Dual P3 vs single athlon

Just been playing with a couple of systems,

Sys 1,
2*1gig P3
Intel chipset mobo (unknown)
512M RAM

Sys 2,
1*1.4G Tbird,
Abit kt7a-raid
768M CAS2 RAM

both GF2, ignore HD's as no caching going on

Render Max Benchmark Scene in MAX 3D

SYS 1 = 1min13secs
SYS 2 = 1min18secs

So the dualie gives a 6% speed increase for a £180 cost increase.

Don't know if it's worth it.

--------------------------------

Look at the size of that thing!
17 answers Last reply
More about dual single athlon
  1. Well, assume that that one app will not be the only one you run, and the choice is clear, the athlon, ALSO, spend 50 on a good cooler and overclock it to 1.6, that will blow the dual p3 out of the water and still save alot of cash.

    ~Matisaro~
    "Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
    ~Tbird1.3@1.55~
  2. Or just get dual mp's and mop the floor.

    What is the difference between <font color=red>pink</font color=red> and <font color=purple>purple</font color=purple>? The <b>GRIP</b>!
  3. I agree dual MPs would be around the same price too...
  4. it depends entirely on what you do with it.
    if thats it, I'd go with the Athlon, but personally, I like duallies...


    ----------------------
    Independant thought is good.
    It won't hurt for long.
  5. There is no way in the world that a single AMD could keep up with dual PIII overclocked or not. Having two CPU's no matter what the brand rules over 1!! Benchmarks don't tell real world stories, and some benchmarks are bias to one manufacturer or another. Look at 3dmark2001, it was made for GF3. You get a great benchmark with a GF3 and nothing else, although gameplay might be identical between the 2 different cards. Don't take benchmarks so seriously, they are a decent gauge of performance, but don't tell the whole story.
  6. He did a real-world test, not a Sandra test or something.


    <font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
    <font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
  7. anema, mp processing is not 100% efficient, one processor can beat 2 processors easily, in many apps. Most apps dont even take ANY advantage of the dual processor setup, a 1.4ghz athlon is faster than 2x 1ghz p3's I would estimate 80% of the time. Notice how the times he showed us were very close, that app is smp enabled meaning it makes full use of both processors, most apps are NOT smp enabled, meaning that extra proc is sitting around doing dick.

    ~Matisaro~
    "The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
    ~Tbird1.3@1.5~
  8. You aren't gonna get any better performance out of a dual system unless your OS supports it. The program shouldn't need to be multi cpu aware. The OS should handle this.
  9. While the OS support (windows NT/2K, Linux,...) is required for both CPUs being usable it is not enough for a particular program to use simultaneously both CPUs in SMP.


    How terrible is wisdom when it brings no profit to the wise
  10. OS support (Windows NT/2K; Linux,...) is a requirement but the application must support multiple CPUs to make use of both processors in a SMP setup.


    How terrible is wisdom when it brings no profit to the wise
  11. Generally speaking, a dual SMP system will add roughly 30-40% performance over a single CPU system of similar speed. So, a Dual P3 clocked at 1ghz each will probably offer similar or slower performance to a single Athlon clocked at 1.4 ghz. This is not always the case, of course, but generally it is.

    Mark-

    When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
  12. Matisaro hit the nail on the head. Does no good to have the duel processors if the software does not explicitly support or utilize it.

    --Wassamatta you?--
  13. Actually, it can especially in multitasking! What if you want to watch a DVD through software and edit an image in Photoshop. One CPU will be deticated to decoding the DVD while the other will work with Photoshop. While on a single processor system this maybe jurky, the dual processor will be very smooth.

    AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
  14. True, this is the only benifit to a dual system when not running smp enabled software. I would venture a guess that a single 1.4 is faster than a dual 1ghz p3 in multitasking, or even if not faster, deffinatly not so much slower as to justify the added cost of a second cpu.

    If you want to go dualie, get an athlon mp, it will chew up the competition.
    If you want the fastest single processor, and dont feel like blowing 500 bucks on a 2ghz p4, get a 1.4ghz tbird and a kt266a mobo. (in a few weeks when they come out)

    ~Matisaro~
    "The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
    ~Tbird1.3@1.5~
  15. correct me if I'm wrong but, I thought you could only split up processes in linux, meaning in win2kpro you can't tell one program to use one processor, and one program to use another, it has to be built in. Now in linux you can tell some stuff to go in one processor and other stuff in another processor.
    It'd be perfect if you could say Processor 1 run the operating system, take care of system devices like USB, SCSI, and all CPU cycle using system parts, and then use the 2nd CPU for anything thats going to run, and as a backup the first CPU can be used of the 2nd is overrun from the program.
    Even more simple, one CPU runs the computer, the other CPU runs your programs/games. That way hardware that uses CPU cycles don't matter as much.
  16. I was under the impression that win2k does that as well, but I have never ran a dualie system. So I can not comment for certain. However I would point out, what is the purpose of a multi cpu aware os which dosent utilize the second cpu.

    ~Matisaro~
    "The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
    ~Tbird1.3@1.5~
  17. Yes, NT/2000 does that as well. Always has, but is only starting to come to the home market, with cheaper dually systems and W2k. Who here ran NT at home? Not me :)

    Anyway, Since the original poster gave 3dMax as his benchmark, I would assume he is interested in 3d rendering. I'm no Vulcan, but that seems logical to me.

    Since the benchmarks were only a little apart, but money was a significant difference, I'd say go for the Athlon (if I haven't already).


    <font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
    <font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs