# Pent D 805 Smithfield



## trt740 (Aug 5, 2007)

I hear it will do 4.0ghz and higher wondering if it's a good chip for everyday computing and light game playing.They can be had for like 40.00 or less on ebay. Was thinking about using it for my kids homework/gaming rig. Does anyone have one.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 5, 2007)

trt740 said:


> I hear it will do 4.0ghz and higher wondering if it's a good chip for everyday computing and light game playing.They can be had for like 40.00 or less on ebay. Was thinking about using it for my kids homework/gaming rig. Does anyone have one.



You have to remember, clocks are *never* guaranteed.

However, if you have the mobo, just get a conroe based celeron.

It'll be faster, will overclock like MAD, and its *TCO* will be significantly lower.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 5, 2007)

Will look into it but the smithfield is a dual core the celeron is not.


----------



## kwchang007 (Aug 5, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Will look into it but the smithfield is a dual core the celeron is not.



He means the Pentium dual core line, it's an allendale core with at a lower fsb, and maybe lower L2, I don't remember how much L2 it has.  

EDIT:  Just saw dippys post....crap, I was wrong.  Anyways, A X2, is much better than netburst.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 5, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Will look into it but the smithfield is a dual core the celeron is not.



I know, but a celeron-L overclocked should outperform an A64...

and a64's prettymuch beat on P4's...

I would take a single core CPU that can run passive, over a furnace of a dual core the pentium D is.


----------



## Demos_sav (Aug 5, 2007)

It is good enough for your kids. And yes, it can overclock near or above 4GHz with sufficient cooling. And with a good videocard it will go beyond "light" gaming


----------



## Demos_sav (Aug 5, 2007)

If you want to see some benchmarks of this processor from other users then click here

http://www.hwbot.org/quickSearch.do?hardwareId=CPU_740&name=Pentium+4+'D'+805+(207)


----------



## trt740 (Aug 6, 2007)

Damn some of them are hitting over 5 ghz


----------



## Oliver_FF (Aug 6, 2007)

I've run a D805 oc'd for nearly 8 months. Sadly my D805 was a really poor bit of silicon, the required vCore was 1.3675v, the max is 1.4 and most peoples was around 1.32v at the time.

Myths aside, they DO overclock well, but only to a certain level.

On AIR (with a Zalman CNPS-9500 running full speed) you can expect to reach 3.4GHz pretty much all the time at stock volts but your temps will be hitting 70c full load.

You'll probably reach 4GHz on air but it'll be throttling like mad as it overheats - I killed mine by pushing for 4GHz on air - luckily i had my e6600 sat beside me waiting to be put in XD

Water cooling is a must for over 3.4GHz!


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 7, 2007)

i had a pentium D 920 clocked at 4.55ghz on air and its dire compaired to a 3800 x2 am2 @ 2.8 and my amd 6000 really takes the piss get rid of the netburst tech and get a e4xxx or even the e2140 clocked up would still beat the living hell out of a pentium D ( pentium D=2 ole p4's sandwiched together)


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 8, 2007)

My 805@3.6GHz(on air) doesn't touch even my 4400+@2.8GHz.  And it certainly doesn't come close to me E4300@3.2GHz.  Personally, I would skip the Pentium D and go for something like an E2160.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 8, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> My 805@3.6GHz(on air) doesn't touch even my 4400+@2.8GHz.  And it certainly doesn't come close to me E4300@3.2GHz.  Personally, I would skip the Pentium D and go for something like an E2160.



Thats great advice, however a Pent D Smithfield Dual can be had on ebay for 30.00 a e2140 is 75 to 80.00 dollars and a e2160 is 95.00 to a 100.00. A  Pen D Dual is fine.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 8, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Thats great advice, however a Pent D Smithfield Dual can be had on ebay for 30.00 a e2140 is 75 to 80.00 dollars and a e2160 is 95.00 to a 100.00. A  Pen D Dual is fine.



then why did you ask? 

I still bet a celeron-L would smoke it.

