Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

P4EE 3.4ghz faster than 3.73ghz?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Motherboards
Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 18, 2006 1:30:35 PM

First the specs:

P4EE 3.40GHZ Gallatin 478 pin FGA, 512KB L2 cache, 2MB L3 cache
130 nm technology, 1066mhz FSB.
Intel D875PBZ motherboard, 2GB 2-2-2-5 400mhz ddr ram.

P4EE 3.73GHZ Prescot 775 pin LGA, 2MB L2 cache, 0MB L3 cache
90 nm technology, 1066mhz FSB.
Intel D975XBX motherboard 2GB 4-4-4-12 667mhz ddr2 ram.

In most other benchmarks, like the cpu portion of Aquamark 3, the cpu's are come out abou the same, within 1% of each other, but usually it's the 3.4ghz cpu that has a slight advantage.

What's going on here?

The integer divide is comparably slow on the 3.73ghz cpu:

When running an old program I wrote to calculate E to 1 million digits, mostly using integer division of large numbers by a single number and addtion of two large numbers, the older 3.40ghz out peforms the 3.73ghz on the calculation, 227 seconds versus 277 seconds, 18% faster. On the coversion to decimal, mostly integer multiplication of large numbers by a single number, the 3.73ghz cpu is faster, 53 seconds versus 55.

Since the 3.73 cpu supports EMT64, I redid the algorithm in 64 bit mode, cutting the number of divisions in half, (but doing 128 bit divisions instead of 64), only reducing the time from 277 seconds to 249 seconds. With the multiply, I could cut the number of multiplies by 4, and this reduced conversion time from 53 seconds down to 12 seconds.

More about : p4ee 4ghz faster 73ghz

April 18, 2006 1:37:56 PM

I would like to see some apps benchmarked on both...Never used any of them, but sounds possible becouse they are different and Prescott is the greatest waste of pipeline stages ever made for mainstream.
April 18, 2006 2:05:38 PM

On the 3.73GHZ / Intel D975XBX motherboard I have 2GB of 4-4-4-12 667mhz ddr2 ram. What would be the pro / cons of using 2GB of 5-5-5-15 800mhz ddr2 ram?
Related resources
April 18, 2006 2:15:09 PM

The system with the 3.73 ghz cpu has an ATI X1900XTX pci express video card, while the system with the 3.40ghz cpu has an ATI X850 agp video card. Games run faster on the newer system, but mostly because of the video card.

If I run Aqamark3 benchmark, the cpu score is just over 11,000 with the 3.4ghz cpu and just under with the 3.73, but it's only about 1% difference.

At least the 3.73ghz does have 64 bit mode, so I've been able to mess with some 64 bit assembly code with it.

What speed do the L2 and L3 caches run at? I seem to remember something about caches running at 1/2 the cpu speed except for Xeons and some P4 cpu's.
April 18, 2006 2:20:34 PM

Quote:
Overvolt the DDR2-800 to 2.1V and try running it at 4-5-4-12 1T, that should give you plenty of 'pros'.
Speaking of which, the memory is speced at 1.85 or 1.95 volts, but my motherboard only handles 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1 volts. Is there any harm in running higher voltage.

My current 4-4-4-12 ddr2 rams are speced to run at 4-4-4-10 at 1.85 volts, could I run them at 1.9 volts?
April 18, 2006 2:28:31 PM

Thanks for the info. It's Kingston hyperx memory, but their speeds have to be manually entered.

I ran the super pi and pi fast programs. The 3.73ghz is faster except when running a 10,000,000 digit calculation with pifast, then the situation revers, 40.22 seconds for the 3.73ghz, 38.63 on the 3.40ghz.
April 18, 2006 3:02:06 PM

Just checked, Kingston now lists a 4-4-4-12 800mhz PC2-6400 ddr ram at 1.95 volts. May get those later on.
April 18, 2006 3:28:20 PM

Quote:
I would like to see some apps benchmarked on both...Never used any of them, but sounds possible becouse they are different and Prescott is the greatest waste of pipeline stages ever made for mainstream.

