Windows 7 Does This Mean...?

[Heaven or Hell]

I was comparing the two following processors:

PassMark CPU Lookup

PassMark CPU Lookup

Now it looks like the Atom D525 at 1.80GHz is better than the Intel Pentium 4 at 3.00GHz...but does this mean the first one is better overall, or is it possible the second one outperforms it in some way? For instance, which is better at single-tasking? And why is the Atom "1.80" whereas the Pentium is "3.00" and yet the Atom is better? From what I've heard, this Atom processor is good at "multi-threading", so maybe that is why it is rated higher? I would like to know how I can find out if the Atom is better at doing a single task.

I wish I can find specifics on this, but the CPU Benchmark site just simply says where processors "rank".

 

[Highwayman]

quite simply, since the advent of multi-cored cpus the speeds should no longer be based on the clock speed alone, the die size is just as important (smaller die sizes are faster than same clock of bigger scales in most instances) along with age of the tech inside... hence a Atom 1.8 can trounce a 3.0 pentium, and likely a dual or quad core cpu would eclipse them both to a huge amount even at 1.5ghz speeds.

 

[cybercore]

Atom D525 1.8 Ghz has 2 cores hyperthreading --> 4 HT threads total. 2 HT cores ~ 2.4 real cores.
Pentium 4 3Ghz --> not sure, is this single or dual core?

Intel Atom D525

Atom is probably a little faster and better handles multitasking. But even more important is that Atom's TDP is way lower than Pentium 4's. I would choose Atom. : )

 

[Highwayman]

I suppose the other thing is that Atoms are mainly aimed at the laptop market, so the biggest rivial to them will be the Core Duo and i5

 

[cybercore]

True, Pentium 4 3Ghz is usually a desktop pc. Atoms are mainly aimed at netbooks.

 

[Highwayman]

could just about cook eggs on my old pentium 4 (3ghz) prescott... even the newer "D" multicore edition were cooler

 

[cybercore]

could just about cook eggs on my old pentium 4 (3ghz) prescott ...

Oh you came thro that too? My Pentium 4 530J (Prescott) was never colder than 65 C.

 

[Highwayman]

Yea, i think if I recall correct I started on P75/P90 Pentium1, then jumped to Intel 166, Intel 333, AMD 500, Intel Pentium3 800 then leaped to AMD with 1300 AMD Thunderbird (went through two in a space of three weeks that melted!!) jumped back to Intel a few weeks after to the P4-1800 then P4 3000 Prescott which thus far has been hottest CPU even compared to my current Intel quad, the Q6600 2400, even when overlocked to 3.6ghz!!!

if ya read my new blog you'll see I rebuilt my rig today, currently the coldest i've seen my chip go on air, lowest core is sat at 24C with 21C ambient air in my room

 

[cybercore]

if ya read my new blog you'll see I rebuilt my rig today, currently the coldest i've seen my chip go on air, lowest core is sat at 24C with 21C ambient air in my room

Ya, I envy your case, very nicely designed. : )

Can't believe those temps are due to Zalman 9700? Mine is Zalman 9500 and the CPU (Q9450 @2,93 Ghz) is never cooler than 50C with 21 ambient in the room. : (

 

[Highwayman]

Well was your idle or at max load though? here's a grab after running prime95 x64 for an hour at 100% load on all cores I run earlier, after ended the test it drop to sub 30C on all core in about 3 seconds!

 

[cybercore]

My cold boot starts with something like 45C or so, then quickly jumps to 50C and stays there forever, at idle. If I load it with some heavy stuff like deep fritz chess or call of futy, it gradually jumps to 53C, 54C, 55C, and if playing those for long enough it goes up 60C.


Link Removed - Invalid URL

 

[Highwayman]

ya might wanna try prime95 (free) to see the top temps it hits to be sure... games rarely use all the cores at 100%, Ive just been playing DDO and it was only using about 30-40 on each core so bearly went above 40C at current 3ghz overclocked.

 

[cybercore]

Ok, I know prime95 of course. I can tell my peak temps when playing chess - does load no worse than prime95.

