• NudeCelebForum has been moved from the vBulletin to the XenForo platform.
    For additional information, see: NCF Moved To XenForo
  • New threads will not be visible until approved by a moderator.

  • Welcome to the forum!
    You must activate your account in order to post and view all forum content
    Please check your email inbox & spam folders for our activation email, then follow the link to validate your email address.
    Contact Us if you are having difficulty posting or viewing forum content.
  • You are viewing our forum as a guest, with limited access.
    By joining you will gain full access to thousands of Videos, Pictures & Much More.
    Membership is absolutely FREE! Registration is FAST & SIMPLE.
    Register Today to join the first, most comprehensive and friendliest communities of nude celebrity fans on the net!

comparing/matching hardware

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
It's difficult for me to tell, but is the "NEW" version actually match or better than the old. Based on the graphics card alone, I'm not really sure, because if it were to match or be better, the new card would be a "256mb Nvidia 8600GTS," instead of a 128mb card. Also I'd have a Pent4 540 (3.2 ghz) or better, but something in the 3.2 ghz range. Am I correct in the assumption or not? Does the "new" one match the "old" or is better or worse?

Old
-Pent4, 540 (3.2 GHZ) ht.1mb
-256mb Nvidia geforce 6800

New
-E6700 (2.66 GHZ) DCT 4MB
-128mb Nvidia 8300GS
 

Epc525

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
208
Reaction score
587
is that a Core 2 Duo in the new comp? if so then the new computer would be much better. The 8300 card in theory should be better, but I would much prefer a 256mb card.
 

Cman

Exp0sed Board Member
Staff member
Staff Alumn
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
4,281
Reaction score
599
The 256MB card is better, because 256 is more than 128, simple.

I'm not clear about what E6700 refers to, but if its more recent, then its probably better.

Does the 1MB vs. 4MB refer to the cache? If so, the 4MB is much better and would be really good for video purposes.
 

UltraLisk

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
274
Reaction score
500
E6700 is a model of a CPU...

id also recommend you get a video card with at least 256MB of ram...
 

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
is that a Core 2 Duo in the new comp? if so then the new computer would be much better. The 8300 card in theory should be better, but I would much prefer a 256mb card.

on the Dual Core issue, I'm not sure, but might be. Does the GHZ issue play any part in that though?

I had 256mb on the old model, so I don't know why I got a 128mb instead of a 256mb. I would think if they matched it, then I would have a 256mb graphics card.
 

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
The 256MB card is better, because 256 is more than 128, simple.

I'm not clear about what E6700 refers to, but if its more recent, then its probably better.

Does the 1MB vs. 4MB refer to the cache? If so, the 4MB is much better and would be really good for video purposes.

I had 256mb card on the old comp, and was surprised to get a new card that was only 128mb. That's a lesser card to me.....even if the card I had was 6800 and the new one is 8300, I think that's just the model number, so I would think they would match it to that 256mb.

I saw the poster above my post that said that "that" E6700 was the model type....but that specified a 2.66ghz......and I'm assuming that part (ghz) refers to the processor. My old "?processor?" was 3.16ghz.

I do think that 1mb and 4mb refers to the cache.


I'm not sure whether I should send this new model back and have them replace the processor and graphics card with the right ones, and send me a new model that has that.
 

Cman

Exp0sed Board Member
Staff member
Staff Alumn
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
4,281
Reaction score
599
Processors are getting more complicated now. In the past, all you had to do was compare the speed (like 2 GHZ vs 3 GHZ), but now they have other factors that you have to consider.

The new Intel Duo Core processors have basically 2 processors in one chip. So in that case, it may be listed as 2GHz, but its technically 4 GHz cause of the 2 chips. (I think, correct me if I'm wrong). There are some other differences too, like AMD processors perform faster at lower speeds, compared to Intel, but they also run hotter, so require more cooling.

Anyway, I know its complicated, but its hard to properly compare 2 different things unless you have all the details of each.
 

