Intel Dual Core Performance Preview Part II: A Deeper Look
by Anand Lal Shimpi on April 6, 2005 12:23 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
The point of this article was to present you with the choice that you'll be making, should you decide to upgrade to a new system in the coming months; the choice between very fast single task performance (and to some extent, light multitasking performance) or more responsive, heavy multitasking performance. No one is really exempt from this decision and you'll have to come to the decision based on your own needs.
We've shown the Athlon 64 to have extremely solid single threaded performance. With the exception of our encoding tests, the Athlon 64 really can't be beat when it comes to running a single application.
The tables are turned as soon as multitasking is introduced, where you can't beat the fact that the Pentium D is able to fulfill the needs of more applications running in the background.
So, the question quickly becomes, how heavy of a multitasker are you? If you're primarily a gamer and you find your gaming performance gets bogged down at all by the tasks you're running in the background, then dual core will most likely outweigh the benefits of a strong single core CPU. If not, then your answer is clear: go for the faster single core.
For encoding performance, you still can't beat the Pentium D. Even a dual core Athlon 64 isn't going to help enough in that area.
To characterize all other non-gaming, non-encoding performance is extremely difficult. For the most part, if you're doing a lot of things at the same time or if you have a lot of applications eating up CPU time - you're better off with the Pentium D. If you are a much cleaner operator and don't have all that much going on, then a single core CPU will still be your best bet; and what better single core to have than the Athlon 64.
The surprise here is the impact of NCQ on multitasking performance. The difference in two of our tests was not only measurable, but also quite noticeable in real world usage. Given that NCQ is quickly becoming a "free" feature of new hard drives, it's a feature that we'd strongly recommend to have in your next system. It doesn't improve performance across the board, but it doesn't hurt things and when it does work, it works extremely well.
With all this excitement, we still have to keep ourselves grounded in the thought that dual core isn't here yet; it's still as much as two months away. For AMD, as we've known all along, the wait is going to be a bit longer on the desktop. The workstation and server markets will be serviced by AMD first, and we will have a look at workstation/server dual core performance as soon as AMD launches those parts. It's looking like, at least on the desktop, if you want dual core at a reasonable price point, your only option will be Intel. But the prospect of more affordable dual core chips out of AMD in 2006 is quite exciting as well.
A dual core Athlon 64 solves a lot of our dilemmas simply because you get stronger single threaded performance than the Pentium D (in everything but encoding) while also getting the multitasking benefits of dual core.
For Intel, the Pentium D is a saving grace - it's the first time that we've been interested in any processor based on the Prescott core. It's also perfect timing; if it weren't for the Pentium D, we'd have no interest in the Intel 945 and 955 chipsets, and definitely not in NVIDIA's new nForce4 SLI Intel Edition product. With that said, it should be pretty clear what our next article in this series will be...
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
106 Comments
View All Comments
segagenesis - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
#45 - The Athlon 64 still lags behind on encoding cabability and its been shown over the past year. However some of the content tested was designed specifically for P4 optimization so its hard to get a reliable result. Who knows... until we see the new AMD64 core with SSE3 we cant really pass judgement.Quanticles - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
AMD needs to send Anandtech one of their dual-cores with a DFI nForce4 SLI board.That'd shut a lot of people up.
If AMD owns single thread, then why wouldnt they own dual core. People would be throwing money away buying intel's dual core.
Spearhawk - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
The first graph on the DVD Shrink/Game bench still seems a bit suspect. Why would the P4 outperform the PD and the A64 when under normal circumstances the A64 should be superior in singlethread and the PD in multithread?Anway, great article. I'm really looking forward to seeing what AMD has to offer since while I'd greatly like improved multitasking I'd also like a good gaming CPU.
Marlin1975 - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
What about overclocking the Dual core chip???Regs - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
Ah, I mis read it. You used the Intel 955X.I have to ask then, is it because of AMD's onboard memory controller that they don't have to manufacture another motherboard for the dual core CPUs? If so, you think AMD was thinking about this scenero (dual cores) well before the first clawhammer came out?
That would sound impressive. Compared to Intel's dual press hots.
segagenesis - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
#37 - Well im hard pressed to really want one when my current setup is still sufficient. That and I have my heart set on AMD64 for gaming. Even at DVD backup I can do a movie in about an hour even with full quality under DVD Shrink. And really, I would use DVD Rebuilder which is very much single threaded and in my book Quality > Speed. Takes about 6-7 hours but better results than DVD Shrink could have wished for.Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
RegsThe nForce4 Intel Edition platform was unrelated to the Intel dual core platform, it was just something I was working on at the time.
The platform arrived DOA, I'm guessing it's an error on NV's part.
Take care,
Anand
Jeff7181 - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
"AMD's dual core will be quite impressive, even more so than Intel's. Don't look at performance as the only vector to measure though... "You like to tease us, don't you? :)
Regs - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
Hey Anand, I noted that you said in Part one that the Intel Dual core was one of the most stable config's you ever had. However in part two and quote, "After recovering from Part I and realizing that my nForce4 Intel Edition platform had died, I was hard at work on Part II of the dual core story. "Was this human error or was it a manufacturing error?
michael2k - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
#26: Actually, encoding a DVD should be a multi-tasking event in of itself!Task1: DVD creation; menu's, transitions, etc
Task2: DVD encoding; background rendering of menu's and transitions
Task3: DVD encoding; background rendering of the actual menu
Task4: Burning of DVD; you should be able to start burning the DVD before the encoding in task 2 or 3 is complete, as long as the burner is properly buffered