Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Core 2 E6400 vs Pentium 4, can one core beat a mid end p4?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 6, 2006 9:53:51 PM

Is a single core with a core 2 e6400 on its own, assuming it still gets the whole 2mb of cache, as fast or faster than a whole p4 3.2ghz HT?

Im having an argument with a friend who is stubbornly defending his p4.

Also, I can probably find this if I looked, but do core 2s have EM64T and HT? Does each core have two threads? I keep getting conflicting information. I know its a bit ignorant of me for not knowing and typing on my new machine with one.
December 6, 2006 10:00:13 PM

In short:
EM64T? Yes, and much better implemented than P4 (i.e. don't suck big time with 64 bit code)
HT? No, and i don't think it would help, with the current C2D architecture
What do you mean with single core on his own?
Even on single threaded apps, C2D simply creams any P4, single or dual core, regardless of HT.
You're friend is just being unreasonable. ;) 
December 6, 2006 10:03:41 PM

if its a single core P4, then yeah, the C2D still beats it in single threaded apps (if its a dual core P4 against a single core C2D in mulitithreaded apps then the P4 will beat it because of the second core.) no HT, EM64T yes.
Related resources
December 6, 2006 10:06:12 PM

single core p4, prescott series 3.2ghz 540. Last year's mid end p4. By last year I mean 365 days ago.

He seemed to also fail to recognize that clock speed is not the end all of performance. He seemed to think that 2.13+2.13 = 4.25ghz versus his 3.2, meaning only so-so faster. He did not grasp the concept that core 2 architecture was vastly superior and operating at lower clock cycles completely kills his p4 at faster clock cycles.

This is coming from a person that before conroe, thought intel beat amd in everything except just gaming, which a year ago, intel was getting pretty well beat by the rebel alliance.

I used to be a big amd fan, when I saw the specs on conroe, I had to reconsider. When I saw the benchmarks, I was instantly converted to the empire lol.

Ill be sure to tell him tomorrow how wrong he is.
December 6, 2006 10:07:44 PM

yeah, in that case the P4 gets pounded into the ground by the C2D.
December 6, 2006 10:12:02 PM

Quote:
if its a single core P4, then yeah, the C2D still beats it in single threaded apps (if its a dual core P4 against a single core C2D in mulitithreaded apps then the P4 will beat it because of the second core.) no HT, EM64T yes.

Excepts that there's no such thing as a single core C2D ;) 
Dude, your CPU is like, 250% faster overall than your friend's P4. :p 
December 6, 2006 10:33:27 PM

Quote:
Excepts that there's no such thing as a single core C2D ;) 


ok, but this is just a therorectical discussion. and im sure theres some kind of wierd, messed up, C2D prototype in some intel lab somewhere that only has one core. they cut chunks of defective cache out of C2D's all the time and sell them as lower end proc's, so they must have done something like that with cores at some point.
December 6, 2006 10:49:41 PM

lol, i cant count the amount of times i have explained to friends that slower clocked athlons or C2D's beat pentium 4/D's

one of my idiotic friends was gonna buy a 3.6ghz P4, i told him C2D was better, he said BS its only 2.13ghz(e6400) and i said but its dual core and newer architechture.
he assumed then 2x2.13 = 4.26ghz. he was gonna buy that and then he come back from the store with a 3.4ghz PentiumD. now he thinks he has the best pc coz he has a 6.8ghz cpu.
lol
IDIOT!
!