Dual core or not. 2 is not always better.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 8, 2007)

e4300 $25 at time of posting
http://cgi.ebay.com/Intel-Core-2-Du...yZ141323QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
blows away a pentium D

if you want pentium D get this 915 

http://cgi.ebay.com/Intel-Pentium-D...yZ129317QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
or this 930
http://cgi.ebay.com/INTEL-PENTIUM-D...oryZ3674QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
smaller die=better oc


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 8, 2007)

I guess I should also go along with the original question asked.  Yes, I have had two, neither were able to reach anywhere near 4GHz on air.  The one I have now barely does 3.6GHz on an Ultra-120, but load temps are over 75C.  The other one did 3.8GHz on cheap water.  So I wouldn't expect to get to 4GHz and beyond.  The early steppings did it, but the later ones didn't.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 8, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> then why did you ask?
> 
> I still bet a celeron-L would smoke it.
> 
> Dual core or not. 2 is not always better.



I didn't ask about any c2d chips? I asked about this specific chip. I'm aware the C2D chips and AMD chips are faster and a better buy.  I own a e6700. Having said that your impute is still good but not what I asked. The e2140 and e2160 are twice the price. This is for a internet computer and for home work.


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 8, 2007)

Pentium D's run slow and hot in todays games athalon x2 are alot better tbh better memory controllers run cooler more instructions per clocks the amd x2 where alot better range than the pentium D the extreme editions where good but still netburst it shows in all of my games but the core 2's are worth twice the price


----------



## kwchang007 (Aug 8, 2007)

trt740 said:


> I didn't ask about any c2d chips? I asked about this specific chip. I'm aware the C2D chips and AMD chips are faster and a better buy.  I own a e6700. Having said that your impute is still good but not what I asked. The e2140 and e2160 are twice the price. This is for a internet computer and for home work.



If it's for homework, put a netburst based celeron in it with like 256 mb of ram and make them do their hw, not play games.  (and this is coming from a 15 yr old....)


----------



## trt740 (Aug 8, 2007)

mitsirfishi said:


> Pentium D's run slow and hot in todays games athalon x2 are alot better tbh better memory controllers run cooler more instructions per clocks the amd x2 where alot better range than the pentium D the extreme editions where good but still netburst it shows in all of my games but the core 2's are worth twice the price



Thx again for the impute but once again I know this just as a Pent4 is faster than AMD K6-2 in most cases. I have a 775 motherboard and don't want to buy another motherboard or for buget sake would buy a Biostar triforce 550 motherboard 69.00 and a Brisbane 4000+ 69.00 and oc it.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 8, 2007)

mitsirfishi said:


> Pentium D's run slow and hot in todays games athalon x2 are alot better tbh better memory controllers run cooler more instructions per clocks the amd x2 where alot better range than the pentium D the extreme editions where good but still netburst it shows in all of my games but the core 2's are worth twice the price



Nice oc on that 6000+


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 8, 2007)

trt740 said:


> I didn't ask about any c2d chips? I asked about this specific chip. I'm aware the C2D chips and AMD chips are faster and a better buy.  I own a e6700. Having said that your impute is still good but not what I asked. The e2140 and e2160 are twice the price. This is for a internet computer and for home work.



Then why not consider a celeron?

Its cheaper *in the long run.* because it uses significantly less power.

You certainly don't need a dual core for homework.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 9, 2007)

Yeah, seriously.  If it is just for homework and internet you don't need a dual core.  Get a Celeron, netburst or Conroe, either way, it will be cheaper to just get a Celeron.


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 9, 2007)

hmm that pentium D was being compaired to a amd 3600x2 which that says its all but the pentium D series is suppose to compair to the k8series not a k6  tar for the thanks on the oc ;P still want more one dude on water has hit 4ghz on his wounder how meny more points ill get in benchies and games once i get a crossfire connector ;D


----------



## trt740 (Aug 9, 2007)

mitsirfishi said:


> hmm that pentium D was being compaired to a amd 3600x2 which that says its all but the pentium D series is suppose to compair to the k8series not a k6  tar for the thanks on the oc ;P still want more one dude on water has hit 4ghz on his wounder how meny more points ill get in benchies and games once i get a crossfire connector ;D



Not a pentuim 4 D 805 smithfield, a pentuim 4  100/133 fsb old school chip and k6-2 or 3


----------



## Oliver_FF (Aug 9, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Then why not consider a celeron?
> 
> Its cheaper *in the long run.* because it uses significantly less power.
> 
> You certainly don't need a dual core for homework.



