Pentium 4 athlon 64: The Battle for Value: Athlon 64 3200+ vs. Pentium 4 530

The result leaves an ambiguous impression: after all, the number of disk operations on a 300 MB set of files is too high in terms of time, so the influence of the disk subsystem, most likely, could not be completely avoided. However, based on the results, we can safely say that Bzip2 does not use a very large dictionary because for the first time, Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, which compares favorably with all other processors by its huge cache size, has «drilled through» for the first time. Apparently, it was there that the entire Bzip2 dictionary “climbed” in its entirety. And again, for the first time, the difference in performance between P4 EE and P4 is larger than than the equivalent pair from AMD. The Athlon 64 3200+ outperforms the Pentium 4 3.2 GHz confirms the hypothesis about the small size of the dictionary we recall that the first one also favorably differs from the second one in the size of the second level cache.

Lame 3.93

Audio encoding turned out to be the most «calm» test. You look at the diagram with the results and immediately think: maybe, well, to hell with this processor race? The difference is minimal, the trends are hardly distinguishable and hmm a little strange (as much as 2 megabytes of L3 cache did not give the Pentium 4 EE nothing at all !). Here is such a test. Take a break, relax, take a closer look at the chart. Remember that in addition to processors in this world there are many other interesting things The music that Lame “played” for us turned out to be calm and relaxing, even meditative.

Return to Castle Wolfenstein

However, «the music didn’t last long». For ahead of us games! And although we still haven’t managed to imagine a person who will spend an amount of about $ 900 for the processor alone, so that later we can use our computer as a game console, but we can’t refuse game tests either, because “you can’t forget about the people”, and for some reason they stubbornly believe that an article without tests in Quake can only justify the presence of something similar, «and more, more!». Otherwise, it’s not even testing, but it’s not clear what at all So what are we talking about?.. Oh yes, games.

Tests at various resolutions in Return to Castle Wolfenstein show us that the closer we get to the modes that are worth playing on a powerful machine, the less dependent on the processor, once again proving but, it seems, about we have already said this. Then you can at least speculate on the topic of which engine likes which platform more. At least there will be some science. The RtCW engine obviously loves Intel more, and especially the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. And especially at 800×600 no, I can’t write about it anymore :)))

Serious Sam: The Second Encounter

But in this case, the situation is radically different from the previous one. For here we can already speak about the “processor preferences” of the game engine quite unambiguously, and without any jokes. Serious Sam traditionally «loves» AMD, and in the case of «extreme» processors, this love is not only not smoothed out, but even becomes more pronounced. In general, the difference of even 7 fps at 1280×1024 resolution with 32-bit color and maximum image quality settings is, I must say, an event. Let’s try to understand why this happens, and for this we will take, of course, almost «synthetic», but at the same time the most significant results at a resolution of 800×600 pixels. Let us now analyze the growth “within the platforms”. Pentium 4 EE is 12% faster than usual. Not stunning, but already impressive. Athlon 64 FX-51 is only 9 times faster than Athlon 64 3200+%. So another rare case. With what it can be connected? And in what cases does a large cache help a lot with Pentium 4? Correct with «chaotic» code, when the branch prediction mechanism of this processor is often wrong. Apparently, in the case of Serious Sam, we have just such a code. Well, old-timers may still remember one «iconic» game with a similar feature that we once used in tests. So what turns out, the programmers who worked on the Expendable engine switched to work in Croteam? 🙂

Unreal Tournament 2003

And again, the same “Expendable syndrome”! No, positively, only Id Software can write the «smooth» code so beloved by Intel’s flagship processors. Maybe they use other compilers? However, the fact remains: if we analyze the results of gaming tests from the point of view of «processor preferences of the engines», then AMD is again in favor. And again, even in high resolutions! Amazing, but true. All Epic Games developers urgently need to master optimizing compilers from Intel! 🙂 By the way, we advise you to pay attention to one more fact: in Unreal Tournament 2003, as well as in Serious Sam, we are witnessing a completely fantastic event: the usual desktop AMD Athlon 64 3200+ overtakes the entire Intel platform, including the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition! Truly: “women shouted hurray, and threw caps into the air”

Or maybe it’s just that games are getting more and more complex, and complexity does not fit well with «linear» code? Indeed, of the three game engines, the RtCW engine that «likes» the Pentium 4 is the oldest. Both new ones are clearly «unevenly breathing» towards AMD processors. However, while this assumption can only be credited to the rank of «bold hypotheses». Here comes the final version of Doom 3 from the «intelophiles» from Id Software then we’ll see.

Theoretically, another explanation is, on the contrary, poor optimization of Quake/RtCW/ engines for AMD processors. However, we have no practical evidence for this fact.

Conclusions

Given the number of compared processors, we decided to divide the conclusions into several parts, within each of which the most probable antagonists are discussed in pairs. It seemed logical to us because most often people do not choose “one of four” (five, six), but first reduce the number of candidates to a more familiar pair and consider it most closely. At the same time, it seemed appropriate to us for clarity to present the results of all the tests considered above once again, but in a different form in the form of a single diagram, where all the tests are presented at once, but only the two competitors under consideration are left, and the performance of one of them (the loser within the given pair ) is taken as 100%. You can consider this way of «secondary presentation of results» as a kind of experiment if it takes root, then it will be possible to introduce it into use as a standard supplement to conclusions.

