There was also at least one model of Iwill board with the i840... and their boards usually had some overclocking features.

sliderider wrote:

prophase_j wrote:

If we compare a late generation K7 like Barton with a later generation Netburst, we can see that for PIII level code they are about equal. I base that off of SANDRA's marks for both processors, and is the reason why I stand that Athlons are optimal for older gaming, all the way up to the DX8/9 era. This paradigm does change however, if you have code that is being optimized for longer pipelines, streaming extensions like SSE2, and in a big way, memory bandwidth. That last point becomes a big deal as graphic complexity increases. I was looking at a review where they compared 3200+ with the first 800mhz bus P4, a 3.0ghz northwood. They basically trade blows, but if you factor in non-gaming tasks the P4 looks superior. Now figure that you can get a factory P4 at 3.8, and that getting a Barton to 2.6ghz is a task requiring some skill and luck; clearly the P4 is the easiest to obtain. Granted, the 3.8 specimen is actually a Cedar Bridge; basically a Prescott with a die shrink with lager cache. But it isn't overclocked, so allowing this constraint I would believe that the P4 would ultimately be the performance leader, since you have the a memory bandwidth when you need it and the raw clock speed will pull it up even in legacy applications. It is worth noting that particular processor uses socket 775, so one will end up with PCI-E graphics unless a few certain motherboards are used.

That being said, I still personally use an Athlon since they work just as well for most stuff and use a lot less energy.

FX-55 kills any Netburst including EE.

I would agree. That FX-55 is a K8, where the integrated memory controller and hypertransport make all the difference. If your in the 939 territory, netburst is certainly cooked, and even more so if you go with the dual core versions.

Check this review where it shows the Pentium D 965 vs FX-60, getting torn up everywhere except a few encoding tasks.

prophase_j wrote:

If we compare a late generation K7 like Barton with a later generation Netburst, we can see that for PIII level code they are about equal. I base that off of SANDRA's marks for both processors, and is the reason why I stand that Athlons are optimal for older gaming, all the way up to the DX8/9 era. This paradigm does change however, if you have code that is being optimized for longer pipelines, streaming extensions like SSE2, and in a big way, memory bandwidth. That last point becomes a big deal as graphic complexity increases. I was looking at a review where they compared 3200+ with the first 800mhz bus P4, a 3.0ghz northwood. They basically trade blows, but if you factor in non-gaming tasks the P4 looks superior. Now figure that you can get a factory P4 at 3.8, and that getting a Barton to 2.6ghz is a task requiring some skill and luck; clearly the P4 is the easiest to obtain. Granted, the 3.8 specimen is actually a Cedar Bridge; basically a Prescott with a die shrink with lager cache. But it isn't overclocked, so allowing this constraint I would believe that the P4 would ultimately be the performance leader, since you have the a memory bandwidth when you need it and the raw clock speed will pull it up even in legacy applications. It is worth noting that particular processor uses socket 775, so one will end up with PCI-E graphics unless a few certain motherboards are used.

That being said, I still personally use an Athlon since they work just as well for most stuff and use a lot less energy.

I think you mean the Cedar Mill 😉
It depends, iirc Cedar Mill wouldn't work in many older s775 boards and the newer ones are much better off with a Conroe. So although Cedar Mill is an interesting CPU, it won't be used much, so I reckon the advantages of Cedar Mill over Barton are mostly theoretical.
And Prescott (double t?) is much hotter then Barton, while A64 is as fast but cooler. I don't see a lot of future in Prescott. A64 will become a better, cheaper alternative.

Prescott is best ignored, as there are better alternatives out there. Northwood, Pentium 4 dual cores and Conroe are a different matter though.

The preshott definitely runs much hotter than either the barton or the shittier thoroughbred... I had a northwood dell precision workstation 360, but I sold it... it was rare for that particular model, and even though it was basically the fastest WS360, it was pathetically slow in XP... 7 was more acceptable... my dad is using a dell GX280 with a preshott 640... it originally had 520 I think... runs barely faster than the athlon 64 x2 3800+ I'm limping on

I have a HP NX9600 laptop that has a preshott 640 also... that POS runs so damn hot that if I don't elevate it, it will overheat! I now have a cooler fan on it, that makes it barely acceptable.... HP sucks!!!