He has a point. MY D805@3.2GHz, P5WD2-E mobo and ATi x1800xt sucked the life out of a good quality 450w PSU - I ended up replacing it, after it damaged the gfx card so much I had to replace that too ...

The moral of the story - don't expect a low power bill from a Smithfield, and expect it to act like a room heater when it's turned on.


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 9, 2007)

that was back then the old skool p4 and amd k6's we are on about now pentium D vs amd a64 x2 ....


----------



## trt740 (Aug 9, 2007)

mitsirfishi said:


> that was back then the old skool p4 and amd k6's we are on about now pentium D vs amd a64 x2 ....


I'm not sure of your point but thx for the response.  


 Thx to all I recieved some very very good Info both for an against this idea.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 9, 2007)

conroe-L chips (celly conroes) will outperform even the A64 chips i would look for one of those and oc it most can hit 4ghz which outperforms even the smithfield dual cores @4ghz in ANY benchmark


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 9, 2007)

cdawall said:


> conroe-L chips (celly conroes) will outperform even the A64 chips i would look for one of those and oc it most can hit 4ghz which outperforms even the smithfield dual cores @4ghz in ANY benchmark



LoL

Stock, it would probably hammer it like every other cpu does.


Really people, kill the P4 already.

It sucked ass.








Really.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 10, 2007)

cdawall said:


> conroe-L chips (celly conroes) will outperform even the A64 chips i would look for one of those and oc it most can hit 4ghz which outperforms even the smithfield dual cores @4ghz in ANY benchmark



Something tells me there are some multi-threaded benchmarks that isn't true on.  

I also don't see where you are getting that most can hit 4GHz when the world record for the 420 on phase is only 3.6GHz.  The 430's world record is currently 4GHz, but that was also on Phase.  It took DAKARA using a single stage cascade to get the 440 up to 4GHz.  I don't think many people have phase cooling laying around allowing them to get to 4GHz with the Conroe-Ls so bringing it into the argument isn't really useful.  Unless you also want to consider what the 805 can do under phase(5.5GHz+).

http://hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=cpu&id=1415_1&id=1440_1&id=740_1&id=1413_1&id=1414_1

Plus if you look over at hwbot, the 805 consistantly outperforms all the but highest end Celeron in multi-threaded benchmarks.


----------



## little geek (Aug 10, 2007)

pentium d's suk mine sits at 40-50c  idle on stock cooling, btw mine cost £45 off ebay


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 10, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> LoL
> 
> Stock, it would probably hammer it like every other cpu does.
> 
> ...



lol thank you someone to see sense ^^


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> Something tells me there are some multi-threaded benchmarks that isn't true on.
> 
> I also don't see where you are getting that most can hit 4GHz when the world record for the 420 on phase is only 3.6GHz.  The 430's world record is currently 4GHz, but that was also on Phase.  It took DAKARA using a single stage cascade to get the 440 up to 4GHz.  I don't think many people have phase cooling laying around allowing them to get to 4GHz with the Conroe-Ls so bringing it into the argument isn't really useful.  Unless you also want to consider what the 805 can do under phase(5.5GHz+).
> 
> ...









http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=148382&page=1


FROM HWBOT

celly wins 5 805 wins *1*
only time the celly lost was when there was no 05 entry


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 10, 2007)

cdawall said:


> http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t307/Solarfall_photos/17.390s.jpg
> 
> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=148382&page=1
> 
> ...



