Presler vs. Smithfield - A Brief Look

Other than the larger L2 cache, Presler as incorporated in the Pentium Extreme Edition 955 provides us with two more enhancements over Smithfield: 1066MHz FSB support and a higher clock speed (3.46GHz).

We wanted to isolate the performance improvement due to the larger L2 cache aside from the other improvements to Presler, so we underclocked our sample and its FSB, and compared it to a Pentium D 820 (2.8GHz). 

Looking at a small subset of our tests, we can get a feel for where you can expect the largest performance gains due simply to the increase in L2 cache size.  Remember that since L2 access latency on Smithfield was already at 27 cycles, Presler's cache isn't any slower, so what we end up measuring is how large of an impact a 2MB cache has in some of our benchmarks. 

 Winstone   Business Winstone 2004  Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004
Presler 19.0 30.2
Smithfield 18.5 29.9

Under Business Winstone 2004, we see a boost of just under 3%, thanks to the larger cache size.  We have seen the biggest improvements in Winstone, thanks to lower latency caches and higher clock speeds, so it's not too much of a surprise to see a minimal impact here.  Content Creation Winstone 2004 shows no real performance impact either. 

 Media Encoding  3dsmax 7 Composite DVD Shrink WME9 H.264 iTunes
Presler 2.03 9.1m 31.3fps 10.5m 50s
Smithfield 2.05 8.9m 31.0fps 10.5m 50s

Our 3D rendering, video encoding and audio encoding tests basically all agree with the earlier results - the added cache doesn't really improve performance here, but that's to be expected, given the nature of the applications (and the already quite large 1MB L2 cache to which we are comparing). 

 Gaming   Battlefield 2  Call of Duty 2 Quake 4
Presler 77.3 76.2 130.6
Smithfield 73.0 75.6 125.5

It isn't until we look at some of our 3D gaming tests that we start to see some more tangible performance gains.  In games, there are some decent performance improvements to be had, ranging anywhere from 0 to just under 6%, thanks to the larger cache alone. 

Couple the larger cache with a faster FSB and higher clock speed, and the Pentium Extreme Edition 955 is shaping up to be a decent improvement over its predecessor. 

Larger L2, but no increase in latency? Multi-Core Support in Games?
Comments Locked

84 Comments

View All Comments

  • Aenslead - Saturday, December 31, 2005 - link

    As J.J., from Spider-Man would say:

    "Ceap, crap, mega-crap!" and then toss it away.
  • ElJefe - Saturday, December 31, 2005 - link

    well it does move very fast in games. that is nice to see finally.

    it would be great if the overall power draw numbers were shown as on tomshardware. even there they showed a 90 watt difference between 4800 and the new 65nm. and that wasnt on the oc'd one. The oc'd one showed 150 more watts draw.
  • Viditor - Saturday, December 31, 2005 - link

    quote:

    well it does move very fast in games. that is nice to see finally

    Agreed...if it weren't for the X2, this would be an excellent chip by comparison!
  • Betwon - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link

    Now, anandtech begin to learn the truth. There are still many knowledge about CPU that anandtech need to learn.
    quote:

    . Through some extremely clever and effective engineering, Prescott actually wasn't any slower than its predecessors, despite the increase in pipeline stages.


    The resluts of tests are simple and clear, but the reasons are complex.

    In past years, anandtech took many mistakes about the correct reasons.
  • bldckstark - Monday, January 2, 2006 - link

    You do realize that none of this stuff is very important, right? Both chips work well. Nobody should be criticized for buying either one of them.
    I love my FIVE computers but making sure my wife and kids are healthy and happy is way more important than any electronic device, especially just one piece of it.
    Your damaging and hostile statements are making it appear as if you have forgotten this and the most important thing in the world is that you make all of us geeks think Anandtech is not perfect. News update - WE ALL KNOW THAT! We still like it.
  • bob4432 - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link

    why don't you do the gaming benchmark with bf2 fps unlocked? it appears that it is just hitting its built in lock with both the fx-57 and also P955 EE 3.46 cpus.
  • Spacecomber - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link

    I believe that they are using the timedemo feature of the game and that the frame rate max doesn't affect this. It would be nice to see more than just average frame rates reported for games, though. At least a range should be mentioned and maybe a standard deviation.

    Space
  • Betwon - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link

    We see a test, where the average fps of PD is less than (about 1% - 2%) the fps of AMD's. But PD's fps is more stable than AMD's.

    In the case that the average fps of netburst is better than the average fps of K8, the test shows that netburst is more stable than K8.
  • Betwon - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link

    The test isn't bf2.
  • bob4432 - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link

    any link you could give me on how to do the time demo from within bf2? is this new with the 1.12 patch?

    thanks

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now