Intel Dual Core Performance Preview Part I: First Encounter
by Anand Lal Shimpi on April 4, 2005 2:44 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
semi-Final Words
The verdict on dual core is far from in, but what we've presented here is a start. We have more coverage coming, including power consumption, overclocking potential and a look at the more economical dual core price points from Intel. We're also hard at work on creating new multitasking benchmarks with the hopes of eventually reaching the holy grail of being able to measure and quantify system response time accurately. To that effect, if you all have any suggestions for usage models that you'd like to see tested or any benchmarking suggestions in general, please let us know.
We're far from being able to make any conclusions about dual core or Intel's Pentium D/Extreme Edition, but there are some things that we can say at this point:
- In general use of the system, the Pentium Extreme Edition 840 felt just as fast as the 3.73GHz Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. In multitasking, there was no substitute for the dual core Pentium Extreme Edition.
- Hyper Threading made a decent impact on our usage, even on the dual core platform. However, the benchmarks show that Hyper Threading on dual core doesn't always result in a performance boost. That being said, we'd still opt for Hyper Threading as it just seems to make things smoother than without on the dual core chip. Although Intel has a desire to separate their Extreme Edition and Pentium D lines, we think that Hyper Threading is the wrong feature to use as a differentiator - all users could benefit from its presence on their dual core platforms.
- Intel's pricing strategy for dual core makes a lot of sense to force market adoption. In the near future, we will be looking at Intel's cheapest dual core offering to see how well it stacks up to AMD's similarly priced single core chips. The only way to make sure that developers crank out multithreaded desktop software is to ensure a large installed user base, and Intel appears to be committed to doing that.
- AMD should get an even larger boost from the move to dual core than Intel has, simply because AMD doesn't presently have the ability to execute more than one thread at a time. Intel's Hyper Threading on their single core chips does improve response time greatly as well as improves multitasking performance. For AMD, the move to dual core will give their users the benefits in response time that their Intel counterparts have enjoyed with Hyper Threading as well as the extra advantage offered by having two identical cores on a chip.
- When it comes to dual core vs. single core with Hyper Threading, there's a huge difference. While both improve system response time, dual core improves it more while also guaranteeing better overall system performance. Hyper Threading lets you multitask, dual core lets you actually get work done while multitasking.
That's all for now - we'll have much more dual core coverage later on this week and the next.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
141 Comments
View All Comments
Questar - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
Is Xvid a relevent test? It's not multithreadedboban10 - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
hi. thanks to responding.i have some sugestion for you work.
can you test this:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threa...
easy real media producer, you get it here:
http://redcheek.net/erm/ermp_full.zip
its free..
can you try to encoding some things, i wannt to see how much diference it it on one and two cpu, and would be nice if you can test with athlon xp too, because i wannt to see how much gain i get with dual-core cpu...
then some more programs that suport dual-cpu:
TMPGEnc , Photoshop. Premiere pro ...
thanks...
Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
Thanks so much for the comments, keep em coming in. This is just the first part, there's more coming. I've got another NDA tomorrow morning but then after that it's more dual core. Let me know what you want to see, I've already got quite a bit planned :)And yes that die shot is correct, it is simply rotated 90 degrees clockwise to fit on the page better.
Take care,
Anand
erikvanvelzen - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
Are you 100% sure that die picture is right? Again a great review from Anandtech!DAPUNISHER - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
I must have missed it somehow; what storage setup did you use? Thanks and great article kid :-)boban10 - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
Anandtech, i wannt to thank you, because this is a great preview....ronaldo
Avalon - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
Impressive results. Sometimes I come across a scenario where I'm doing two things at once fighting for 100% CPU time on my A64 Sempron rig, so it would be quite nice to have a dual core chip to handle that for me. I personally can't wait to see a more full review, and hopefully one of AMD's dual core setup as well.karlreading - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
#11Very good points, but i think the thing to remeber about intel is this:
Yes, they are beating AMD to the desktop. And yes, that will be good beacuse it will encourage the user base to adopt dual core, and thus programers to multi thread more. Bineg a enthusiast site, obviously dektop dual is the scene we care about and sticks in our minds.
BUT:
AMD will beat out Intel to dual core in the enterprise segment. THE area where the real money is. THE area where dual core can stretch its multithreaded wings. THE area where it has a product thats already causing waves ( opteron may not have the penertration of xeon, but it's given AMD a seriouse status in the enterprise sector and it is a respected architecture ), and, THE area it can really try and hurt intel, and its partners. DELL wont have a dual core capable box yet, HP can have one very soon. More to the point, if ur a IT head and u spent on Opteron server, Youll be a very happy one. Beacuse that 8 Way opteron box you got can suddenly become a 16- way box.
Its strikes of AMD's stratagey with x86-64. No, it wasent as powerful as itanium, it wasent new, fresh, and funky. It certainly wasent the first 64 bit cpu for enterprise wither, not by a long shot. But by giving comapnys, and people what they want, a easy, painless upgrade path, it suceeded in destroying intels dream of killing of x86. Intel was still denying yamhill when it was already in there cpus, lying dormant for the day intel would swallow its pride and follow AMD down the x86-64 route.
Intel will beat AMD to dual core on the desktop, but they will make waves and in roads in the enterprise sector, and, let's face it, its just better that way.
Karlos
Googer - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
"I tried to take a screenshot of what was going on, but print screen wouldn't work. I could launch Paint, but I couldn't paste anything into it"If paint does not work you can always use wordpad and paste any images to it that are cahced to the clipboard.
karlreading - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
Personally, im very excited about dual core. It appears to me that everyone seems to be forgeting the main thing.Its not necesseraly about doing one thing faster, its about doing MORE things faster.
the multi-tasking scenarios ANAND has given us is where the real excitment and benefit come in. Now, as a AMD FANboi, all i say is this: Bring on TOLEDO :)
Karlos