Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Benching my Pentium D 820 vs Sandy Bridge

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 23, 2010 3:17:23 PM

So kind of a weird question....but just curiosity. Currently running a Pentium D 820 and will be upgrading it to SandyBridge in January.

I'm curious to predict what kind of performance increases I'll get (yes I know they'll be "BIG" but wondered if its 3x, 5x, etc....)

I looked at Tom's CPU charts and unfortunately it looks like the benchmarks have changed since 2005 so direct comparison is hard.

On Anandtech they have the "comparison tool" where you can enter 2 different CPUs and it will chart out the comparison across all benchs.

My question is, they don't have the PD 820 on there, but they DO have a P4 660 which is single core and HT. Is that in any way a decent proxy on Benchs for the P-D 820? As its single core, would I need to double the performance of the P4 660 to equate to the 2 core P-D 820? I've just run the comparison against the i7 870 because then Anandtech shows that SB will outperform the 870.

November 23, 2010 3:33:05 PM

hogan773 said:
So kind of a weird question....but just curiosity. Currently running a Pentium D 820 and will be upgrading it to SandyBridge in January.

I'm curious to predict what kind of performance increases I'll get (yes I know they'll be "BIG" but wondered if its 3x, 5x, etc....)

I looked at Tom's CPU charts and unfortunately it looks like the benchmarks have changed since 2005 so direct comparison is hard.

On Anandtech they have the "comparison tool" where you can enter 2 different CPUs and it will chart out the comparison across all benchs.

My question is, they don't have the PD 820 on there, but they DO have a P4 660 which is single core and HT. Is that in any way a decent proxy on Benchs for the P-D 820? As its single core, would I need to double the performance of the P4 660 to equate to the 2 core P-D 820? I've just run the comparison against the i7 870 because then Anandtech shows that SB will outperform the 870.



So I posted a tad early...sorry....but in case anyone is curious, I found that Tom's has a 2006 benchmark chart including both the 820 and the 660, and the 820 is NOT 2x as fast as the 660. I didn't go thru all the charts yet but it appears the 820 might be in the neighborhood of 5-20% faster on the benchs depending probably on the ability of those programs to utilize the multiple cores.
m
0
l
a c 87 à CPUs
November 24, 2010 12:05:18 AM

You don't get double the performance for several reasons. One is that the software we have now doesn't scale perfectly with more cores. (most doesn't anyways.) If A + B = C, you have to wait for that to calculate before the other core can do C x D = G. Second, keep in mind that the 660 is a hyperthreaded CPU, so it already acts as a dual core. It won't be as good as a dual core, but it will perform a lot better then a single core.

Frankly I consider this question a bit dumb, no offense. We have no real benchies of SB yet, so no one can give you an answer without violating an NDA. How much faster will also depend on the tasks. Look back at your comparison. 5-20%? What if I said 4x as fast and its 2x as fast on some things, but 8x as fast on others? SB will be much much faster, you can be sure of that.
m
0
l
Related resources
November 24, 2010 12:47:21 AM

No offense taken I guess....I said in the original post that it was more intellectual curiosity to compare my current system to the SB. And to be fair (to me), we DO have some SB benches. At Anandtech. So as I said in my post, one can see that the initial SB generally beats the i7 880......and one can also compare the i7 880 vs the Pentium 4 660......and then I can compare the P4 660 vs my Pentium D.

The 5-20% was comparing the P4 660 to the Pentium D. Then I could see that the P4 660 was anywhere from 2x to 6x SLOWER than the i7 880. And SB should be faster than i7 880.

So there is my answer......no exact of course.....but I didn't violate any NDAs either.

Thanks for playing the game with me (although I guess I did all the work) and sorry that you thought this to be a "dumb" question

Take care
m
0
l
a c 87 à CPUs
November 24, 2010 2:43:47 AM

I know you were comparing the 660 and the P4D. As I was claiming however we don't really have any benchies of SB. Sure there are some leeks and guesses floating around the web, but they are using pre-production hardware with beta bios. Things can change a lot since then. And the top model SB probably can beat the best i7, but that doesn't mean that all will. Can the SB that fits in your budget beat an i7? i5? Will you be able to afford the 2011 or will you need to get the 1055? By going from the top 2011 socket chip down to a midrange 1055 drop you from 8x performance down to 6x or 4x? Hopefully this shows you better what I mean by a lack of benchies.

