Anyone have the benchmarks for the 3.2ghz dual core and the 3.8 ghz? I'm going to buy a box and as the price is marginal I would like to know what I'd be losing by purchasing the 3.2ghz.

---

If the 3.2 is a dual core and the 3.8 is not, I would _definitely_ get the dual core. If they are both dual core, then I would look at the "overclockability" of the 3.2; I went with AMD, personally, so I know nothing about these specific Intel chips, but when I compared the AMD 3700 to the AMD 3800, I found the 3700 could be overclocked to _easily_ outrun the 3800, and was cheaper, and had a larger cache... and overclocked, even as little as I was willing to do, would equal or better the _4200_, which I couldn't afford.

If the two chips are identical except for speed, and you aren't going to overclock, then it's entirely a financial decision - the 3.8 is faster, is it worth the extra money?

Look at sites like www.tomshardware.com and www.bleedinedge.com and www.anandtech.com, NOT at the CPU manufacturer sites or computer builder sites, for info on real performance and overclocking.

---

Anyone have the benchmarks for the 3.2ghz dual core and the 3.8 ghz? I'm going to buy a box and as the price is marginal I would like to know what I'd be losing by purchasing the 3.2ghz.

Can't help you with benchmarks, but a dual core 3.2GHz will probably do more crunching than a single core 3.8GHz (even with HT on).

Hard to compare with the variable length of Rosetta WUs but looking at my own 3.4GHz P4 with HT, it has approximately the throughput of two 2.4GHz P4's when running SETI. I'd expect the 3.8GHz to have a little less throughput than a dual core 2.8GHz.

Having said all that, I'd look at an Athlon X2 instead. Lower power consumption, less heat (even if overclocked). Don't know what prices you're looking at, but an Athlon X2 4400+ is likely cheaper than either of the Pentiums and should easily outpace them (even at stock speed).

[EDIT]Note: A motherboard for the Athlon will probably also be cheaper[/EDIT]

---

*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***

I had thought that the DC would probably run 'faster' with boinc plus helping out with other multitasking things. I'm definately not buying a new box for rosetta.

I do like AMD chips. Unfortunately, I do not get the kind of discount on them that I do on intel boxes. Specifically, I receive a steep university discount (as I am affiliated with a University) through dell. Of course, I could always go with a mac as they are also a partner, but macs aren't my thing.

Basically, I can get a 3.2ghz DC for 1k under the dell list price for both home and business users. The 3.8ghz is about 40 more to add.

Thanks for the comparison, I was interested in the way a DC would crunch WUs.

---

Basically, I can get a 3.2ghz DC for 1k under the dell list price for both home and business users. The 3.8ghz is about 40 more to add.

OK, go for the dual core and use the money you save to add a decent CPU heatsink and fan (like a Zalman CNPS9500LED or similar :-)

---

*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***

James.

Boinc benchmarks for my Intel Pentium D 840 (not the Extemely Expensive edition);

Number of CPU's: 2
1436 double precision MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
1609 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

Anyone have the benchmarks for the 3.2ghz dual core and the 3.8 ghz? I'm going to buy a box and as the price is marginal I would like to know what I'd be losing by purchasing the 3.2ghz.

Simple rule of maths apply here, both CPU being equal, but one has 2 cpu's on it.

2x3.2GHz = 6.4GHz (ok so you do loose a little of that, but not that much in DC terms)

6.4GHz > 3.8GHz, so even if you add HT (which both will have anyway) you win out.

Athlough watch out for cooling in prebuilt systems, especially if designed for the none extreme nature of wordprocessing at work ;)
You may have to beef up the cooling if your DCing as there is a good chance they may start throttling back the speed.
It's a common situation I've seen with Dell's (and most prebuilt 'make' computers). Crops up time & time with DCers

Although due to the excellent way BOINC benchmarks you'll not loose out on any credit when it throttles, as BOINC does not see that the computer is running slower for at least 4 days ;-)

---

Team mauisun.org

so even if you add HT (which both will have anyway)

Only if the 3.2Ghz dual core is the 840EE - the Pentium D's aren't HT'd

HT adds at most 40%, with the gain usually being a more modest 20-30%. meaning the 3.8 Ghz with HT would be roughly equivelent to a 4.56 GHz dual core.

When I can start to buy computer stuff again, I will likely be re-doing my systems with true dual core CPUs (at this time I would pick AMD 4400s - but I can't buy now so who knows what I will eventaully choose) and as a replacement for HT 3.0 and 3.2 GHz machines I would expect my Cobblestones per hour to go from about 10-12 to about 30 ... as measured by BOINC View.

This is based on an extrapolation of my one AMD 3500 single core. So, it is all speculation ...

---

Thanks for the info - I haven't kept up on the DC side of things with regard to their performance in relation to the single core brethren.

I'll likely go for the 3.2ghz dc. Plus all the goodies. Sometimes it's nice to work for a university - the discounts are pretty insane. For instance, what I want is about 1k under lists prices and about 600 under the 'refurbished' retail prices.

Of course the trade off is that I work for a university.

Yes, the fan will be the first to go followed by the heatsink. That's a given.

And no buying until next month. That's when my double British Airway miles kick in. Apparently I spend enough (and never pay late which is too bad for them) on the visa that I'm getting perks.

---

The P4 3.8 has HT allowing it to run 2 units at a time, a bit faster than the duel core 3.2, but if you get the Pentium D Extreme Edition you have HT on each of the cores and can run 4 units at a time. They would each run slower than on the P4 3.8 HT, but with running 4 at a time you do more in a day.

You were probably looking at the regular Pentium D (no HT on it) as the Extreme Edition chip alone is over $1,000 US. That should be dropping by this summer as I here that Intel plans on releasing 3.4 and 3.8 Extreme Edition chips by the fall. When it is out the 3.8 Extreme Edition should really fly, about the same as having two P4 3.8 HT chips.

Ray

---

Pizza@Home Rays Place Rays place Forums

The P4 3.8 has HT allowing it to run 2 units at a time, a bit faster than the duel core 3.2

Sorry, I'm with Paul on this one, based on my experience with the 3.4GHz version.

A P4 with HT will run two WU at maybe 70, maybe 75% efficienty each (i.e. about 2.66-2.85GHz each on a 3.8GHz CPU, sharing the cache) The 3.2GHz dual core on the other hand will run each WU on a dedicated 3.2GHz processor with its own cache.

Oh, and there is a 3.4GHZ Dual Core now, with 2x2MB L2 Cache. The CPU is not much more expensive than the single core 3.8GHZ from what I have seen.

---

*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***

NO Dualcore AMD advise, mmmm

"I'm going to buy a box" i assume this is a full case.

---

NO Dualcore AMD advise, mmmm

If you look through the replies (3rd and 4th) you will see that I did mention the Athlon X2 4400, but James gets discount from a supplier who only does Intel CPUs. Hence we're talking about which Intel, rather than which brand CPU.

---

*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***

NO Dualcore AMD advise, mmmm

If you look through the replies (3rd and 4th) you will see that I did mention the Athlon X2 4400, but James gets discount from a supplier who only does Intel CPUs. Hence we're talking about which Intel, rather than which brand CPU.

I didn't know about tht discount.
Did know about the X2 ;)

Either way i advice the dualcore intel. 3,2 ghz.
Don't like those 8xx names, just call what there specs are. ;)

---

If you get a Dell uninstall all the junk they put on them these days.

---