First of all Superpi is single threaded, notice I said multi-threaded, so your large screen shot serves no other purpose in this argument other than to waste screeen space and bandwidth.  

http://hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=cpu&id=1415_1&id=740_1

If you just take the 4GHz 440 against the 805 the 805 actually wins in the multi-threaded benchmarks.  The only Celeron able to beat the 805 was the 460, can you even find me a 460 on sale anywhere?  Can you find one for at or under the ~$55 asking price of the 805?  It is pretty hard to even find the 440 for under ~$65, so good luck find the 460 at $55.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 10, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> First of all Superpi is single threaded, notice I said multi-threaded, so your large screen shot serves no other purpose in this argument other than to waste screeen space and bandwidth.
> 
> http://hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=cpu&id=1415_1&id=740_1
> 
> If you just take the 4GHz 440 against the 805 the 805 actually wins in the multi-threaded benchmarks.  The only Celeron able to beat the 805 was the 460, can you even find me a 460 on sale anywhere?  Can you find one for at or under the ~$55 asking price of the 805?  It is pretty hard to even find the 440 for under ~$65, so good luck find the 460 at $55.



the screen shot shows a higher OC than what you were saying MAX was the 440 doesnt stop at 4ghz i have seen higher not to mention that was NOT on LN2 (though it was dry ice)


heres a 440 doing 4ghz ON STOCK AIR
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=210648


heres 4.3ghz on a 440 under single stage
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=150242

celly 460 @4.7ghz





these chips can do lots

heres a simple WC setup @4+ghz






this is off XS


PcCI2iminal said:


> here is my new Celly
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 12, 2007)

celerons sound a dangerous threat


----------



## cdawall (Aug 12, 2007)

mitsirfishi said:


> celerons sound a dangerous threat



no kidding  the things are C2D with cache and a core disabled :/ seems to do the trick at getting them to oc like crazy though they hit a FSB wall in the 400s (prolly intel limiting them )


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 12, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> First of all Superpi is single threaded, notice I said multi-threaded, so your large screen shot serves no other purpose in this argument other than to waste screeen space and bandwidth.



Single core is perfectly viable still.

My 3700+ @ 3ghz keeps up just fine in every application, and I'm a pretty power user in comparison to what this computer would be used for.

Not to mention the Celeron-L can run almost heatsink-less and run perfectly fine, whereas the pentium D will be a furnace.


----------



## hat (Aug 12, 2007)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116040
Just get this. Sure it's $10 more, but it will save money on your electricity bill, and you can probably UNDER-VOLT it and hit 2GHz easy. A 2ghz conroe core with 1/2MB cache (the cache won't hurt it since conroes are extremely efficent). If you want to go higher, you can probably do 3GHz on stock cooling.

3+GHz reccomended for BF2142, but as I said it can be done with stock cooling.


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 12, 2007)

damn that thing is cheap as chips i might have to get one for in my sisters pc as she has a celeron 360 lawlll or a e2140


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 12, 2007)

hat said:


> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116040
> Just get this. Sure it's $10 more, but it will save money on your electricity bill, and you can probably UNDER-VOLT it and hit 2GHz easy. A 2ghz conroe core with 1/2MB cache (the cache won't hurt it since conroes are extremely efficent). If you want to go higher, you can probably do 3GHz on stock cooling.
> 
> 3+GHz reccomended for BF2142, but as I said it can be done with stock cooling.



Dang $49.

That almost makes me wanna grab a mobo and a few containers of dry ice and have my way with it for a few hours


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 12, 2007)

cdawall said:


> the screen shot shows a higher OC than what you were saying MAX was the 440 doesnt stop at 4ghz i have seen higher not to mention that was NOT on LN2 (though it was dry ice)
> 
> 
> heres a 440 doing 4ghz ON STOCK AIR
> ...



All of that doesn't mean anything, I still don't see any proof that a 4GHz Conroe-L will outperform a Dual Core Smithfield when both are at 4GHz in *ANY* benchmark.

I can show you a 4.1GHz Smithfield vs. a 4.05GHz Conroe-L

http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=579357
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=630361

The Conroe-L got its ass handed to it in a multi-threaded benchmark.



cdawall said:


> conroe-L chips (celly conroes) will outperform even the A64 chips i would look for one of those and oc it most can hit 4ghz which outperforms even the smithfield dual cores @4ghz in ANY benchmark



I'm still waiting for you to back this up.  You can post all the screenshots of overclocks you want, you still aren't backing up that a 4GHz Conroe-L will outperform a 4GHz Smithfield in any banchmark.

