Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel Duo Core vs Pentium 4 for non-gaming graphics???

Tags:
  • CPUs
Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 24, 2006 5:27:12 AM

I need your expert opinions.....
I am going to buy a new machine, but I am not sure which machine to buy. I won't be doing any game playing on this machine it will strictly be used to run Adobe software, Macromeida, and various 3D rendering programs. Stuff used in magazine layout and such. So is the Intel Duo core better for this or is the Pentium 4 ok?

More about : intel duo core pentium gaming graphics

a b à CPUs
November 24, 2006 6:12:14 AM

Quote:
I need your expert opinions.....
I am going to buy a new machine, but I am not sure which machine to buy. I won't be doing any game playing on this machine it will strictly be used to run Adobe software, Macromeida, and various 3D rendering programs. Stuff used in magazine layout and such. So is the Intel Duo core better for this or is the Pentium 4 ok?


The Core 2 Duo is the superior processor in every way, shape, and form. Avoid the Pentium 4 line at all costs :)  (within reason).

The lowly old E6300 can best the Pentium Extreme Edition 965 in some cases, and will run neck and neck with a 3.60 GHz Pentium 4 without any problems. An E6400 will out perform any Pentium 4 on the market today by significant margins, and the E6600 simpily makes the Pentium 4 look like a Celeron of 3 years ago.

I cannot stress enough.... go for the C2D -- especially in the application set you mention above.

Jack

sort of gives us a breif look into the computer market from the untrained/outside eye - No mention of AMD, and AMD is better the the P4 for one.
November 24, 2006 7:04:09 AM

Yes, they are bothe right.
The AMD X2 chips ared better than the pentiumD chips.
The Core2 Duo chips are better than the X2 chips
That means the Core2 Duo chips are much better than the pentiumD chips.
Added value comes from the lower heat output as well.
a b à CPUs
November 24, 2006 7:18:40 AM

Quote:
Yes, they are bothe right.
The AMD X2 chips ared better than the pentiumD chips.
The Core2 Duo chips are better than the X2 chips
That means the Core2 Duo chips are much better than the pentiumD chips.
Added value comes from the lower heat output as well.


Kinda funny aswell, no one asks no more bout "celeron vs" whatever - its like the low end IS the pentium/athlon now (well for intel yes but)
November 24, 2006 7:51:04 AM

Quote:
Yes, they are bothe right.
The AMD X2 chips ared better than the pentiumD chips.
The Core2 Duo chips are better than the X2 chips
That means the Core2 Duo chips are much better than the pentiumD chips.
Added value comes from the lower heat output as well.


Kinda funny aswell, no one asks no more bout "celeron vs" whatever - its like the low end IS the pentium/athlon now (well for intel yes but)

Celeron doesn't have full SSE extensions. Some graphics rendering tools won't even RUN on a Celeron, thus Celeron has never ever been under consideration for a Photoshop/Multimedia system. I have a good P4 and a 6400 system, the C2D beats the P4 in EVERYTHING with at least a 50% increase in rendering speed, more typically it's two to four times faster. Yes an AMD dual-core might be considered, but WHY?!
November 24, 2006 7:59:52 AM

I would definetly go with C2D, but if you like AMD CPU's better, get a A64 X2, something like a 4400 or higher. And you should be good to go.
November 24, 2006 11:37:32 AM

When it comes to running programs like that, anything above the Celeron/Sempron range is good enough. RAM is what you need most. Save money on the CPU and get more RAM is my advice.
November 26, 2006 3:14:51 AM

Thank you to all who replyed.... I decided to go with the Core 2 Duo 2.13ghz E6400, 2gb ram, 250gb hd, and a 20" ultrasharp digital widescreen monitor. Gotta be better than the PIII 600 I am using now!!!!
November 26, 2006 6:25:13 AM

Cool, should run real nice 8)
a b à CPUs
November 26, 2006 9:39:00 PM

Quote:
When it comes to running programs like that, anything above the Celeron/Sempron range is good enough. RAM is what you need most. Save money on the CPU and get more RAM is my advice.


once you have ~1+ gb the performance doesnt really rise up much after that ;) 

Quote:
Celeron doesn't have full SSE extensions. Some graphics rendering tools won't even RUN on a Celeron, thus Celeron has never ever been under consideration for a Photoshop/Multimedia system. I have a good P4 and a 6400 system, the C2D beats the P4 in EVERYTHING with at least a 50% increase in rendering speed, more typically it's two to four times faster. Yes an AMD dual-core might be considered, but WHY?!


no full SSE extensions? THERE P4's WITH LESS CACHE! :roll:

and what im getting at is WHY "P4 or C2D" when AMD is clearly faster then the old P4? we all know C2D is faster so why does everyone even concider a P4 and not even question an AMD?
!