Ghz of the 4000+ though.

My 512kb L2 cache cpu is also at 2.6Ghz. I would say that the 200Mhz about makes up for the smaller cache in some bandwidth intensive applications but slightly surpasses it in others.

 

[Vegeta]

Yes all tiny differences, but I'd have to agree with the original statement.

 

[FatRakoon]

As of last night, running Super PI, I compared my Newcastle 3000 and ClawHammer 3700 to my P4

The Newcastle 3000 I took to 2.4Ggz, the same as the ClawHammer 3700, the Newcastle has 512k the Claw has 1MB, and the P4, has 2MB and thats a Prescott at 3.6Ghz.

The P4 gives me a 35 Second 1M SuperPI, the Newcstle @ 2.5 gives me 37 and the Claw gives me 36, so one second between the 3.

On a 2MB SuperPI run, the Newcastle @2.4 and the P4, both give me 1m26s and the Clawhammer gives me 1m22 so that has edged the clawhammer out in front only slightly...

So, considering the P4 is 3.6 and the AMDs are both 2.4, I would say that on those results, the AMD is 50% faster than the P4, and if we can assume this is true across the board, then a 2Ghz AMD is the same speed then, as a 3Ghz Pentium?

Nice warm glow coming up to know that my 2 fastest AMDs have hit 3Ghz, so in theory, I need to get 4.5Ghz out of a P4 to equal them.

This is not strictly true however, as one of the AMDs is a Winchester, the other an XP and the speed differences of both those are fairly drastically wider than the crand canyon.

 

[MeatLoaf]

If you clocked your 3200+ to 2.6Ghz it would be almost identical to a 4000+ at 2.4Ghz. Apparently the extra cache of the 4000+ counts as approx 200Mhz

 

[FatRakoon]

That sounds about right... The extra cache can do some wonderful things, and to be honest, going from 512 to 1M isnt all that much of a difference over say 128 to 256.

Its a similar result with the Barton v XP ( 256 v 512 ) with the very same FSB & Multi... For the most part, there is next to no difference, but with multitasking ( Well, lots of Apps on the desktop at any one time more than the multitasking I find ) and with games, the extra cache plays a bigger part than you'd think.

The arguement here, is when I compared the Sempron 3300 against the 3100.

The 3100 is 1.8Ghz and a 256k cache, and the 3300 is 2Ghz but with only a 128k cache... That 200mhz counted for nothign as the performance of the sempron was so poor, it was a shame that I actually bought it thinking it would be half decent.

I have now got rid of it, but I know for a fact that it is slower than a stock XP2500... Cant remember if it was a 64Bit CPU now either... Sure it wasnt.

 

[WatchTower]

Since my first post I pushed it to 2.7Ghz an extra 300mhz over the 4000. I think The AMD64 3000+ and 3200+ are the best bargins out there. As they're cheap and can be overclocked easly and well. So you end up getting like £240 of performance for around £100.