And I also don't believe anything saying they are getting 4GHz on a Conroe-L with stock cooling, or even Air cooling for that matter.  Especially not with Intel switching to the shitty all aluminum stock coolers.



Dippyskoodlez said:


> Single core is perfectly viable still.
> 
> My 3700+ @ 3ghz keeps up just fine in every application, and I'm a pretty power user in comparison to what this computer would be used for.
> 
> Not to mention the Celeron-L can run almost heatsink-less and run perfectly fine, whereas the pentium D will be a furnace.



I know it is a viable option, and a good one in many situations.  In fact, if you read up a little further in the thread you will I said to just get the Celeron.  I'm not arguing that.  I'm arguing that he said a Conroe-L will outperform a Smithfield when they are both clocked at 4GHz in ANY benchmark.  I disagree, the Conroe-L will fall behind in some multi-threaded benchmarks, which is why him producing a single threaded superpi benchmark as proof was useless.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 12, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> The Conroe-L got its ass handed to it in a multi-threaded benchmark.
> 
> I disagree, the Conroe-L will fall behind in some multi-threaded benchmarks, which is why him producing a single threaded superpi benchmark as proof was useless.



Its for browsing/e-mail last I checked...

and Those aren't very multithreaded.

Besides, 3s superpi?

ZOMG FLASH IS GETTING 999999FPS DEWD CHECK IT OUT! 

3s in superpi.. | Hair A, meet | Hair B.



In the* long run *it will be significantly cheaper, as its *power consumption* is almost nonexistant.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 12, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Its for browsing/e-mail last I checked...
> 
> and Those aren't very multithreaded.
> 
> ...




Again, all things I am not arguing and totally agree with you on.

Since you obviously don't want to go and actually read the damn thread I'll just quote where I said it previously.



newtekie1 said:


> Yeah, seriously.  If it is just for homework and internet you don't need a dual core.  Get a Celeron, netburst or Conroe, either way, it will be cheaper to just get a Celeron.



Read the damn thread and stop trying to argue just to argue.  I'm arguing a specific point about a comment he made that isn't true.  All the rest of your BS doesn't matter.


----------



## hat (Aug 12, 2007)

The conroe-L has a TDP of 35W as shown in the attatchment. Do you know how insingnificant that is? Today's common lightbulb uses more power (40-60w).

The 805 Smithfield has a TDP of 95w:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Pentium_D_microprocessors

Not only that but Intel doesn't make different heatsinks for thier processors, save the Extreme series. So the Celeron gets the same cooling that the E6850 gets, and will probably run 45C full load if that. This allows overclocking potential. With the stock cooler. The Pentium D? Stock cooling probably over 55C, where's the overclocking potential in that?

Seriously, these kids don't need any multithreading. I played Oblivion with a 2.8GHz s478P4 (no HT) and an old Geforce 5200FX, I'm sure whatever machine they have there is a video card in there more powerful than the hand-held scientific calculator my 5200 was equivilent to.


----------



## hat (Aug 12, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Let me know, when you have a power bill.
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently you didn't see the thread on XS where they just flat out took the heatsink off?



No... what did they take the heatsink off of? I'm just pulling these temps from the top of my head, I have no proof of them. But the Celeron will undoubtedly run cooler than the Pentium D.

edit- LOL I have quoted a deleted post. You're too slow Dippy!!