UltraLisk

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
274
Reaction score
500
Ok, since I am such a nice guy, I will clear things up for everything...


is that a Core 2 Duo in the new comp? if so then the new computer would be much better. The 8300 card in theory should be better, but I would much prefer a 256mb card.
Yes that is a Core 2 duo, but that CPU uses 1033 FSB. Intel is trying to push 1333 FSB. How are they doing it? They are only lowering the price of the 1333 FSB. In other words, if you are purchasing a E6700 (on a whole new computer from a store), you are a sucker.


The 256MB card is better, because 256 is more than 128, simple.
Far from simple.

The 8300 (128MB) has a better architecture and I am sure operate faster. You could have a video card with 2048MB of ram on it and it would not out perform a 256MB video card with much better architecture, speed and design.

Does the 1MB vs. 4MB refer to the cache? If so, the 4MB is much better and would be really good for video purposes.

Yes it does. But 4MB is nothing, almost any Intel CPU over 200$ (if not 150$) will have a 4MB L2 cache (2MB shared). Some even at 8MB (quad). We will also soon have 6MB shared on duel cores (wolfdale). (edit: and 12MB on the Quad)

Does the GHZ issue play any part in that though?

Short explanation on the whole GHZ things: The reason why your old CPU has a higher GHZ is, you guessed it: the architecture. One of the factors (without getting technical) is the pipeline size. Basically the pipeline allows the CPU to work on several instructions at once. The deeper the pileline, the more instruction it works on, and in turns technical the faster it works. P4 (24 deep I think) was built around that. AMD came along and made a better architecture with less, Intel copied them with the Core Duo 2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cpu (go down to Parallelism to read up on pipelines)


OK, so, to sum it all up: That new CPU kicks the ass out of the old P4 EASILLY, but there are currently CPU on the market right now that are cheaper for the same performance.

On top of this all... Intel is brining out a new CPU built in 45nm (penryn) vs the 65nm chips. This means less electricity, faster chips, and with some improvement (like SSE4).
 

UltraLisk

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
274
Reaction score
500
The new Intel Duo Core processors have basically 2 processors in one chip. So in that case, it may be listed as 2GHz, but its technically 4 GHz cause of the 2 chips. (I think, correct me if I'm wrong). There are some other differences too, like AMD processors perform faster at lower speeds, compared to Intel, but they also run hotter, so require more cooling.

The Intel Core Duo 2 is a real dual core CPU... It’s the Quad cores that are fake (two duel core into the same CPU (even the next gen Intel are two duels together I think)).

Also you said 2GHZ x2 = 4GHZ, that is also very wrong. The operating system and many games/application aren’t optimized for multiples cores. So its rare that you will get a 4GHZ equivalent CPU with 2GHZ. One way I can max both my cores: Encode two different movies (in 2 diff applications) telling each movie to use one specific core.

Also AMD do not perform faster at lower speeds.... What AMD sort of has vs intel is there price war, they just bring there price of there CPUs so low they are matching Intel awesome power (in some cases).

edit: good example was how AMD named there chips: "2GHZ AMD 64 +3200". That meant a single core 2GHZ was really equivalent to a 3.2GHZ Intel P4. Those number were decently accurate before dual cores came out.
 

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
Ok, since I am such a nice guy, I will clear things up for everything...



Yes that is a Core 2 duo, but that CPU uses 1033 FSB. Intel is trying to push 1333 FSB. How are they doing it? They are only lowering the price of the 1333 FSB. In other words, if you are purchasing a E6700 (on a whole new computer from a store), you are a sucker.



Far from simple.

The 8300 (128MB) has a better architecture and I am sure operate faster. You could have a video card with 2048MB of ram on it and it would not out perform a 256MB video card with much better architecture, speed and design.



Yes it does. But 4MB is nothing, almost any Intel CPU over 200$ (if not 150$) will have a 4MB L2 cache (2MB shared). Some even at 8MB (quad). We will also soon have 6MB shared on duel cores (wolfdale). (edit: and 12MB on the Quad)



Short explanation on the whole GHZ things: The reason why your old CPU has a higher GHZ is, you guessed it: the architecture. One of the factors (without getting technical) is the pipeline size. Basically the pipeline allows the CPU to work on several instructions at once. The deeper the pileline, the more instruction it works on, and in turns technical the faster it works. P4 (24 deep I think) was built around that. AMD came along and made a better architecture with less, Intel copied them with the Core Duo 2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cpu (go down to Parallelism to read up on pipelines)


OK, so, to sum it all up: That new CPU kicks the ass out of the old P4 EASILLY, but there are currently CPU on the market right now that are cheaper for the same performance.

On top of this all... Intel is brining out a new CPU built in 45nm (penryn) vs the 65nm chips. This means less electricity, faster chips, and with some improvement (like SSE4).


So you're saying a 128mb Nvidia 8300GS graphics card is BETTER, than the 256mb Nvidia GEFORCE 6800 on my old comp, and better than the one that they should've matched it with, the 256mb Nvidia 8600GTS?

I couldn't follow the CPU part you posted about Core 2 Duo. This isn't a purchase, more of a replacement. So about the E6700 (2.66GHZ).....do you think I should have that changed to the 3.19 GHZ?

I'm just trying to figure out whether those two issues, the graphics card and processor, match up in some sense, or are better in the new computer. Wasn't sure whether I should ask for a new model with the proper "?matching?" components, like I talked about earlier.
 

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
Processors are getting more complicated now. In the past, all you had to do was compare the speed (like 2 GHZ vs 3 GHZ), but now they have other factors that you have to consider.

The new Intel Duo Core processors have basically 2 processors in one chip. So in that case, it may be listed as 2GHz, but its technically 4 GHz cause of the 2 chips. (I think, correct me if I'm wrong). There are some other differences too, like AMD processors perform faster at lower speeds, compared to Intel, but they also run hotter, so require more cooling.

Anyway, I know its complicated, but its hard to properly compare 2 different things unless you have all the details of each.

I only have details, provided by an invoice. I could check on the manufacturer's site to see what specific tech it is, aside from the graphics cards that I mention, which I think I provided enough detail, and am still confused on whether, after reading the newer posts, above this one, whether I should request for that 256mb Nvidia 8600gts to "match" the 256 one I use to have, in that sense. ?
 

UltraLisk

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
274
Reaction score
500
So you're saying a 128mb Nvidia 8300GS graphics card is BETTER, than the 256mb Nvidia GEFORCE 6800 on my old comp, and better than the one that they should've matched it with, the 256mb Nvidia 8600GTS?

I couldn't follow the CPU part you posted about Core 2 Duo. This isn't a purchase, more of a replacement. So about the E6700 (2.66GHZ).....do you think I should have that changed to the 3.19 GHZ?

I'm just trying to figure out whether those two issues, the graphics card and processor, match up in some sense, or are better in the new computer. Wasn't sure whether I should ask for a new model with the proper "?matching?" components, like I talked about earlier.

The 8300 is some random card, I did not even know it existed for the desktop :p. Doing a bit of google'ing and I found this chart: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,5442.html

Seems like its at the bottom of the barrel for DX10 cards (on top of that DX9 > DX10 ATM)... It should be about as good maybe a little better then your last card... but I am just guessing...

As for your CPU... Like I said, the one you are getting as a replacement is better then your old P4 CPU. My current 2GHZx2 CPU (which is way faster then your P4 3.2GHZ CPU) is almost half as slow as your replacement...

To put things in perspective, my old SINGLE CORE 2GHZ was faster then your p4 3.2GHZ :p

Or look at it this way, that CPU cost about 500-600$ a year ago :p

So yes, that CPU is faster, id guess about 2-2.5 times faster (depending on the application you are using).

