Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3.2ghz P4 vs. 3.2ghz P4 dual core, why is dual core slower?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 22, 2006 12:57:04 PM

I changed my system recently going from a standard 3.2ghz to a 3.2ghz with dual core and the system is now slower according to the benchmark.

Why is CPU integer math so different??

Also I do not see an option with my new motherboard (intel 945 pvs) to overclock.

Old system:

CPU - Integer Math 94.16
CPU - Floating Point Math 282.84
CPU - Find Prime Numbers 161.76
CPU - SSE/3DNow! 1771.27
CPU - Compression 2623.77
CPU - Encryption 17.48
CPU - Image Rotation 353.39
CPU - String Sorting 962.31
Graphics 2D - Lines 89.42
Graphics 2D - Rectangles 314.11
Graphics 2D - Shapes 21.20
Graphics 2D - Fonts and Text 192.00
Graphics 2D - GUI 153.69
Graphics 3D - Simple 1212.38
Graphics 3D - Medium 281.47
Graphics 3D - Complex 25.15
Memory - Allocate Small Block 1345.17
Memory - Read Cached 1747.59
Memory - Read Uncached 1609.46
Memory - Write 871.93
Memory - Large RAM 332.55
Disk - Sequential Read 42.54
Disk - Sequential Write 44.43
Disk - Random Seek + RW 2.38
CD - Read 2.21
CPU Mark 508.85
2D Graphics Mark 625.74
Memory Mark 436.69
Disk Mark 323.11
CD Mark 270.02
3D Graphics Mark 486.13
PassMark Rating 450.86

New system:

Test Name perfres - rm - jan2006 This Computer
CPU - Integer Math 62.56 -
CPU - Floating Point Math 293.37 -
CPU - Find Prime Numbers 169.75 -
CPU - SSE/3DNow! 1260.06 -
CPU - Compression 1913.88 -
CPU - Encryption 17.90 -
CPU - Image Rotation 193.96 -
CPU - String Sorting 973.27 -
Graphics 2D - Lines 120.06 -
Graphics 2D - Rectangles 253.87 -
Graphics 2D - Shapes 27.66 -
Graphics 2D - Fonts and Text 184.26 -
Graphics 2D - GUI 204.46 -
Graphics 3D - Simple 1294.47 -
Graphics 3D - Medium 303.92 -
Graphics 3D - Complex 31.04 -
Memory - Allocate Small Block 1316.72 -
Memory - Read Cached 1726.05 -
Memory - Read Uncached 1635.60 -
Memory - Write 1160.66 -
Memory - Large RAM 506.56 -
Disk - Sequential Read 58.32 -
Disk - Sequential Write 18.81 -
Disk - Random Seek + RW 2.78 -
CPU Mark 397.30 -
2D Graphics Mark 612.34 -
Memory Mark 469.13 -
Disk Mark 289.02 -
3D Graphics Mark 521.47 -
PassMark Rating 397.82
a b à CPUs
January 22, 2006 1:21:28 PM

Using the same MB for both systems' comparison? (An older Northwood core 3.2C, with it's shorter pipeline, for instance, would be faster than a newer Prescott in single threaded apps at the same core freq)

Was this merely a cpu swap, or entire system upgrade? Under what OS?

Was it a retail system?

(Are both cores detected/utilized in both the BIOS and in the OS?)
January 22, 2006 1:55:14 PM

Is your new system already overheating and throttling down when doing the test? Check the temp.
Related resources
January 22, 2006 1:55:34 PM

It's a actually a new system, I moved the old system to my living room HTPC and the new system is for gaming (battlefield2, call of duty2, etc).

The system doesn't feel necessarily any slower however it bugs me if the system is not working properly.

Both systems were put together by me, so they are not retail systems.

Windows XP SP2 for both.

How would I know if both cores are detected? Would I see 2 CPU's in task manager? Right now I do not see that. Would I need another driver for this?

Thanks for your help

Rob
January 22, 2006 3:23:24 PM

Not really, average CPU temp is 44C, internal is 32. Peak CPU is 60 (perftest, etc)

I am using a Zalman CPU fan..

The PC does see 2 CPUs when I go into device manager/processors.

thanks
!