Pentium 4 Extreme Edition as an alternative to the usual Pentium 4

Only 8.5%, and if you look at the one who made the main contribution to this figure (Bzip2 archiver) It becomes a little sad. In general, the impressions from the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition were somehow blurred, and they were “blurred” not so much even by its performance as by expectations from them. Still, as much as 2 MB of L3 cache, and No, it’s not that it’s bad everywhere, not that there’s absolutely no advantage over the usual Pentium 4 3.2 GHz! But somehow it is all too vague, we definitely expected more. It turns out that the positioning of this processor itself is about the th Intel turned out to be, we would say, «depressingly true» it really is something like the recently discontinued «600th Mercedes», which is intended to be, rather, not a sign of the owner’s passion for good cars, but a symbol of his prosperity. Previously, there was the famous Zadornov’s “porsche on aspen”, now something else has been added like “and I’m cutting myself on the P4 EE!”. However, in some applications, the performance of this CPU, if not stunning, then at least commendable. Therefore, if you approach the P4 EE from the point of view of not prestige, but common sense, the reason is to buy it “under the application”. First find out st about or whether the increase received by is in your favorite program , the money spent and only after that think about buying. For obvious reasons, we are not able to consider all the software that exists in the world, so we will limit ourselves to such simple advice.

Athlon 64 FX-51 as an alternative to Athlon 64 3200+

We have already said that the title of «Extreme Performance Edition» is more deserving of Athlon 64 FX-51 than P4 EE, and the diagram once again confirms this. And the point is not even in the general indicator of the average performance increase in relation to a conventional desktop processor (although this indicator is higher for the A64 FX), but in the fact that the performance of the Athlon 64 FX-51 always outperforms the Athlon 64 3200+, and not by «flashes» like the P4 EE of its «partner». Of course, the higher frequency of the “semi-server” AMD processor also affects, but we recall that if the performance increase exceeds 10% (the ratio between frequencies of Athlon 64 3200+ and Athlon 64 FX-51), then it is impossible not to recognize the presence of other factors acceleration. And there are already four such cases In general, it makes no sense to talk for a long time on the topic “is the Athlon 64 FX faster than the regular Athlon 64” faster, and significantly. It’s just a pity that just taking and upgrading from one processor to another , alas, will not work. And it is this point that makes the value of the undoubtedly very remarkable and fast Athlon 64 FX processor much lower than it could be. However, we already wrote about this in the introductory part of the article.

Athlon 64 3200+ as an alternative to Pentium 4 3.2 GHz

Loss by 6% is, in general, not a failure, but simply a «loss on points», so it’s quite appropriate to talk about the real existence of an alternative. Moreover, in four cases out of 10, the AMD processor is even faster. True, he demonstrates the greatest superiority in games, which still looks somewhat “undignified”. And almost no one uses top-end processors in gaming systems, as we have already said more than once.

Let’s take a closer look at the most significant losses of Athlon 64 3200+. These are both «renderers» 3ds max and Lightwave, and the 7-Zip archiver. Doesn’t such a set cause any associations? That’s right: all these are programs that can use the resources of multiprocessor (or «virtual multiprocessor») systems, that is, it is quite legitimate to assume that Pentium 4 won precisely due to Hyper-Threading support. It’s easy to see this scroll up to the chart with Lightwave results and compare the performance of processors for one and eight threads. It is easy to see that in the case of a single thread, the lag of Athlon 64 3200+ becomes much smaller, although it does not disappear completely. Therefore, no matter what AMD says, but the facts are a stubborn thing: “multiprocessor emulation”, , at least for a processor like the Pentium 4 , turned out to be extremely useful.

Athlon 64 FX-51 as an alternative to the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.2 GHz, or simply “AMD vs. Intel» 🙂

Why «AMD vs. Intel”, it’s easy to understand: after all, in this section we are pitting our heads against the two most powerful desktop processors from two “sworn friends”. We collide and see that nothing happened. Why not call the gain of Pentium 4 Extreme Edition by 1.3% a victory?! No, we will not call it a victory. Even «winning on points». Moreover, individual tests have agreed: exactly in half of them the P4 EE wins, and in the second half the A64 FX leads. Therefore, we just have to once again smile and state equality. Why smile? Yes, because again the battle of the giants ended in a fighting draw, despite the terrible amount of fanatical battles between fans of both manufacturers. And even the “micron” gain of the Intel platform has already become almost a traditional attribute. Architectures change, all kinds of hyperthreading and 64-bit instructions are introduced, but the essence has remained the same for four years in a row: significant performance advantages over a long period of time cannot be achieved by any of the competitors. Isn’t that a good reason to stop this race altogether? Probably, but who will listen to us?

Athlon 64 FX-51 as an alternative to Pentium 4 3.2 GHz?

Well, it overtakes, overtakes, calm down :). Even in an additional diagram, in general, there is no particular need. In fact, it would be strange if this did not happen what was the point for AMD in releasing the Athlon 64 FX then? One can even cautiously assume that this is exactly how this decision was made: on the basis of internal testing on the subject of “overtake or not overtake?”. overtook. However, we have already written about the cost: de facto server (well, or, at least, workstation-) boards, the use of a registered DDR400, which you won’t find in the daytime In a word, sincerely rejoicing for once at a rather convincing victory for AMD, we still have to state that the victory turned out to be somewhat « podium.» And apparently, they were somewhat not above those who were supposed to be defeated initially they were going to overtake the competitor’s fastest desktop processor, but the competitor unexpectedly responded with the release of an equally “far-fetched” version that “spoiled all the raspberries”.

If we try to predict the future, then it seems to us that both «monsters», in the end, will remain monsters in the minds of ordinary users. They (or systems based on them) will be purchased either for reasons that are rather weakly related to practical use (fanatical devotion to a certain brand, prestige), or vice versa clearly knowing which applications are executed on the corresponding CPU the fastest, that is, choosing a computer strictly for the task. Other users will be completely satisfied with the usual Pentium 4 or Athlon 64 — fortunately, there is something to compare there too, and everything is not so unambiguous as to be able to talk about absolute leadership. On this pragmatic-optimistic note, perhaps, we will end.