As for the video card, if it is a replacement because your broke or something... id ask for a DX9 card with 256MB... that way they would give you a 7600GT or better (which is better then the 8300GS).
 

Cman

Exp0sed Board Member
Staff member
Staff Alumn
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
4,281
Reaction score
599
Ok, I guess you can ignore everything I said LOL. Listen to UltraLisk.

The reason that I was unsure about everything is because I haven't kept up to date with the newest technology. I don't have a very challenging tech job at the moment, so its hard to keep my knowledge up to date.
 

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
The 8300 is some random card, I did not even know it existed for the desktop :p. Doing a bit of google'ing and I found this chart: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,5442.html

Seems like its at the bottom of the barrel for DX10 cards (on top of that DX9 > DX10 ATM)... It should be about as good maybe a little better then your last card... but I am just guessing...

As for your CPU... Like I said, the one you are getting as a replacement is better then your old P4 CPU. My current 2GHZx2 CPU (which is way faster then your P4 3.2GHZ CPU) is almost half as slow as your replacement...

To put things in perspective, my old SINGLE CORE 2GHZ was faster then your p4 3.2GHZ :p

Or look at it this way, that CPU cost about 500-600$ a year ago :p

So yes, that CPU is faster, id guess about 2-2.5 times faster (depending on the application you are using).

As for the video card, if it is a replacement because your broke or something... id ask for a DX9 card with 256MB... that way they would give you a 7600GT or better (which is better then the 8300GS).

The new comp is a replacement for the old one. Didn't break or anything, was just not put together right, and caused problems.

I think I get what you are saying now about the CPU aspect, in that it's a dual core, so there are 2 cores, which would equal 4, and be better than the 3.19, or 3.19 Pent 4 that I had.

As for the graphics card, that caused me problems for a long time. When I bought my old comp a couple years ago, I wanted everything high-end, because I work with graphics programs, and I wanted the hardware, etc, to hold up, years after, till I would buy a new comp. I think the card itself was just faulty.

I don't think I can get a DX9. I can ask for an Nvidia or ATI card, and ask for one specifically at 256mb, instead of the one I got on the new model which is 128mb. The model, at least that should match that, is the Nvidia 8600GTS model.
 

Epc525

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
208
Reaction score
587
Jeez I wish I would have gotten here earlier. Ultra, I know all of that as well you just beat me to the punch. I have to explain the GHz issue everyday when I sell a computer. Every customer comes in trying to say that there pentium 4 processor is faster then the Core 2 Duo.

Hobbam,
another thing to look at with the video card is if it is 128-bit, that is the max amount of video memory it can use at one time for an individual program. With the card that you have in the new computer you shouldnt have any issue running games. The future may be problematic bcuz it only has 128MB but right now that is normally enough to run a game at normal settings.
 

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
Jeez I wish I would have gotten here earlier. Ultra, I know all of that as well you just beat me to the punch. I have to explain the GHz issue everyday when I sell a computer. Every customer comes in trying to say that there pentium 4 processor is faster then the Core 2 Duo.

Hobbam,
another thing to look at with the video card is if it is 128-bit, that is the max amount of video memory it can use at one time for an individual program. With the card that you have in the new computer you shouldnt have any issue running games. The future may be problematic bcuz it only has 128MB but right now that is normally enough to run a game at normal settings.

well, if you're running a game......or mostly and mainly heavy graphic programs, I want the absolute best card I can get. That's why on my old comp when I had my comp built, I requested at the time, their top of the line card, which was the 256mb nvidia card. This replacement should match that 256mb card, and they shouldn't have given me a 128 standardesque card. So I think at least, they need to replace that card. Not sure if it should be an Nvidia or ATI card though. I've had both, and there are pros and cons.

Nvidia geforce was quiet and ran fine, but I don't think held up.
ATI is good and better in parts than the nvidia, but runs loud and sounds odd. Like a fan that's not running in stable position with a baseball card lightly hitting it as it runs.
 