----------



## trt740 (Aug 12, 2007)

Hey guys of the old pent chip which is the best dual core not single IYO


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 12, 2007)

hat said:


> No... what did they take the heatsink off of? I'm just pulling these temps from the top of my head, I have no proof of them. But the Celeron will undoubtedly run cooler than the Pentium D.
> 
> edit- LOL I have quoted a deleted post. You're too slow Dippy!!



lol, I changed my mind on how I read your post 

But a 60W difference will show on your powerbill in the long run 

They took a picture of the celeron running windows xp without the heatsink.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 12, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> All of that doesn't mean anything, I still don't see any proof that a 4GHz Conroe-L will outperform a Dual Core Smithfield when both are at 4GHz in *ANY* benchmark.
> 
> I can show you a 4.1GHz Smithfield vs. a 4.05GHz Conroe-L
> 
> ...




http://hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=cpu&id=1415_1&id=740_1 it won by less 10% in all the tests it won  this is looking at THE TOP for both and since almost all celeron 440s can do 4ghz ON AIR you are not going to run an 805 ON AIR to 4ghz (for vary long anyway) so looking at the minuit amount of time your bettering with the 805 it is pointless you argueing for the sake of arguement just stop i admit in rare cases you will loose by 3 or secs in heavily multithreaded apps so dont calc pi while your runnign orthos on your celly i think you'll be OK


----------



## hat (Aug 13, 2007)

As said numerous times, the celeron is more than adequate. Espically when overclocked.


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 13, 2007)

there is certainly a power difference there which means the celeron would run miles cooler aswell making it even more possible to clock further on air cooling anyone tryed a casade yet on one of the celly's


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

hat said:


> Not only that but Intel doesn't make different heatsinks for thier processors, save the Extreme series. So the Celeron gets the same cooling that the E6850 gets, and will probably run 45C full load if that. This allows overclocking potential. With the stock cooler. The Pentium D? Stock cooling probably over 55C, where's the overclocking potential in that?









o rly?

On the left is the heatsink for the lower end Core 2 Duos(E4000 series and lower, it came with my E4300), on the right is the heatsink for the E6000 series(from my E6600).  Notice anything different?  They didn't just paint the metal a different color...

Don't talk about things you have not clue about.  You are just posting BS, and it doesn't help the readers because they read your crap and think it is true.  You know absolutely noting about what you are talking about, it is all complete BS.

As for the overclocking potential of the 805 on stock cooling, I'm not arguing that point, I don't know why you seem to want to jump around the point I am arguing.  The 805 isn't going to get to 4GHz on air, I already said that(read the damn thread before posting).  However, if you want to know the overclocking potential on stock cooling you are lucking because I have one on stock cooling right now.  It is running at 3.2GHz and under 100% load hits 63C at the most.



cdawall said:


> http://hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=cpu&id=1415_1&id=740_1 it won by less 10% in all the tests it won  this is looking at THE TOP for both and since almost all celeron 440s can do 4ghz ON AIR you are not going to run an 805 ON AIR to 4ghz (for vary long anyway) so looking at the minuit amount of time your bettering with the 805 it is pointless you argueing for the sake of arguement just stop i admit in rare cases you will loose by 3 or secs in heavily multithreaded apps so dont calc pi while your runnign orthos on your celly i think you'll be OK



Again, you are trying to argue against me by stating other facts that don't matter in your original statement and you are just stating more BS in the process.

The fact isn't which on can do 4GHz on air and which one can't. I believe neither can reliably do it and dont' believe a cpu-z screenshot as it contains nothing about the cooling used, for all we know all the 4GHz runs have been done under phase, I know that is what it has taken for the world record holders to reach that speeds, so I find it hard to believe that others are doing it on stock air.

The issue at hand is that you said when both are at 4GHz the Conroe-L will win in *ANY* benchmark. I've shown you that isn't true.  That is the issue we are talking about.  Not which processor is better, not which one can do what on whatever cooling.  The issue is that you stated complete BS, and for some reason want to keep arguing about it when I have proven it isn't true by stating other facts, most of which I totally agree with.



Dippyskoodlez said:


> They took a picture of the celeron running windows xp without the heatsink.



That actually isn't that great of a thing.  I've seen netburst processors doing the exact same thing.  The thermalmonitor in the processor will just slow it down so much that it will survive but still allow work to be done, that is what it is designed to do.  You just have to turn off the safety features of the motherboard so it doesn't kick in and shut the machine down before Intel's throttling kicks in.