Its an interesting question and I love comparing older hardware to new. But you usually have to wait for a better/clearer picture of the new hardware to show up before you can ask.
m
0
l
November 24, 2010 2:51:58 AM

Ummm OK, but perhaps you didn't read the Sandy Bridge Preview at Anandtech then. It appeared to be more than "leeks" and guesses. He ran full benchmarks. Preproduction SB - yes. But he fully explained the setup. And it was the LOW END Sandy Bridge - the i5 2400 - on test. This is the 1155 socket by the way. There are no 2011 sockets out for test that I've heard about. And the i5 2400 generally beat the i7 880, and in some cases nearly equaled the 980x!
m
0
l
a c 87 à CPUs
November 24, 2010 3:01:58 AM

True. But you even used the correct word, preview. I know they also spent some time showing us how well the GPU part of SB worked. (most impressive for an Intel part.) We did get a good look at what SB is capable of early, and I have no idea why that is. It's still all pre-production stuff, so take it for what it is.
m
0
l
November 24, 2010 1:46:24 PM

Agreed - preview material - but my point is that A-T went much further than just the normal "WOW I caught a glimpse of a unit they were demo-ing and it looked like they were overclocking it bigtime!!!" (although there have been those chatroom discussions re: SB too)

Anyway, I think the A-T tests are very encouraging because they were using the LOWEST version of the chip, WITHOUT TURBO, and they were getting some darn good results.

Doubtful that the actual production versions, with turbo, will be substantially slower that that. Why would they allow A-T to test something and then have the actual product fall short of those tests? And they certainly must be in actual production on these by now, as they are filling the inventory channel prior to launch in a little over a month.
m
0
l
a c 87 à CPUs
November 24, 2010 4:58:29 PM

Yes, exactly my point! Perhaps I'm being to literal in this. I got the impression that you want a semi exact "how much faster". Seeing as we don't know where SB will perform at what price point, we can't answer. A higher binned chip will be faster then the answer we gave you. A new unknown problem in the memory controller could make SB 25% slower then the AT preview. You still haven't told us what test your interested in, so there is that as well. Without knowing what test, what SB you can afford, and real production values, I still maintain we cant' give you a "correct" answer. You can look at that preview sure, but it might change by the time SB comes out. Which is fine as long as you understand that.

I think I need a break from this thread. Good luck with your upgrade.
m
0
l
November 24, 2010 6:12:56 PM

^^ got high hopes for AMD there. lol
m
0
l
November 25, 2010 3:14:11 AM

2204822,10,71107 said:
Perhaps I'm being to literal in this. quotemsg]


Yes you are being too literal. I was just doing a fun "what if" and wanted to know generally how much bang I'll be getting vs my current 5yr old system. I don't care if its exact. 3x, 4x, 5x, its all good. I'll be buying SB regardless. Its not like I'm saying "unless it is at least 172.4% faster I will not buy it"

I think we've beaten this horse to death.

Thanks
m
0
l
November 25, 2010 5:02:29 PM

Quote:
and that's funny becuase this question was a total waste of time from the start..


then why did you waste your time posting the same BS bulldozer thing multiple times

Peace out fella
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 25, 2010 6:15:56 PM

hogan773 said:
So kind of a weird question....but just curiosity. Currently running a Pentium D 820 and will be upgrading it to SandyBridge in January.

I'm curious to predict what kind of performance increases I'll get (yes I know they'll be "BIG" but wondered if its 3x, 5x, etc....)

I looked at Tom's CPU charts and unfortunately it looks like the benchmarks have changed since 2005 so direct comparison is hard.

On Anandtech they have the "comparison tool" where you can enter 2 different CPUs and it will chart out the comparison across all benchs.

My question is, they don't have the PD 820 on there, but they DO have a P4 660 which is single core and HT. Is that in any way a decent proxy on Benchs for the P-D 820? As its single core, would I need to double the performance of the P4 660 to equate to the 2 core P-D 820? I've just run the comparison against the i7 870 because then Anandtech shows that SB will outperform the 870.

I dont think its that good idea to even buy SB right after launch..Premium price strategy is used by business to clean out all the old products..From my experience Intel is very frugal..
m
0
l
!