Dual Core vs P4

Discussion in 'Dell' started by Hank Arnold, Mar 18, 2006.

  1. Hank Arnold

    Hank Arnold Guest

    Which would you get? A Dual Core Pentium D 820 (2.8GHz) or a P4 650 w/HT
    (3.4GHz). I'm leaning toward the latter..................
    Hank Arnold, Mar 18, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Hank Arnold

    Tom Scales Guest

    Dual Core. But I like to drive fast.
    Tom Scales, Mar 18, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hank Arnold

    Tom Lake Guest

    If your software takes advantage of mutiprocessing, dual core is faster, if
    not, the 3.4GHz CPU
    will be faster.

    Tom Lake
    Tom Lake, Mar 18, 2006
  4. Hank Arnold

    WSZsr Guest

    Dual Core for sure. It is nice to be able to open Outlook and use another
    application while Outlook polls the email servers.
    WSZsr, Mar 18, 2006
  5. Are there any benchmark results anywhere? I've tried the usual sites
    but can't find anything.

    I'm in the same position as the OP, 2.8 Dual Core vs 3.4
    P4...............it's probably a psychological numbers thing, 2.8 is
    less than 3.4 so must be slower etc etc....
    Alex Flaherty, Mar 18, 2006
  6. Hank Arnold

    Bob Levine Guest

    As already pointed out, if the app takes advantage of dual core, it will
    be faster. Photoshop screams with the Pentium D 2.8.

    Bob Levine, Mar 18, 2006
  7. Hank Arnold

    Jay B Guest

    I'm disappointed with the dual core for everyday life.
    i sold about 5 of them and not impressed.
    the 3.4 is a real screamer. i buy that for all my customers now and they
    are all pleased.
    Jay B, Mar 18, 2006
  8. Hank Arnold

    journey Guest

    What is is that you don't like about the dual core? I have a P4 3Ghz
    HT, and when multi-tasking it sounds choppy. I'm pretty happy with my
    P4, which I plan on keeping for many years, but if I had to do it over
    again I would have waited for dual core.

    journey, Mar 18, 2006
  9. Hank Arnold

    Jay B Guest

    i dont think for the extra money, it is that much faster or better for
    the average user. have you tried a 3.4, its a big noticable difference
    over any 3.2 or dual core chip 2.8/3.0 chip. plain and simple.
    Jay B, Mar 19, 2006
  10. Hank Arnold

    User N Guest

    User N, Mar 19, 2006
  11. Thanks for that, the review seems to vindicate what has been said
    already in this thread; namely, unless you're running apps already
    optimised for dual-core processors, you won't notice the difference.

    The other drawback (in the UK at least) is that Dell won't sell a
    dual-core system without MCE 2005..........are they saying XP Home or
    Pro won't run on that platform? Or is it just policy?
    Alex Flaherty, Mar 19, 2006
  12. Hank Arnold

    User N Guest

    The Pentium D 820 is less expensive than the Pentium 4 650. Each
    processor pulls ahead of the other by a sizeable margin under the
    right benchmarks/applications, so some care should be taken in terms
    of selection.
    User N, Mar 19, 2006
  13. Hank Arnold

    JLA Guest

    Just go with the Precision 670 with (2) Xeon DUAL CORE 2.8 GHz
    Processors and 2 to 4GB or Ram. That will put all the P4s to shame
    (but not the Opteron's from AMD but the cost of a machine with two of
    those is a bit more $$$$)

    You can pick one up at Dell for less than 2K with DVD Burner, SATA or
    SCSI Drives and a nice video card if you know when and where to look
    JLA, Mar 19, 2006
  14. Hank Arnold

    Hank Arnold Guest

    The P4 option is $100+ more than the DC
    Hank Arnold, Mar 19, 2006
  15. Hank Arnold

    Hank Arnold Guest

    Considering that I can get a 5150 with

    - P4 3.4GHz
    - 1GB RAM
    - 80GB DASD
    - 17 inch flat panel
    - CD/DVD burner

    for $739 (after $390 off and an extra 5% coupon), "less than $2K " seems
    less attractive.... ;-)
    Hank Arnold, Mar 19, 2006
  16. Hank Arnold

    Tom McCune Guest

    I have the Dell XPS 400, with the Pentium D 830 and Windows XP Pro. I don't
    see any incompatibility. Didn't Microsoft have to modified its Windows
    software for the UK market - could that possibly have introduced a
    compatibility problem (I wouldn't think so)?
    Tom McCune, Mar 19, 2006
  17. Hank Arnold

    journey Guest

    Thanks for explaining your reasoning. I do know that a lot of the
    dual core PC's come out at around similar price points as the single
    cores that they are replacing. Intel is very aggressive this time.

    journey, Mar 19, 2006
  18. Hank Arnold

    Leythos Guest

    Dual core, currently based on the typical Windows OS/Applications, would
    excel on a Server or with applications that fully support multiple CPU's
    (like CAD, Graphics (PhotoShop), and very high-end apps). For most
    people, a P4, with HT, and a higher CPU clock, will be better in terms
    of felt performance.
    Leythos, Mar 20, 2006
  19. Hank Arnold

    journey Guest

    What about disk defragmenting, virus checking, playing mp3's, moving
    files around -- wouldn't a dual core help in some of those
    multitasking scenarios?

    journey, Mar 20, 2006
  20. Hank Arnold

    Leythos Guest

    To many variables to say.

    My experience with Dual CPU systems covers everything since the Dual
    Celeron days, and shows that having Duals vs HT is great for me. I think
    that most people will not notice much difference in getting a Dual Core
    vs a very fast single + HT.

    Playing MP3's? Are you kidding, they don't take ANY CPU load anyways.

    Moving files? Maybe if you wanted to move 70GB of files and burn a DVD
    at the same time.

    AV, it might help, if you were already having performance issues.

    Defragging, that's a drive performance issue, not a CPU issue.
    Leythos, Mar 20, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.