Because the P4 is a 2 issue wide chip - the E2160 is a 3 issue wide chip (potentially 4 with macro op fusion) - so in very basic terms the E2160 can do at least 50% more work per clock tick - and up to 100% more work per tick in certain situations with macro op fusion is working..
At stock speeds the two chips will thus run very similar performance tbh – but the E2160 can fairly easily be overclocked to match the GHz speed of the P4 you listed – and then will just storm into the lead.
between those 2... the E2160 and latter on you buy a cooler and learn to overclock it.. but personally i agree with blackpanther on building a computer from scratch, probably go a little over 400$ including a nice lcd monitor but i would be really worth it cause you´ll get way better features.
p.s: guys help me in the budget board for e8400 forum!!
There's no operating system in that last quote.
Further, the low cost system he's looking at isn't likely to have overclocking features (for the rather dated C2D processor). So, while I agree he might be able to build a better system, he's probably not going to be able to build one as cheap as what he's looking at.
The Pentium D based system is a dead end in terms of upgradability. However, the C2D system may not be much better (since it's probably limited in terms of what processors or memory speeds it supports).
Depending on his needs either system may meet his current requirements, but neither is likely to do so long term.
January 1, 2009 2:00:29 AM
Ok thanks for all the help I the dual core is better than the D now I just have one more question before I decide I went to another walmart and found the same thing but with an amd x2 2200. How does that stack up against the dual core?
do you mean the X2 4200? I would think being that the E2160 is before conroe that the Athlon 64 X2 4200 would be much better. I had the first Athlon 64 X2 4200 939socket and I loved it till I upgraded to the Athlon 64 X2 6000 and then the Phenom 9600.