The performance of 4 cores, if any, and performance per core has the greatest impact on the result, since most games do not fully use more than 4 cores.

The speed of caches and working with RAM is also important.

Speed ​​in office use

Athlon 64 4000+

32. 8 (+14.3%)

Pentium 4 3.00GHz

28.1

Performance in everyday work such as browsers and office programs.

The performance of 1 core has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications use only one, ignoring the rest.

Similarly, many professional applications such as various CADs ignore multi-threaded performance.

Speed ​​in heavy applications

Athlon 64 4000+

14.3 (+11.9%)

Pentium 4 3.00GHz

12.6

The performance of all cores and their number have the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications willingly use all the cores and increase the speed accordingly.

At the same time, certain periods of work can be demanding on the performance of one or two cores, for example, applying filters in the editor.

Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems with and without overclocking. Thus, you see the average values ​​corresponding to the processor.

Speed ​​of numerical operations

Different tasks require different CPU strengths. A system with few fast cores and low memory latency will be fine for the vast majority of games, but will be inferior to a system with a lot of slow cores in a rendering scenario.

We believe that a minimum of 4/4 (4 physical cores and 4 threads) processor is suitable for a budget gaming PC. At the same time, some games can load it at 100%, slow down and freeze, and performing any tasks in the background will lead to a drop in FPS.

Ideally, the budget shopper should aim for a minimum of 4/8 and 6/6. A gamer with a big budget can choose between 6/12, 8/8 and 8/16. Processors with 10 and 12 cores can perform well in games with high frequency and fast memory, but are overkill for such tasks. Also, buying for the future is a dubious undertaking, since in a few years many slow cores may not provide sufficient gaming performance.

When choosing a processor to work with, consider how many cores your programs use. For example, photo and video editors can use 1-2 cores when working with filtering, and rendering or converting in the same editors already uses all threads.

Data obtained from tests of users who tested their systems both with overclocking (maximum value in the table) and without (minimum). A typical result is shown in the middle, the more filled in the color bar, the better the average result among all tested systems.

Benchmarks

Benchmarks were run on stock hardware, that is, without overclocking and with factory settings. Therefore, on overclocked systems, the points can noticeably differ upwards. Also, small performance changes may be due to the BIOS version.

Passmark

AMD Athlon 64 4000+

321 (+ 3.4%)

Intel Pentium 4 3.00GHZ

310

Characteristics. Data are not yet filled, therefore, there may not be enough information or existing functions. .

Basic

Manufacturer	AMD	Intel
DescriptionInformation about the processor, taken from the official website of the manufacturer.
ArchitectureCode name for the microarchitecture generation.
Process The manufacturing process, measured in nanometers. The smaller the technical process, the more perfect the technology, the lower the heat dissipation and power consumption.	No data	No data
Release dateMonth and year of the processor’s availability.	09-2016	09-2016
Model Official name.
Cores The number of physical cores.	No data	No data
ThreadsNumber of threads. The number of logical processor cores that the operating system sees.	No data	2
Multi-Threading Technology With Intel’s Hyper-threading and AMD’s SMT technology, one physical core is recognized as two logical cores in the operating system, thereby increasing processor performance in multi-threaded applications.	Missing	Hyper-threading (note that some games may not work well with Hyper-threading, you can disable the technology in the BIOS of the motherboard for maximum FPS).
Base frequencyGuaranteed frequency of all processor cores at maximum load. Performance in single-threaded and multi-threaded applications and games depends on it. It is important to remember that speed and frequency are not directly related. For example, a new processor at a lower frequency may be faster than an old one at a higher one.	2.6 GHz	3GHz
Turbo frequencyThe maximum frequency of one processor core in turbo mode. Manufacturers allow modern processors to independently increase the frequency of one or more cores under heavy load, due to which performance is noticeably increased. It may depend on the nature of the load, the number of loaded cores, temperature and the specified limits. Significantly affects the speed in games and applications that are demanding on the frequency of the CPU.	2.6	No data
L3 cache size The third level cache acts as a buffer between the computer’s RAM and the processor’s level 2 cache. Used by all cores, the speed of information processing depends on the volume.	No data	No data
Instructions
Extended instruction set Allows you to speed up calculations, processing and execution of certain operations. Also, some games require instruction support.
Embedded Options Available Two enclosure versions. Standard and designed for mobile devices. In the second version, the processor can be soldered on the motherboard.	No	No
Bus frequency The speed of communication with the system.
Number of QPI links
TDPThermal Design Power is an indicator that determines heat dissipation in standard operation. The cooler or water cooling system must be rated for a larger value. Remember that with a factory bus or manual overclocking, TDP increases significantly.	No data	No data
Cooling system specifications

Video core

Integrated graphics core Allows you to use your computer without a discrete graphics card. The monitor is connected to the video output on the motherboard. If earlier integrated graphics made it possible to simply work at a computer, today it can replace budget video accelerators and makes it possible to play most games at low settings.
GPU base clockFrequency of 2D and idle operation.	No data	No data
Maximum GPU frequencyMaximum 3D frequency.	No data	No data
Intel® Wireless Display (Intel® WiDi) Supports Wireless Display technology using the Wi-Fi 802.11n standard. Thanks to it, a monitor or TV equipped with the same technology does not require a cable to connect.
Supported monitorsThe maximum number of monitors that can be connected to the integrated video core at the same time.