----------



## hat (Aug 13, 2007)

> o rly?[/url] I said something before about including a C2D heatsink with a PD he was selling (he had advanced cooling for the C2D), so that the PD would run cooler. However, I was told that all heatsinks are the same...
> 
> Anyways newtekie, your arguement has the same logic of putting an 8800ULTRA in an old 486 (if it was possible.. >_<). There is no way in HELL a 486 will need all that power or even be able to use it. Same thing here, these kids don't need a dual-core processor. What are they gonna do, check email and look up stuff for school at the same time?  The celeron will be more than adequate for them, and it's cheaper in the fist place, and it will be cheaper on the electric bill. Not to mention it will run cooler, which would make a minimal, but real impact on the A/C if he has his A/C set for a certian temp (keep the house at 70F), further saving him money.


----------



## tkpenalty (Aug 13, 2007)

Guys, CHILL OUT. Newtekie, take a deep breath. Pentium D's Stock cooler is different to the core 2 Duo's coolers. All the core 2 Duo's and the remaining batches of Pentium 4s Use the same cooler. You DONT have to attack someone like that, if you are indeed angry at an external matter, please don't vent your anger on TPU thanks. Anyway, about the Conroe L, dont think that its a uber processor all because it can clock to 4Ghz... the fact is, its a LUCKY DIP. I've seen a E6320 not even manage 1.9Ghz before.

Newtekie with the stock cooler, isnt the silver base one nickel plated??? Why do they use those coolers on the Pentium 4s?


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

hat said:


> > o rly?[/url] I said something before about including a C2D heatsink with a PD he was selling (he had advanced cooling for the C2D), so that the PD would run cooler. However, I was told that all heatsinks are the same...
> >
> > Anyways newtekie, your arguement has the same logic of putting an 8800ULTRA in an old 486 (if it was possible.. >_<). There is no way in HELL a 486 will need all that power or even be able to use it. Same thing here, these kids don't need a dual-core processor. What are they gonna do, check email and look up stuff for school at the same time?  The celeron will be more than adequate for them, and it's cheaper in the fist place, and it will be cheaper on the electric bill. Not to mention it will run cooler, which would make a minimal, but real impact on the A/C if he has his A/C set for a certian temp (keep the house at 70F), further saving him money.
> 
> ...


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

tkpenalty said:


> Guys, CHILL OUT. Newtekie, take a deep breath. Pentium D's Stock cooler is different to the core 2 Duo's coolers. All the core 2 Duo's and the remaining batches of Pentium 4s Use the same cooler. You DONT have to attack someone like that, if you are indeed angry at an external matter, please don't vent your anger on TPU thanks. Anyway, about the Conroe L, dont think that its a uber processor all because it can clock to 4Ghz... the fact is, its a LUCKY DIP. I've seen a E6320 not even manage 1.9Ghz before.
> 
> Newtekie with the stock cooler, isnt the silver base one nickel plated??? Why do they use those coolers on the Pentium 4s?



You are wrong TK.  The Pentium D cooler is identical to the Core 2 Duo E6600 cooler, which is different from the E4000 and lower cooler.  See the picture in my provious post.  The all aluminum cooler came with a CORE 2 DUO.

No the base isn't nickel plated.  They use an aluminum core instead of a copper one.  With the copper core, the copper is hollowed out, but with the aluminum core it is a solid slug.  The fan on the aluminum one also spins at 2600RPM instead of 1600RPM like the copper version.  So it not only cools worse, but it is also louder.

Edit: And TK, when he attacks my arguments with complete BS I am going to attack him as hard as I can.


----------



## tkpenalty (Aug 13, 2007)

Pentium D 820 = FAIL. End of story, nuff said. You can pay less for a E2140 and it will be faster and run cooler. Or be more practical and get a Celeron 420...

EDIT: Newtekie, there are several revisions of the cooler, you're wrong again . The Pentium D uses a larger slug.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

tkpenalty said:


> Pentium D 820 = FAIL. End of story, nuff said. You can pay less for a E2140 and it will be faster and run cooler. Or be more practical and get a Celeron 420...
> 
> EDIT: Newtekie, there are several revisions of the cooler, you're wrong again . The Pentium D uses a larger slug.



