Which System Is Better?

[dannyp1]

I still get a little confused when comparing dos systems.  Which would be a faster, better computer/processor?

1.  An older (maybe 5 to 7 Y.O.) system with a 2.52ghz processor?

2.  A 3 year old system with an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.80ghz?

Number 1 is what I use daily.  Number 2 is being offered to me by someone moving at a hard to resist price.

[motorollin]

--
moto

[Iggy]

I still get a little confused when comparing dos systems.  Which would be a faster, better computer/processor?

1.  An older (maybe 5 to 7 Y.O.) system with a 2.52ghz processor?

2.  A 3 year old system with an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.80ghz?

Number 1 is what I use daily.  Number 2 is being offered to me by someone moving at a hard to resist price.

What are you comparing? If the older system is a P4, put it down, step back and walk away from it.
The entire Netburst design only proved that Intel could still make really stupid decisions.
The entire shift to Core2 was necesitated but Intels loss of the X86 top dog crown to its licensee AMD when Amd's A64s started slapping Intels products at lower clockspeed because of a superior design.

Stated more simply, your probably better of with the Core2, especially if that CPU can be upgraded. Core2 help us all regain some measure of respect for Intel (on my part begrudged).

[fishy_fiz]

A core2duo, per physical core is roughly 80-100% faster at same clockspeed vs a Pentium4 (depending of course on which type of core2 and which p4 architecture). Bare in mind that a 2.7ghz core2duo can be bought new for about $65 these days, socket775 motherboards supporting either ddr2 or ddr3 for about $40 (again new), and ram itself for about $40 per 4gig(ddr3@1333 or ddr2@800), so make sure you dont spend too much if it is 2nd hand.

[Zac67]

As Iggy wrote, GHz alone don't tell too much. A P4 (Netburst) roughly counts 2/3 of it's clockspeed against more modern CPUs. The 5/7 y.o. machine probably is single core as well, it's slower in every respect than the C2D. Plus it's hotter and noisier - stay clear.

[tone007]

In fewer words:

Get the dual core.

[fishy_fiz]

If you pay more than $100 for the entire system though youre being ripped off (even if not intentionally,... that sort of gear is just practically given away these days is all). Core2 based architecture is now 3 generations old (or will be in a few weeks when sandy bridge based systems are released). That's not to say they dont make nice little machines (Im using one clocked at 3.86ghz for my aros box), theyre just old is all, ergo the warning in regards to pricing.

[persia]

As long as it's a core 2 duo, the original Duo Core chips sucked almost as badly as P4s...

[dannyp1]

OK, here is what is being offered to me for $200

20" Samsung Syncmaster monitor 205bw

Tower-

2 gigs ram
ASRock 775Dual Motherboard
MSI 8600 graphics card
Intel Core 2 Duo 1.80ghz
2 hard drives - 32gig & 320gig
USB Wireless wifi receiver
DVD Burner
Windows 7
Microsoft wireless mouse
Microsoft wireless keyboard

I think that's most everything.

Is the price way out of line because this is double the $100 amount.

[Iggy]

As long as it's a core 2 duo, the original Duo Core chips sucked almost as badly as P4s...

It seems to be what he stated. And its not a bad system, might even be slightly over-clockable.

Glad to see so many of you were as horrified by the P4 as I was.
When they were introduced I warned a former employer to avoid them. There was something odd about how the Pentium III out performed the Pentium IV.
Personally, I think Intels blind focus on memory bandwidth and the assinie idea that the design would scale to 10 Ghz blinded them to tghe inherent flaws in the design.

[KThunder]

I still get a little confused when comparing dos systems.  Which would be a faster, better computer/processor?

1.  An older (maybe 5 to 7 Y.O.) system with a 2.52ghz processor?

2.  A 3 year old system with an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.80ghz?

Number 1 is what I use daily.  Number 2 is being offered to me by someone moving at a hard to resist price.

You said "dos systems" are you actually using dos or freedos, or do you mean wintel systems. A true dos or freedos system will not use any of the advanced features of new processors.

If you are running very tight code it is possible that a 2.52ghz can come out very similar to a 1.8 dual core. Similar but noticably slower.

the reason is the second core would not be used, so this would come down to a comparison of the pipeline depth of the cpus. IIRC p4s have a 31 stage pipe. core  has a 14 stage pipe. so the p4 would have to be at least twice as fast or 3.6 ghz, to be better than the core. you are a ghz off this.

If you are running dos I have no clue what would need even half the power of a p4. If you are running windows, or will be; definitely spring for the core.

BTW I have a 1.8ghz athlon64 single core and it is much faster than any of my p4 systems, including my 2.0, 2.5, 2.8, and 3.06

this article is really good:
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/313

[dannyp1]

I should have been clearer.  I am talking about windos systems.  The P4 system has XP and the core has 7.

[tone007]

The monitor alone is worth at least $100.

The $200 price sounds like a good deal to me.

[fishy_fiz]

Pipeline depth doesnt directly dictate speed, but more typically frequency potential. Things like branch prediction and so on are more relevant to speed than pipeline length, especially with a larger pipe. Also there was 4 different architectures for the p4, not all had the same length pipeline. JUdging by the frequency though it's probably either northwood or williamette.

As for the price, I guess if it includes a monitor and other bits n bobs 200 isnt too unreasonable. Personally I wouldnt pay it, but for some people I guess a ready to use system is worth a little extra money. When I said $100 to begin with I was thinking more along the lines of just the box + core components.

[motrucker]

I still get a little confused when comparing dos systems.  Which would be a faster, better computer/processor?

1.  An older (maybe 5 to 7 Y.O.) system with a 2.52ghz processor?

2.  A 3 year old system with an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.80ghz?

Number 1 is what I use daily.  Number 2 is being offered to me by someone moving at a hard to resist price.

No brainer, Core 2