RAM

Maximum amount of RAMThe amount of RAM that can be installed on the motherboard with this processor.	No data	No data
Supported type of RAM The type of RAM depends on its frequency and timings (speed), availability, price.
RAM Channels The multi-channel memory architecture increases data transfer speed. On desktop platforms, two-channel, three-channel and four-channel modes are available.
RAM bandwidth
ECC memory Support for error-correcting memory that is used in servers. Usually more expensive than usual and requires more expensive server components. However, second-hand server processors, Chinese motherboards and ECC memory sticks, which are sold relatively cheaply in China, have become widespread.	No data	No data

PCI

Data Protection

AES-NI The AES command set extension speeds up applications that use appropriate encryption.	No data	No data
Intel® Secure Key An RDRAND instruction that allows you to create a high performance random number generator.	No data	No data

Design

Which is better

AMD Athlon 64 4000+

• On average, gaming performance is 3% better.
• The speed of work in office applications and browsers is increased by 5%.

Intel Pentium 4 3.00GHz

• The number of threads is increased by 1.
• The base frequency is increased by 0.4 GHz.

How they are similar

• In complex multi-threaded applications, they are approximately equal.

  The performance of 4 cores, if any, and performance per core has the greatest impact on the result, since most games do not fully use more than 4 cores.

  The speed of caches and working with RAM is also important.

  Speed ​​in office use

  Pentium 4 3.00GHz

  28.1

  Athlon 64 3000+

  32.8 (+14.3%)

  Performance in everyday work, e.g. browsing.

  The performance of 1 core has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications use only one, ignoring the rest.

  Similarly, many professional applications such as various CADs ignore multi-threaded performance.

  Speed ​​in heavy applications

  Pentium 4 3.00GHz

  12. 6

  Athlon 64 3000+

  14.3 (+11.9%) maximum

  The performance of all cores and their number have the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications willingly use all the cores and increase the speed accordingly.

  At the same time, certain periods of work can be demanding on the performance of one or two cores, for example, applying filters in the editor.

  Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems with and without overclocking. Thus, you see the average values ​​corresponding to the processor.

  Speed ​​of numerical operations

  Simple household tasks

  Pentium 4 3.00GHz 23 Athlon 64 3000+ 25.2 (+8.7%)

  Demanding games and tasks

  Pentium 4 3. 00GHz 3.3 (+18.2%) Athlon 64 3000+ 2.7

  Extreme

  Pentium 4 3.00GHz 0.7 (+28.6%) Athlon 64 3000+ 0.5

  Different tasks require different CPU strengths. A system with few fast cores and low memory latency will be fine for the vast majority of games, but will be inferior to a system with a lot of slow cores in a rendering scenario.

  We believe that a minimum of 4/4 (4 physical cores and 4 threads) processor is suitable for a budget gaming PC. At the same time, some games can load it at 100%, slow down and freeze, and performing any tasks in the background will lead to a drop in FPS.

  Ideally, the budget shopper should aim for a minimum of 4/8 and 6/6. A gamer with a big budget can choose between 6/12, 8/8 and 8/16. Processors with 10 and 12 cores can perform well in games with high frequency and fast memory, but are overkill for such tasks. Also, buying for the future is a dubious undertaking, since in a few years many slow cores may not provide sufficient gaming performance.

  When choosing a processor to work with, consider how many cores your programs use. For example, photo and video editors can use 1-2 cores when working with filtering, and rendering or converting in the same editors already uses all threads.

  Data obtained from tests of users who tested their systems both with overclocking (maximum value in the table) and without (minimum). A typical result is shown in the middle, the more filled in the color bar, the better the average result among all tested systems.

  Benchmarks

  Benchmarks were run on stock hardware, that is, without overclocking and with factory settings. Therefore, on overclocked systems, the points can noticeably differ upwards. Also, small performance changes may be due to the BIOS version.

  Passmark

  Intel Pentium 4 3.00GHZ

  310 (+ 2.3%)

  AMD Athlon 64 3000+

  303

  Characteristics of the

  Data are not yet filled, therefore, there may not be enough information or existing functions. .

  Basic

  Manufacturer	Intel	AMD
  DescriptionInformation about the processor, taken from the official website of the manufacturer.
  ArchitectureCode name for the microarchitecture generation.
  Process The manufacturing process, measured in nanometers. The smaller the technical process, the more perfect the technology, the lower the heat dissipation and power consumption.	No data	No data
  Release dateMonth and year of the processor’s availability.	09-2016	09-2016
  Model Official name.
  Cores The number of physical cores.	No data	No data
  ThreadsNumber of threads. The number of logical processor cores that the operating system sees.	2	No data
  Multi-Threading Technology With Intel’s Hyper-threading and AMD’s SMT technology, one physical core is recognized as two logical cores in the operating system, thereby increasing processor performance in multi-threaded applications.	Hyper-threading (note that some games may not work well with Hyper-threading, you can disable the technology in the BIOS of the motherboard for maximum FPS).	Missing
  Base frequencyGuaranteed frequency of all processor cores at maximum load. Performance in single-threaded and multi-threaded applications and games depends on it. It is important to remember that speed and frequency are not directly related. For example, a new processor at a lower frequency may be faster than an old one at a higher one.	3GHz	1.8 GHz
  Turbo frequency The maximum frequency of one processor core in turbo mode. Manufacturers allow modern processors to independently increase the frequency of one or more cores under heavy load, due to which performance is noticeably increased. It may depend on the nature of the load, the number of loaded cores, temperature and the specified limits. Significantly affects the speed in games and applications that are demanding on the frequency of the CPU.	No data	1. 8
  L3 cache size The third level cache acts as a buffer between the computer’s RAM and the processor’s level 2 cache. Used by all cores, the speed of information processing depends on the volume.	No data	No data
  Instructions
  Extended instruction set Allows you to speed up calculations, processing and execution of certain operations. Also, some games require instruction support.
  Embedded Options Available Two enclosure versions. Standard and designed for mobile devices. In the second version, the processor can be soldered on the motherboard.	No	No
  Bus frequency The speed of communication with the system.
  Number of QPI links
  TDPThermal Design Power is an indicator that determines heat dissipation in standard operation. The cooler or water cooling system must be rated for a larger value. Remember that with a factory bus or manual overclocking, TDP increases significantly.	No data	No data
  Cooling system specifications

