computergeek92 wrote:

I know P4's were bad and I used to own some, but wasn't the Pentium 4 1.3GHz cpu equivalent to a Pentium III 700MHz or 750MHz? A 100fsb or 133fsb model? I'm having a hard time finding benchmarks...

No. It's nowhere near that dramatic. Pentium 4 Willamette is marginally worse-off per-clock than Pentium 3 CuMine; Northwood improved on Pentium 4's IPC (so at the same clocks it will be generally faster than Willamette). It still isn't 1:1 with CuMine, but it's closer. Overall the difference is nowhere near as big as the myth has become in recent years. 😊

Anand has a comparison with a few Willamette CPUs and some T-Birds:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/818/7
So does HotHardware:
http://hothardware.com/reviews/Pentium-4-2GHz … 8-Review?page=3

And Anand also has a comparison with 1.4GHz and 1.5GHz Willamette, 1GHz CuMine, and some T-Birds:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/661/14

Gaming benchmarks for that one start here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/661/16

And at TweakTown with a 1.5GHz Willamette, 800MHz CuMine, and a T-Bird:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/12/intel_pen … ghz/index6.html

Northwood improves upon Willamette; here's a TweakTown comparison:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/165/intel_pe … iew/index5.html

Tualatin (which is actually newer than most of the chips above) can improve that situation as long as SSE2 (among other things) are non-factors, but it still isn't anything close to double-over performance. Here's an X-bit comparison of a 1.13GHz Tualatin with some other CPUs:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/ … atin.html#sect3

And another test, with a 1.2GHz Tualatin, and a handful of newer CPUs than what X-Bit had:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/804/7 (P4 1.8GHz looks to be consistently holding its own or bettering the Tualatin, so the 2GHz and beyond should be expected to perform just as well).

Gaming benchmarks begin here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/804/10

@computergeek92
This review should be what you are looking for: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/ … um4-1400-2.html

Looks to me like the 1.4 is on par with the 1GHz Pentium III 😁
I can't wait for my Dual P3 1GHz Board to arrive ^^
Unfortunately I don't have a socket 423 Board (which I am looking for)
but at least I already have the "423" 1.3GHz CPU 😀

Arctic wrote:

@computergeek92 This review should be what you are looking for: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/ … um4-1400-2.html […]
Show full quote

@computergeek92
This review should be what you are looking for: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/ … um4-1400-2.html

Looks to me like the 1.4 is on par with the 1GHz Pentium III 😁
I can't wait for my Dual P3 1GHz Board to arrive ^^
Unfortunately I don't have a socket 423 Board (which I am looking for)
but at least I already have the "423" 1.3GHz CPU 😀

If you're willing to spend a bit more, look for a RIMM-capable motherboard. I have a P4T-F on my 423 P4 (1.4GHz). But you'll need a PSU with a 6-pin AUX (plus the standard 4-pin). Real high-end stuff 😀

It depends on the application.

Doom 3 and 3DMark01 are both very cruel to the P4/PD.
In those benchmarks, my DDR-equipped Pentium III-S at 1575MHz runs just as fast (or, in the case of Doom3, faster) than my 2.4/400FSB Northwood, and it runs circles around any Willamette. We're talking 49.3 fps on the PIII vs 46 fps on the 2.4A (or 30.2 fps on a 1.8 Willamette). When paired with a much more common SDRAM-based motherboard, the PIII-S slows down to a still decent 41.5 fps.

However, the DOSBox 0.74 CPU Benchmark (in the DOSBox General forum) seems to favor Netburst over PIII. In that particular test, my 3.06GHz Prescott is actually faster per MHz than the PIII-S, achieving over twice the frame rate!* I'm no DOSBox expert, but that's gotta be using at least SSE2.

Then, you've got applications like Chrome, which refuse to even start on the PIII. So yeah, it really depends on how you'll be using the processors.

*however, that P4 gets whipped by a 1.8GHz C2D. And that's just a single-threaded benchmark; the second core on the C2D is going completely unused. 🙄

Totally unscientific example: a 3 Ghz Conroe (E6850) gets twice the GeekBench score as a 3 Ghz Presler (925) for me. NetBurst got destroyed, and my K8 can only beat NB by 100-200 points or so.

Snayperskaya wrote:

If you're willing to spend a bit more, look for a RIMM-capable motherboard. I have a P4T-F on my 423 P4 (1.4GHz). But you'll need a PSU with a 6-pin AUX (plus the standard 4-pin). Real high-end stuff 😀

There are non-850 based Socket 423 boards? 😕 I know there are SDRAM based 478 boards (I own one), but I honestly have never seen a 423 board that uses anything but the Intel i850 (which only supports RDRAM afaik). 😊

Standard Def Steve wrote:

Doom 3 and 3DMark01 are both very cruel to the P4/PD.
In those benchmarks, my DDR-equipped Pentium III-S at 1575MHz runs just as fast (or, in the case of Doom3, faster) than my 2.4/400FSB Northwood, and it runs circles around any Willamette. We're talking 49.3 fps on the PIII vs 46 fps on the 2.4A (or 30.2 fps on a 1.8 Willamette). When paired with a much more common SDRAM-based motherboard, the PIII-S slows down to a still decent 41.5 fps.