Ive just been playing DDO and it was only using about 30-40 on each core so bearly went above 40C at current 3ghz overclocked.

Sounds fantastic to me, whish I could have them like yours.
Your picture on page 1 shows max. 100C, and that's Celcius, can a cpu survive that hot?

 

[Highwayman]

Thats the TJunction temp as I understand can be of 5C+/- accuracy, which the cpu apparently supports before death... although i'd say 70 Celcius would be the highest you ever want to go on my chip, and even that that would have to be if it was seriously overclocked and stable.

Each revision of CPU has different thermal kill points so the 95-100C TJunction seems to apply to the Q6600 Go-Stepped edition which I have, not to be confused with the TCase (The overall cpu temp, not just cores) max which is rated to about 71 Celcius on intels specs. more information can be found here http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/250157-29-q6600-tjmax-right

 

[Heaven or Hell]

The D525 is in the Compaq All-in-One desktop computer which I'm looking forwards to buy.

I'm pretty convinced now that the Atom D525 @ 1.80 will be better than a Pentium 4 @ 3.00 at playing an HD video, in terms of speed. Now to compare....ok crap. Just compared the two video cards and lol...the Compaq All-in-One has an Intel GMA 3150 whereas my Dell Desktop that has the slower processor (P4 @ 3.00) has an Intel 82915G Express, ranking at 115 whereas the Compaq card is at 69. Crap...

....so, what does a weak video card mean exactly. I mean I know it doesn't mean less resolution. The resolution is 720p on the Compaq computer either way. Does weaker card mean laggy video playback or something? Because honestly, I thought how fast a computer can play an HD video was dependent on its processor, not its video card. I thought video cards had to do with how much CPU/video game graphics it can handle at once (read: something that's not pre-rendered like an HD video), and let me tell you, I'm not looking for a computer for HD games. The highest level of graphics I'm going to play on the new computer is HD Mugen, which is PS2-level graphics (i.e. fairly low...).

Also did anyone notice how windows7forums.com was down for several days? What happened?

 

[cybercore]

(The overall cpu temp, not just cores)

I see.

although i'd say 70 Celcius would be the highest

Right, 72C for my C2Q9450. I reckon first quad cores Q6600 were limited to 62C, mean as Intel stated officially.



~~~~~~~~~~~~

....so, what does a weak video card mean exactly.
I'm not looking for a computer for HD games.

A weak video card means it doesn't give you enough FPS (Frames Per Second) in games and instead of a smooth animation you'll see 3D graphics going in lags and hitches. Which would be hard for eyes and not comfortable at all. The higher graphics options you set the more powerful videocard you need to keep within playable FPS, 0FPS.

It is not the best idea to play HD games on a notebook because laptops cannot have as powerful hardware as in desktops. Why? Because powerful hardware heats and needs cooling that is very hard to provide for a mobile PC.

 

[Heaven or Hell]

The Compaq All-in-One is a desktop though. It just so happens to utilize the Intel Atom processor which apparently is usually in netbooks/notebooks.

 

[cybercore]

The Compaq All-in-One is a desktop though. It just so happens to utilize the Intel Atom processor which apparently is usually in netbooks/notebooks.

CoreI would be a better choice, faster and has SSE4.1 & 4.2 instruction sets.

 

[stueycaster]

My old Athlon 64 2.2Ghz single core processor can encode video at 2x with absolutely no multi-tasking ability at all. They said it compared to the 3.0 Ghz Pentiums of the day.

My i5-430m dual core processor is one of the lowest powered i5 processors available. But, it will encode video at somewhere between 6.5x to 8.5x and it still has multi-tasking ability. That's how good the i-series processors are. I would heartily recommend one. They can be had fairly cheap.

 

[Highwayman]

It is not the best idea to play HD games on a notebook because laptops cannot have as powerful hardware as in desktops. Why? Because powerful hardware heats and needs cooling that is very hard to provide for a mobile PC.

Not to mention bang for bucks is easily 2x or 3x more expensive for Laptops vs Towers