  Video core

  Integrated graphics core Allows you to use your computer without a discrete graphics card. The monitor is connected to the video output on the motherboard. If earlier integrated graphics made it possible to simply work at a computer, today it can replace budget video accelerators and makes it possible to play most games at low settings.
  GPU base clockFrequency of 2D and idle operation.	No data	No data
  Maximum GPU frequencyMaximum 3D frequency.	No data	No data
  Intel® Wireless Display (Intel® WiDi) Supports Wireless Display technology using the Wi-Fi 802.11n standard. Thanks to it, a monitor or TV equipped with the same technology does not require a cable to connect.
  Supported monitorsThe maximum number of monitors that can be connected to the integrated video core at the same time.

  RAM

  Maximum amount of RAMThe amount of RAM that can be installed on the motherboard with this processor.	No data	No data
  Supported type of RAM The type of RAM depends on its frequency and timings (speed), availability, price.
  RAM Channels The multi-channel memory architecture increases data transfer speed. On desktop platforms, two-channel, three-channel and four-channel modes are available.
  RAM bandwidth
  ECC memory Support for error-correcting memory that is used in servers. Usually more expensive than usual and requires more expensive server components. However, second-hand server processors, Chinese motherboards and ECC memory sticks, which are sold relatively cheaply in China, have become widespread.	No data	No data

  PCI

  PCI-E Computer bus version of PCI Express. The bandwidth and power limit depend on the version. There is backward compatibility.	No data	No data
  PCI configuration options
  Number of PCI lanes	No data

  Data Protection

  AES-NI The AES command set extension speeds up applications that use appropriate encryption.	No data	No data
  Intel® Secure Key An RDRAND instruction that allows you to create a high performance random number generator.	No data	No data

  Design

  Dimensions	No data	No data
  Supported sockets	No data	No data
  Maximum processors per motherboard	No data	No data

  Which is better

  Intel Pentium 4 3.00GHz

  • Faster in complex multi-threaded applications and outperforms by 0%.
  • The number of threads is increased by 1.
  • The base frequency is increased by 1.2 GHz.

  AMD Athlon 64 3000+

  • On average, gaming performance is 4% better.
  • The speed of work in office applications and browsers is increased by 5%.

  How are 9 similar?0013

  • Prices for new processors are about the same.
  • The number of physical cores is equal.

  Comparison of AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Intel Pentium 4 HT 520

  Comparative analysis of AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Intel Pentium 4 HT 520 processors according to all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Performance, Compatibility, Memory, Security and reliability, Technologies, Virtualization.
  Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core.

  AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+

  versus

  Intel Pentium 4 HT 520

  Benefits

  Reasons to choose AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+

  • Newer processor, release dates difference 1 year(s)
  • more the ability to run more applications simultaneously: 2 vs 1
  • L1 cache is 8 times larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access

  Issue date	May 2006 vs June 2004
  Number of cores	2 vs 1
  Level 1 cache	128 KB vs 16 KB

  Reasons to choose Intel Pentium 4 HT 520

  • About 27% more clock speed: 2. 8 GHz vs 2.2 GHz
  • The L2 cache is 2 times larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
  • About 6% less power consumption: 84 Watt vs 89 Watt
  • a) more: 801 vs 219
  • 2.3 times more performance in Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core benchmark: 906 vs 398

  Maximum frequency	2.8GHz vs 2.2GHz
  Level 2 cache	1024 KB vs 512 KB
  Power consumption (TDP)	84 Watt vs 89 Watt
  Geekbench 4 — Single Core	801 vs 219
  Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core	906 vs 398

  Benchmark comparison

  CPU 1: AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+
  CPU 2: Intel Pentium 4 HT 520

  Geekbench 4 — Single Core	CPU 1 CPU 2
  Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core	CPU 1 CPU 2

  Name	AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+	Intel Pentium 4 HT 520
  PassMark — Single thread mark	0
  PassMark — CPU mark	1285
  Geekbench 4 — Single Core	219	801
  Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core	398	906

  Performance comparison

  Manchester

  	AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+	Intel Pentium 4 HT 520
  Architecture name		Prescott
  Production date	May 2006	June 2004
  Price at first issue date	$309
  Place in the ranking	2724	2064
  Price now	$179. 95
  Price/performance ratio (0-100)	1.80
  Applicability	Desktop	Desktop
  Processor Number		520
  Series		Legacy Intel® Pentium® Processor
  Status		Discontinued
  Support 64 bit
  Crystal area	156mm	112 mm2
  Level 1 cache	128 KB	16KB
  Level 2 cache	512KB	1024KB
  Process	90nm	90nm
  Maximum frequency	2. 2GHz	2.8 GHz
  Number of cores	2	1
  Number of transistors	154 million	125 million
  Base frequency		2.80 GHz
  Bus Speed ​​		800 MHz FSB
  Maximum core temperature		67.7°C
  Permissible core voltage		1.200V-1.425V
  Maximum number of processors in configuration	1	1
  Supported sockets	939	PLGA775
  Power consumption (TDP)	89 Watt	84 Watt
  Low Halogen Options Available
  Package Size		37. 5mm x 37.5mm
  Supported memory types		DDR1, DDR2, DDR3
  Execute Disable Bit (EDB)
  Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (TXT)
  Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology
  Idle States
  Intel 64
  Intel® Demand Based Switching
  Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology
  Intel® Turbo Boost Technology
  Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x)

  Pentium 4 XE 3.