Out of curiosity, what P3 board are you using that has DDR?

Tualatins are very nifty chips and can be very good performers, and the Pentium M took that to another level. Those will happily run alongside with Gallatin, Athlon64 FX, etc (http://techreport.com/review/7927/the-pentium … fi-855gme-mgf/7 - there are some Asus 478 boards that will take Pentium M with an adapter too (Asus CT479), so you aren't "stuck" with 855 boards).

calvin wrote:

Totally unscientific example: a 3 Ghz Conroe (E6850) gets twice the GeekBench score as a 3 Ghz Presler (925) for me. NetBurst got destroyed, and my K8 can only beat NB by 100-200 points or so.

What does this have to do with Pentium 3 though? 😊 😕

obobskivich wrote:

Snayperskaya wrote:

If you're willing to spend a bit more, look for a RIMM-capable motherboard. I have a P4T-F on my 423 P4 (1.4GHz). But you'll need a PSU with a 6-pin AUX (plus the standard 4-pin). Real high-end stuff 😀

There are non-850 based Socket 423 boards? 😕 I know there are SDRAM based 478 boards (I own one), but I honestly have never seen a 423 board that uses anything but the Intel i850 (which only supports RDRAM afaik). 😊

Yep! I have a couple ECS P4VMM3's that take DDR or SDRAM. It's driven by a VIA VT8751 (P4M266). All the pics on the internet of this card are terrible, I'm taking some pics later. Too bad almost all caps are swollen on both. I just checked my P4T-F today to find three bad caps (and they are Nippon Chemi-Cons!) 🙁

Snayperskaya wrote:

Yep! I have a couple ECS P4VMM3's that take DDR or SDRAM. It's driven by a VIA VT8751 (P4M266). All the pics on the internet of this card are terrible, I'm taking some pics later. Too bad almost all caps are swollen on both. I just checked my P4T-F today to find three bad caps (and they are Nippon Chemi-Cons!) 🙁

Wow, that's even more bizarre than I was expecting - DDR and Socket 423! 😲

Shame on the caps though. 😢

When I did my Voodoo 2 SLI CPU scaling project, I found that the P4 was behind the P3 as a Voodoo 2 platform. It was only with an extremely high clock speed of 3 GHz or so that the P4 started to become competitive.

I tried 2 S478 motherboards and got the same results. The P4 platform however has other benefits. They are very easy to source, cheap, easy to work with, SATA connectors and are cheap. Nice Pentium III-S gear is not that easy and cheap to get.

obobskivich wrote:

Out of curiosity, what P3 board are you using that has DDR?

Tualatins are very nifty chips and can be very good performers, and the Pentium M took that to another level. Those will happily run alongside with Gallatin, Athlon64 FX, etc (http://techreport.com/review/7927/the-pentium … fi-855gme-mgf/7 - there are some Asus 478 boards that will take Pentium M with an adapter too (Asus CT479), so you aren't "stuck" with 855 boards).
:

It's a QDI Advance 12T, based on the Apollo Pro 266T chipset. Besides supporting DDR memory, it also has a dedicated 266MB/s link between the northbridge and southbridge, which helps to improve system throughput somewhat.

Pentium M is pretty sweet. I have one running at 2.7GHz on an i915 board, and in terms of single threaded IPC it's roughly equivalent to a Socket 939 CPU running at the same frequency. It's a shame these CPUs don't support x86-64, or even SSE3.

@Socket 423
I know SD-RAM is slow 😵
But I have not seen any RD-RAM Socket 423 Board with 3.3V AGP (support for AGP Voodoo cards) yet

This should probably be in Marvin

Moved to Marvin.

I don't see what all the hate is about with the Pentium 4's. Yeah, the early ones didn't improve much on the Pentium 3, but during the life of the pentium 4 other aspects of hardware improved so much that it smoked past pentium 3's anyway. I've never seen a Pentium 3 with DDR/DDR2 RAM, SATA (native), PCIE, and whatnot. (granted if they never bothered with the pentium 4 line and just improved the pentium 3 I suppose it could be argued that we would be several generations ahead.)

The early socket 423 and RD RAM though, I can call bullshit on that.

Snayperskaya wrote:

... I just checked my P4T-F today to find three bad caps (and they are Nippon Chemi-Cons!) 🙁

^ Guess the culprits were Chemicon KZG or KZJ series, which came out as problematic back in the day.

One of the exceptions to the rule that jap caps are the most reliable. Happens in the best of families. 😦

Early low-clocked Willamettes were notoriously worse than late PIII Cumines (not to mention Tualatins) for many tasks.