Looking at the interactive CPU charts at THG, the 3.4 is faster at most games, while the 3.73 is faster with the more cpu oriented benchmarks.
April 19, 2006 3:21:28 AM

The 478 3.2 and 3.4 EE's would have been the only P4's I would have ever considered buying. Unfortunatley they weren't 64bit.
April 19, 2006 3:44:24 AM

Quote:
I ran the super pi and pi fast programs. The 3.73ghz is faster except when running a 10,000,000 digit calculation with pifast, then the situation revers, 40.22 seconds for the 3.73ghz, 38.63 on the 3.40ghz.


The difference in 10M pi times can be explained by the 2MB L3 cache on top of the 512KB L2 found on the 3.4GHz Gallatin core, combined with the shorter pipeline, which I believe was similar to the Northwood's.
April 19, 2006 4:17:33 AM

I have the 3.4 version, wish I had the 3.7 though then I would have PCI E :cry: .
April 19, 2006 10:06:08 AM

Quote:
I ran the super pi and pi fast programs. The 3.73ghz is faster except when running a 10,000,000 digit calculation with pifast, then the situation revers, 40.22 seconds for the 3.73ghz, 38.63 on the 3.40ghz.


The difference in 10M pi times can be explained by the 2MB L3 cache on top of the 512KB L2 found on the 3.4GHz Gallatin core, combined with the shorter pipeline, which I believe was similar to the Northwood's.
Wrong!
The SuperPI better score can be explained with the better instructions/clock efficiency of the Northwood which has 20 pipeline stages, while the Precott has 30. More pipeline stages are letting higher freqfencies to be achieved easyly, therefore lowering the instructions/clock efficiency. K8s have 12, therefore having much more better instruction/clock efficiency than the Netburst architecture. Yonah and Dothan have 12 or 14(I am not sure), and are efficient like K8 or more.
April 19, 2006 3:15:07 PM

Why did super-pi become the standard when Pifast is so much faster (pi fast does 10,000,000 digits in about the same time as Super-pi does 1,000,000?
April 20, 2006 4:23:10 AM

Quote:
Why did super-pi become the standard when Pifast is so much faster (pi fast does 10,000,000 digits in about the same time as Super-pi does 1,000,000?

Superpi has a better looking GUI.
April 20, 2006 7:25:26 AM

Netburst was lame. I almost went for it for my laptop. But went for the p4 3.4ee. L3 2mb of cache. Why pay more for something that ran hotter then I wanted and also ran slower. Then My battery life would of been cut in half.
April 20, 2006 10:13:46 AM

Quote:
Why did super-pi become the standard when Pifast is so much faster (pi fast does 10,000,000 digits in about the same time as Super-pi does 1,000,000?

I don't know why, both are useless if you are looking for the point of calcualtion of 10M Pi digits...But I know that SuperPI is scoring linearly and objective. Any CPU that has a good SuperPI score is kicking asses in games:) 
April 20, 2006 11:19:50 AM

Quote:
The difference in 10M pi times can be explained by the 2MB L3 cache on top of the 512KB L2 found on the 3.4GHz Gallatin core, combined with the shorter pipeline, which I believe was similar to the Northwood's.

Wrong!
The SuperPI better score can be explained with the better instructions/clock efficiency of the Northwood which has 20 pipeline stages, while the Precott has 30. More pipeline stages are letting higher freqfencies to be achieved easyly, therefore lowering the instructions/clock efficiency. K8s have 12, therefore having much more better instruction/clock efficiency than the Netburst architecture. Yonah and Dothan have 12 or 14(I am not sure), and are efficient like K8 or more.

I'll just bold out the part that you missed about the shorter pipeline, making your little lecture superfulous and say that cache DO have an important part to play in those lower pi times.
April 20, 2006 3:06:24 PM

Quote:
I'll just bold out the part that you missed about the shorter pipeline, making your little lecture superfulous and say that cache DO have an important part to play in those lower pi times.

Yeap I missed that part, don't know how:( 
Anyway, the bolded part is the correct answer, not the L3 cache.
The reason why the 3.73GHz EE is better performing in other apps is becouse it has 2 cores.
April 21, 2006 8:33:25 AM

Quote:
The reason why the 3.73GHz EE is better performing in other apps is becouse it has 2 cores.
It has hyper threading. The dual core version is the Intel 965, which Intel describes on their web-site, but I don't see any stores that carry it yet.
!