  46 GHz and Athlon 64 FX-55

  So where are these phantom processors? The vast majority of
  users regularly look at dozens of reviews of similar devices, where they write about unprecedented performance,
  huge overclocking potential. Web sites regularly appear inaccessible
  are the results of extremely overclocked these same simply extreme CPUs.
  manufacturers cite the speed data of their «XE» and «FX» as confirmation of
  that they are the fastest «processor builders» today. In a word, there is a lot of noise around devices that really (!) seem to not exist.

  We help

  Since these processors are positioned «for enthusiasts», let’s think about who can be included in this category — young fans of computer hardware or adult experienced users who are demanding on speed? Perhaps, for the first, extreme CPUs are really a desirable acquisition, but they cannot afford such a luxury. For the latter, everything is exactly the opposite: most likely they would be able to overpower such a purchase, but getting these processors is not just difficult, but very difficult.

  Here, for example, it would be possible to hold an action on behalf of manufacturers — let’s say, bring into the country 20 pieces of «XE» and «FX» and sell them at 400 dollars (but not 1000 dollars) within the framework of some exhibition. These same enthusiastic fans would immediately appear in the country, possessing unique CPUs and showing them to other enthusiasts who would also want to have such processors … you see, over time, the necessary critical mass would have accumulated. In the meantime, only test labs can evaluate the capabilities of superdevices, which have no choice but to inform readers of verdicts like «Very good, but you won’t see it.»

  But let’s finish the lyrical reflections on the topic «who needs all this» and move on to the technical side of things.

  course

  UI/UX Design

  REGISTER!

  Intel 925XE — frequencies are never too high!

  It’s hard to say which event is more timed for which
  : the new Pentium 4 Extreme Edition processor with FSB
  1066 MHz released to promote the i925XE chipset or vice versa? We are inclined to believe that the appearance of a chipset in this case is much more important, since it has a much greater chance of becoming a mass
  . The Intel 925XE has the features we hoped to see in the
  in the 925X. In essence, the letter «E», as before,
  means support for higher clock speeds. This time the physical value of
  FSB «grew up» to 266 MHz (resulting 1066 MHz), which provided
  The theoretical bandwidth for the processor bus is 8.5 GBps. On the one hand,
  fully corresponds to the capabilities of dual-channel DDR2 533 memory, on the other hand,
  allows it to win a symbolic victory over its competitor (Athlon 64/Socket
  939 has a processor bus bandwidth of 8.0 GBps). The maximum memory frequency was left at 533 MHz — apparently, postponing DDR2 667 until better times, in order to add one more letter to the chipset later (for example, 925XEi).

  9The 2262 Pentium 4 Extreme Edition still uses the Northwood core with an additional 2 MB L3 cache. In general, there is a clear unwillingness of Intel to part with the «golden» generation of its processors. Why they don’t release processors on the Prescott core with a third-level cache is also quite clear. First, you need to test this core with lower frequencies on servers (as was the case with Gallatin and Prestonia). Secondly, the heat dissipation of 90nm processors is already at the limit, and adding even more static memory elements can already lead to irreparable consequences. So the current fate of Northwood is reminiscent of the life path of nForce2 — both products are already unpromising from a technical point of view, but thanks to their excellent characteristics they still keep afloat.

  AMD also continues to pull everything possible and impossible out of the 0.13 micron process — however, unlike Intel, by increasing the processor multiplier. The latest achievement of AMD developers was Athlon 64 FX-55 with a frequency of 2.6 GHz. It’s hard to say anything in advance, but it looks very likely that the FX-55 will remain AMD’s fastest 0.13 micron processor. At least, it’s already hard to believe in the possibility of the appearance of the FX-57 with a frequency of 2. 8 GHz on the existing architecture.

  Features of testing

  Intel D925XECV2 (i925XE chipset) was used as the main motherboard for testing Pentium 4 XE. Both externally and functionally, the board is completely identical to the Intel D925XCV based on the i925X. However, it turned out that the DDR2 667 memory mode supported in BIOS Setup for both boards turned out to be inoperative. In this regard, as an alternative option, we took the ASUS P5AD2 Premium board (i9 chipset25X) with advanced performance tuning options. It was also interesting to check whether our assumptions that the i925X/915P chipsets will work with processors with a FSB frequency of 1066 MHz and DDR667 memory will be confirmed. The result turned out to be positive — P5AD2 started up stably with the new Pentium 4 XE 3.46 GHz and PC2 5400 Kingston HyperX KHX5400D2 modules. Moreover, when we raised the FSB frequency even more, it turned out that 720 MHz is neither for memory nor for the i9 chipset25X is not a problem. In a word, buyers of new extreme processors should not be embarrassed if they only have a motherboard with chipsets for the first CPUs with Socket LGA775.

  Intel D925XECV2 (i925XE) improved copy of D925XCV

  For the fastest AMD processor, we chose the Soltek SL-K8TPRO-939 motherboard (VIA K8T800 Pro chipset). In fact, this choice is not accidental — it seems that the company, whose name «thundered» in Ukraine about three years ago, seriously decided to regain lost ground. The board is equipped in the best traditions of high-level products — POST code indicator, dual-channel IDE RAID, FireWire, Gigabit Ethernet. Multimedia capabilities are also not forgotten — the ALC850 8-channel audio codec has four audio outputs for connecting speakers, as well as an input / output for a digital signal. BIOS Setup has moderate functionality in terms of overclocking, but we think that over time, Soltek will catch up on this indicator.

