Compare 2004 processor with today

Hello, using the charts on this site, how can I compare my 2004 AMD Athlon XP 2400+ with a modern processor? None of the Benchmark tests of 2004 are used in 2010 so how do I find a common basis of comparison?
9 answers Last reply
More about compare 2004 processor today
  1. gliebisch said:
    Hello, using the charts on this site, how can I compare my 2004 AMD Athlon XP 2400+ with a modern processor? None of the Benchmark tests of 2004 are used in 2010 so how do I find a common basis of comparison?

    Well as much i would like to help you find a comparison, you wont be able to find much due to that time span . Cpu's today have far exceeded older cpu's performance that it would not be worth whiled to measure.

    Although i will say this. If memory serves correct, 2400+ meant the equivalent of a 2.4GHz pentium 4. Well i used to have a Pentium 4 2.8ghz.

    Now a core 2 duo a 1.6 ghz (if i remember correctly with just) 1 of the 2 cores could match the performance of many bench marks of my P4 at 2.8GHz. Now this was a long while back when i read this article so i maybe forgetting info or messed them up. :pt1cable:

    And thats not factoring the newer cpu's like the Intel core i's, AMD Phenom/Athlon II x# ect.

    Now i do still know one way of comparing modern cpu's with older ones. Although that performance difference may not be precise way of veiwing performances between different cpu's with other programs but it the only one that can still be done today. The measurement is point per day with F@H. all points per day is about is it the amount of points you earn per day by turning in a certain number of work units. The more WU's that cpu can complete, the more points you earn.

    Now for some reason i couldn't find your cpu and with a single core client but i know there out there but im able to find the:

    AMD Athlon 2500+ and it gives 104 points per day (with is with the all these extra stuff turned on to earn bonuses for extra points).

    Other cpus to get an idea: (cpu --- points per day)
    AMD Athlon X4 635 ---- 4157
    AMD Phenom II X4 965 --- 8202
    AMD Phenom II X6 1090T --- 15138

    Intel Pentium 4 2.50GHz --- 95
    Intel Core i3 530 @ 2.93GHz --- 4112
    Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.67GHz --- 12000
    Intel Core i7 X 980 @ 3.33GHz --- 29758

    Overall, lets just say that even a lower end current cpu like a core i3 or a Althon II x2 and run many, many laps around your AMD athlon Xp and My Intel P4.

    Probably not what your looking for but it's really the only way of measuring modern and old cpu performance with real programs (dont like the synthetic benchmark as they sometime dont show the performance of hardware correctly.)

    Wish there was more i could do. :(
  2. I remember the Athlon XPs. Back before AMD had a chipset of their own so we had to rely on SIS and VIA (ewww to both) which made it hard to get them to work. Add the fact that they had some heat issues along with no heat spreader and its a recipie for trouble. My friend got a 3000+ and had a VIA mobo that would see it as a 700MHz CPU until you manually set the clock. Even then it would only go to a 2700+. Pain in the....

    But to compare a 2004 CPU to 2010 CPU, that just doesn't work. The 6 year gap alone means that the Atlhon XP has no chance.

    If we do compare as well the CPUs alone, we should look at the specs:

    Athlon XP (T-Bred core):

    180nm process
    L1-Cache: 64 + 64 KB (Data + Instructions)
    L2-Cache: 256 KB, fullspeed
    MMX, 3DNow!
    Front side bus: 133/166 MHz (266/333 MT/s) (this was before AMD had a IMC so they had a 2x FSB)
    VCore: 1.50–1.65 V
    Clock rate: 1400-2250MHz

    Phenom II:

    45nm Process
    Up to 6 K10 based cores
    L1 cache: 64 kB + 64 kB (data + instructions) per core
    L2 cache: 512 kB per core, full-speed
    L3 cache: 6 MB shared between all cores (L3 was not even heard of and the first one that had it if I remember was the Pentium 4 EE)
    Memory controller: dual channel DDR2-1066 MHz (AM2+), dual channel DDR3-1333 (AM3) with unganging option
    MMX, Extended 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, AMD64, Cool'n'Quiet, NX bit, AMD-V
    Turbo Core
    Power consumption (TDP): 95 to 140 Watt
    Clock rate: 2.5 to 3.5 GHz

    Core i series:

    32nm process
    Up to 6 cores
    IMC running DDR3 for dual or tri channel
    QuickPath connects the CPU to everything
    32kB L1 Cache each (instruction and data ) per core
    256kB L2 Cache
    8-12MB L3 cache (shared
    SMT (makes each core act as two cores)
    Clock rate: Up to 3.2GHz

    Overall the lowest you can normally get is dual core. And even the single core super loe end CPUs will beat the tar out of your Athlon XP.

    Basically if you upgrade to anything, even a older Core 2 Duo or Athlon X2 you will see a mjor boost in performance. but you will have to do a entire system upgrade because yours is so outdated that the memory type is no longer being used nor are the interfaces such as AGP.

    You can scour the web looking for charts but you wont find em. When something gets too olde it falls off the charts. Normally 3 years old and it doesn't get used in any comparison charts.

    There is a comparison of processors that date back to the dual cores of 2005, even the weakest of which would be roughly twice as powerful as your Athlon Xp if not more.
  4. Download the free version of 3DMark03 benchmark from Guru3D
    When your done running the benchmark it will take you online to see your score compared to some pretty modern cpus.
    I managed a whopping 10500 (Boo) with dual Xeon P4 3.2 L3 1mb FSB 533 :(
    Low end Core2Duos were around 30k-40k if i recall right.
    Dont worry, if your computer does everything you need it do then dont sweat it.
  5. Just download some benchmark to test your system performance in order to get an ideia depending on what you are going to do with it!

    You have many options, there are 3dmarks (2001, 2003, 2006 depending on your gpu).
    You could also try SuperPI and compare to online results from other users or you could simply run PassMark which by itself is a very complete benchmark tool!
  6. First of all, kudos on hanging in there so long with an athlon XP processor. If you are talking about upgrading, nothing you can buy today will be slower than that. If you stay in the same processor class, (and by that I mean mainstream not celeron/sempron/atom etc.) you will see a huge performance increase.

    I agree with the other posters. If you just want a benchmark, then download something like super pi and compare that to current processors.

    Using that benchmark page you can see your old Althlon XP 2400+. It routinely ends up in the lower end of the charts. That benchmark page was from 2004. If you want a comparison with modern CPUs, simply check out anandtech's CPU bench page:

    Your cpu isn't on there so you can't do a direct comparison, but you can look at how the Pentium 4 660 does compared to your Athlon XP 2400+ in the 2004 benchmarks, then look that same cpu up the in Anandtech Bench link and see how slow it is compared to today's offerings. Even the Celeron 420 at 1.6Ghz is faster than your Athlon XP 2400+ (the Celeron 420 is generally equivalent to the Pentium 4 HT at 2.8GHz or the Athlon64 3000 at 1.8 GHz). Your Athlon XP, as its rating suggests, it generally equivalent to a 2.4GHz Pentium 4. The only modern CPUs your old Athlon XP can beat are single core Atoms and Nanos.
  8. Thanks everyone for your replies. I"ve been pretty much ignoring the newer faster chips for over 5 years, because my PC did everything I needed it to, as one poster suggested. But now I want to do more editing of home video and that is where my existiing 2004 system completely bogs down and grinds to a near halt when doing video tasks. So I guess almost anything I look at today will be light years ahead. I'm looking at an HP Pavilion p6610f with an AMD Athlon II as a good compromise of price and performance.
  9. Sounds good. That quad core will definitely speed up your video tasks.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Processors Windows XP Product