UltraLisk

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
274
Reaction score
500
I think I get what you are saying now about the CPU aspect, in that it's a dual core, so there are 2 cores, which would equal 4, and be better than the 3.19, or 3.19 Pent 4 that I had.

No, I am saying it has nothing to do with the cores... Even a single core 2.66 GHZ with that architecture would be much better then the 3.2GHZ p4. As for the cores, if you had one CPU with 400 cores each running at 2GHZ and a CPU with 4 cores each running at 4GHZ, the CPU with 4 cores would be 2 times faster with many applications.

Why? Because most applications/games cannot utilize more then one core. This is changing, but the fact remains, right now Dual Core at 3GHZ > Quad core at 2.6GHZ for about everything a standard user would do.

So yes, more the extra core does give you a performance increase (id say -5% to 100% depending on circumstances) but the BIG reason why 2.6 GHZ > 3.2 GHZ in your situation is the architecture.
 

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
No, I am saying it has nothing to do with the cores... Even a single core 2.66 GHZ with that architecture would be much better then the 3.2GHZ p4. As for the cores, if you had one CPU with 400 cores each running at 2GHZ and a CPU with 4 cores each running at 4GHZ, the CPU with 4 cores would be 2 times faster with many applications.

Why? Because most applications/games cannot utilize more then one core. This is changing, but the fact remains, right now Dual Core at 3GHZ > Quad core at 2.6GHZ for about everything a standard user would do.

So yes, more the extra core does give you a performance increase (id say -5% to 100% depending on circumstances) but the BIG reason why 2.6 GHZ > 3.2 GHZ in your situation is the architecture.

Ok, I think I got it now. So then I'd want the Dual Core at 3.19 GHZ.....which was what I was trying to say....if that's correct. I don't want the "standard user computer" if that's what they are now giving me. That comp wont help me, even if it's a little better than what I have now. I had initially purchased one that would be high end, for the programs I was working with, etc. If this new XPS is a standard genericesque model, then I would rather send back, and have them match it toward the high end model that I had initially purchased. If that means changing it out for that Dual Core 3.19 processor, and 256mb graphics card, so be it.
 

UltraLisk

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
274
Reaction score
500
the Core 2 2.6GHZ is WAY better then P4 3.19. There is no 3.19 (or 3.2GHZ) Core 2 CPU out there (but you can OC, but I wont even go there)... The fastest Intel Core 2 is 3.0GHZ.

Here is a good chart (second one in the page): http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3038&p=2

Notice how your E6700 is red and very expensive? That is because its 1066 and Intel is trying to phase them out. But nevertheless, its a VERY good CPU...
 

HOBBAM

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
113
Reaction score
4
the Core 2 2.6GHZ is WAY better then P4 3.19. There is no 3.19 (or 3.2GHZ) Core 2 CPU out there (but you can OC, but I wont even go there)... The fastest Intel Core 2 is 3.0GHZ.

Here is a good chart (second one in the page): http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3038&p=2

Notice how your E6700 is red and very expensive? That is because its 1066 and Intel is trying to phase them out. But nevertheless, its a VERY good CPU...

Thanks for posting that. Is the primary reason for the phase out, an expense issue, or just because they are moving onto the 1333?

After learning more about the CPU. I'm fine with that. As far as the graphics card goes.

This is the option that Dell gave me.

1. Keep the 128mb Nvidia 8300GS model that is in the XPS model.

Go to this link, scroll down to graphics, click "learn more" and it will show you, both the 8300GS as well as the 8600GTS.
http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/xpsdt_410?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs

2. Go with a 256mb GeForce 7600 GT Graphics Card. Here's the link for it.

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=A0728586

Seems like the 7600 they are offering me, is a lesser card in some aspects, just so they can match that 256mb issue. Not sure why they just wont go up to the 256mb 8600GTS, so the quality matches the speed???
 

Similar threads

Top