  Soltek SL-K8TPRO939 — an attempt by to revive the «people’s» brand

  DDR2-667 vs. DDR400 — huge speed vs fast access

  Test system configurations
  Platform	Intel	AMD
  Processor	Intel Pentium 4 XE 3.46 GHz	AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 2.6 GHz
  Process	0. 13 µm
  Specifications CPU	512 KB L2 cache, 2 MB L3 cache, FSB 1066 MHz, multiplier x13	1 MB L2 cache, FSB 1000 MHz, multiplier x13
  Cooler	Intel BOX Cooler	Zalman CNPS7000ACu 2700 rpm
  Motherboard	Intel D925XECV2 (i925XE chipset), Intel P5AD2 (i925X chipset)	Soltek SL-K8TPRO-939 (VIA K8T800 Pro chipset)
  Memory	2×512 MB Kingston HyperX KHX5400D2 (DDR2-667)	2×512 MB Kinston HyperX KHX3200UL (DDR400)
  9 modes0224 memory test	533 MHz, timings 12-4-4-4, 667 MHz, timings 12-4-4-4	400 MHz, timings 6-3-3-2
  Video card	ASUS AX800XT 256 MB (PCI Express 16X)	Sapphire X800XT 256 MB (AGP 8X)
  Video test modes	500/500 MHz (chip/memory), Catalist 4. 10 drivers
  Rigid disk	Western Digital WD1600 (160 GB, 7200 rpm)
  OS	Windows XP Professional SP2, DirectX 9.0c

  Summing up

  As before, we do not deviate from our principles: processors created for benchmarks should be tested in them. So we offer you diagrams of all generations of 3DMark and two cult games — Far Cry and DOOM 3. Only in 3DMark 05, Intel systems managed to outperform the competitor thanks to HyperThreading technology. In previous generations of this test, the leadership of the FX-55 looks very convincing. The gap between the top system and AMD in real games looks even more impressive. Surprisingly, even in DOOM 3 (which «knows» how to use HT), the Athlon 64 was able to be faster at 6 frames per second. In Far Cry, the gap was already 15 frames, which is a very significant indicator. Note that testing was carried out in 1024×768 mode at the highest possible quality settings, which is quite close to real conditions (unlike commonly used CPU test modes like 640×480 at low detail), i.e. today we can talk about a real advantage hi-end systems from AMD over those from Intel. We have already talked about the reasons for this more than once, but we will briefly repeat the main ones: the HyperTransport bus is much more advanced compared to the half-duplex AGTL +, therefore, with an increase in the frequency of processors, the increase in performance is greater for AMD systems. In gaming applications, low memory latency is more important than high bandwidth.

  Over the past year, 64-bit processors of the new wave from AMD have proved their right to
  existence. It would even be more correct to say so — those technological innovations,
  on which the company made a bet, justified themselves. However, Intel is by no means sitting idly by
  , but now it has directed its main efforts to improving the
  platform as a whole, and not just the CPU. Also, the fact that the Pentium 4 with
  at 4 GHz will not be released means that very soon we will see something that seems to be dual-core.
  Well, Pentium 4 XE 3.46 GHz, in our opinion, adequately presented the new platform
  with a bus frequency exceeding 1 GHz. Now, in fact, we are looking forward to
  «accelerated» Pentium 4 on the Prescott core, for which this
  platform will be really in demand.

  Equipment supplied by
  Intel Pentium 4 XE 3.46 GHz	Representative office Intel in Ukraine	(044) 490-6417
  Motherboard Intel D925XECV2
  AMD Athlon 64 FX-55	Representative Office of AMD in Ukraine	www. amd.ru
  Motherboard ASUS P5AD2 Premium	«Technopark»	www.technopark.com.ua
  ASUS video card AX800XT	MTI	(044) 458-3434
  Motherboard Soltek SL-K8TPRO-939	Compass	(044) 531-9730
  Sapphire video card X800XT
  Memory modules Kingston HyperX	«Heaven»	(044) 490-3577

  Processor Intel Pentium 4 (2 GHz), Celeron (1.

  6 GHz), AMD ATHLON-64 3000+ (1.8 GHz)

  Processor Intel Pentium 4 (2 GHz), Celeron (1.6 GHz), AMD ATHLON-64 3000+ (1.8 GHz)

  Different processors (according to different sockets), which were lost after the upgrade of computer equipment. Mustache processors at a normal working station. Sold without cooling system (coolers). Technical specifications are listed below.

  Intel Celeron Processor = 1 of Cores, 1.80 GHz, 128K Cache, 400 MHz FSB, 66.1 W TDP, 1.560V-1.725V VID Voltage Range, SL7RU MALAY, PPGA478 Sockets Supported.
  = 50 UAH

  Intel Celeron Processor = 1 of Cores, 2.40 GHz, 128K Cache, 400 MHz FSB, 59.8 W TDP, 1.315V-1.525V VID Voltage Range, SL6W4 MALAY, PPGA478 Sockets Supported.
  = 70 UAH

  Intel Celeron Processor 420 = 1 of Cores, 1.60 GHz, 512K Cache, 800 MHz FSB, 35.0 W TDP, 1.000V-1.3375V VID Voltage Range, SL9XP MALAY, LGA775 Sockets Supported.
  = 90 UAH

  Intel Celeron Processor 430 = 1 of Cores, 1. 80 GHz, 512K Cache, 800 MHz FSB, 35.0 W TDP, 1.000V-1.3375V VID Voltage Range, SL9XN COSTA RICA, LGA775 Sockets Supported.
  = 100 UAH

  Intel Celeron Processor 346 = 1 of Cores, 3.06 GHz, 256K Cache, 533 MHz FSB, 84.0 W TDP, 1.250V-1.400V VID Voltage Range, SL9BR MALAY, LGA775 Sockets Supported.
  = 90 UAH

  Intel Pentium 4 Processor = 1 of Cores, 2.00 GHz, 256K Cache, 400 MHz FSB, 71.8 W TDP, 1.560V-1.75V VID Voltage Range, SL5TL MALAY, PPGA423 — PPGA478 Sockets Supported.
  = 100 UAH

  Intel Pentium D Processor 925 = 2 of Cores, 3.00 GHz, 4MB Cache, 800 MHz FSB, 95.0 W TDP, 1.200V-1.3375V VID Voltage Range, SL9D9 COSTA RICA, LGA775 Sockets Supported.
  = 150 UAH

  AMD ATHLON-64 3000+ (ADA3000iAA4CN) «Orleans» (F2 & F3, 90 nm), Socket AM2, frequency = 1.8 GHz, 1 core, L1 cache = 128 KB, L2 cache = 512 KB, TDP = 62 W
  = 130 UAH

  Single-core, without fan (cooler) — removal from office computer after upgrade, normal stan.
  Virobnik = China.

  DESCRIPTION = Specifications = General Specifications

  Processor 3000+ Specifications (AMD Athlon 64 3000+ ADA3000IAA4CN)
  Manufacturer — AMD
  Connector type — AM2 socket
  Clock frequency — 1.8 Ghz
  L2 cache — 512 KB
  Number of cores — 1
  Manufacturing technology — 90 nm
  Power consumption — 62 W F3, 90 nm)
  All models support: MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, Cool’n’Quiet, AMD-V
  Model Number = Athlon 64 3000+
  Frequency = 1800 MHz
  L2 Cache = 512 KB
  HyperTransport = 1000 MHz
  CPU multiplier 1 = 9x
  Supply voltage = 1.35-1.40 V
  TDP = 62 W
  Socket = Socket AM2
  Release date = May 23, 2006
  Part number = ADA3000iAA4CN

  Specifications
  Manufacturer: ATI
  processor frequency = 1.8 GHz.
  Processor socket = Socket AM2
  Bus speed = 1000 MHz
  L1 cache = 128 KB
  L2 cache = 512 KB, running at processor speed
  Core = Orleans
  Number of cores = 1
  Memory type supported = DDR2 PC-4200 (DDR533) , PC-5300 (DDR667), PC-6400 (DDR800), ECC not supported, dual controller
  Max RAM = 16 GB.
  Supply voltage = 1.35 ~ 1.40 V
  Power dissipation = 62 W
  Critical temperature = 69°C
  Technology = 0.09 µm, copper connections, SOI, DSL (Dual Stress Liner)
  * * * * * * * * * * * *

  Notebook processor Intel Pentium Dual Core T2310, Socket PPGA478, frequency = 1.46GHz, 2 cores
  = 150 UAH.

  Dual core, no fan (cooler), normal stan.
  Weaver = Malaysia

  DESCRIPTION = Characteristics = General characteristics

  The Intel Pentium Dual Core T2310 is a 1460 MHz dual-core processor introduced in the fourth quarter of 2007. It operates at a system bus frequency of 533 MHz, has 1 MB of L2 cache, supports 64-bit instructions, and is built on a 65-nm Merom core. Maximum heats up to 100°C and supports a package of features: Intel SpeedStep and Execute Disable Bit.

  Series: Intel Pentium Dual Core
  Code: Merom
  Clock speed: 1460 MHz
  FSB: 533 MHz
  L2 cache: 1024 KB
  Number of cores/threads: 2/2
  Maximum power consumption (TDP): 35 W
  Process technology: 65 nm
  64 Bit: 64 Bit support

  Intel® Pentium® Processor T2310 (1M Cache , 1. 46 GHz, 533 MHz FSB)
  Specifications
  -Basic Features
  Processor Part Number = T2310
  Condition = End of Interactive Support
  Release Date = Q4’07
  Lithography = 65 nm
  MSRP = N/A
  -Performance
  Number of cores = 2
  Processor Base Clock = 1.46 GHz
  Cache = 1 MB L2
  FSB = 533 MHz FSB
  FSB Parity = None
  Rated Power = 35 W
  VID Voltage Range = 1.075V-1.175V
  -Additional Information
  Embedded options available = None
  Datasheet =

  — Chassis specs
  Supported connectors = PPGA478
  TJUNCTION = 100°C
  Case Size = 35mm x 35mm
  Processor Core Size = 143 mm2
  Number of Transistors in Processor Core = 291 million
  Low Halogen Options Available = See MDDS Declaration
  -Advanced Technology
  Technology Intel® Turbo Boost = No
  Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology = No
  Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) = No
  Intel® Architecture 6 = Yes
  Instruction Set = 64-bit
  Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology = Yes
  Intel® Demand Based Switching Technology = No
  -Intel® Platform Protection Technology
  Trusted Execution Technology = No
  Execute Cancel Bit Function = Yes

  Description:
  Intel Pentium T2310 specifications
  The specs can be used for short-term
  listings on auction and classifieds sitesGet specs
  General information
  Type CPU / Microprocessor
  Market segment Mobile
  Family Intel Pentium Dual-Core Mobile
  Model number ? T2310
  CPU part number
  LF80537GE0201M is an OEM/tray microprocessor
  Frequency 1467 MHz
  Bus speed 533 MHz
  Clock multiplier 11 P
  S-spec numbers
  Part number ES/QS processors Production processors
  Q1TQ SLAEC
  LF80537GE0201M + +
  Architecture / Microarchitecture
  Microarchitecture Core
  Processor core ? Merom-2M
  Core stepping ? M0 (SLAEC)
  CPUID 6FD (SLAEC)
  Manufacturing process 0.