Actually the Extreme Editions uses a copper slug that isnt' hollow, but all the regular Pentium Ds use the hollowed out version.

Edit: And again, going with the Pentium D in this situation is a bad idea, I agree with that.  Though he already stated that it would be less for an 805 over an E2140, and he is right if you get the 805 off ebay.  Though a single core Celeron would be the way to go in this situation, I've already said that several times.


----------



## tkpenalty (Aug 13, 2007)

^Agreed, Btw newtekie, they did the hollowed slug for a reason... not really to cut costs.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

tkpenalty said:


> ^Agreed, Btw newtekie, they did the hollowed slug for a reason... not really to cut costs.



More to cut weight, even with the hollow copper slug it is actually a pretty heafty little sucker, and the full copper slug versions are pretty weighty, IIRC they come in just under the max weight specified.  The aluminum was done purely to cut costs though.


----------



## Grings (Aug 13, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


>



i noticed this building one of my friends a new rig this weekend, and with the same model processor too

my e4400 (pack date 04/02/07) came with the copper base, wheras the e4400 (pack date 06/01/07) i put in my friends rig had the aluminium one


----------



## hat (Aug 13, 2007)

The fan spins at 2600RPM max load?? Damn, my stock AMD fan spins at 5400RPM 
I guess those C2D's are pretty damn cool...


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

Grings said:


> i noticed this building one of my friends a new rig this weekend, and with the same model processor too
> 
> my e4400 (pack date 04/02/07) came with the copper base, wheras the e4400 (pack date 06/01/07) i put in my friends rig had the aluminium one



I wonder if Intel was just using the copper versions until they got the aluminum versions in then?  Oh well, the fact still stands that all Intel heatsinks are not created equal.


----------



## hat (Aug 13, 2007)

You should sell the copper one


----------



## cdawall (Aug 13, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> Again, you are trying to argue against me by stating other facts that don't matter in your original statement and you are just stating more BS in the process.
> 
> The fact isn't which on can do 4GHz on air and which one can't. I believe neither can reliably do it and dont' believe a cpu-z screenshot as it contains nothing about the cooling used, for all we know all the 4GHz runs have been done under phase, I know that is what it has taken for the world record holders to reach that speeds, so I find it hard to believe that others are doing it on stock air.
> 
> The issue at hand is that you said when both are at 4GHz the Conroe-L will win in *ANY* benchmark. I've shown you that isn't true.  That is the issue we are talking about.  Not which processor is better, not which one can do what on whatever cooling.  The issue is that you stated complete BS, and for some reason want to keep arguing about it when I have proven it isn't true by stating other facts, most of which I totally agree with.




DID you NOT read my POST? i stated flat that YES the 805 will win SOME multithreaded crap but not by much????? why did you attack what i said WHEN I WAS AGREEING WITH YOU. not to mention the comparo you showed for won was a 4.1ghz 805 vs a 4.05ghz celly NOT THE SAME not to mention that the celly and 805 had different ram speeds and different ram timings that also adds to the fact that the 805 had an extra 50mhz no big deal ehhh try that on ANY OTHER CHIP it MAKES A DIFFERENCE


here much closer scores pentium D 805 @ 4024mhz scores 41.730sec celeron  440 @ 4051mhz scores 42.000sec .270sec and a 27mhz difference that there is all within the variation points of the program effectively they ran the SAME TIME@THE SAME SPEED 

the multithreading thing is pointless any way what they going to do run music and check email at the same time my a64 can do that thank you very much dont need some overblown pentium D/furnace to do that the celeron is 1 a better deal since getting H2O for you 805 so that it can do 4ghz kinda blows the budget now dont it 

i admit i made a blanket statement wuhooo the 805 can pull and extra few seconds out of its ass and beat the cooler/cheaper celeron WOW thats like saying it beats a i386 its one of those NO SHIT SHERLOCK things. sadly you can still get i386s for the $50 bucks we are talking about


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

I argued with you because I was trying to get you to finally admit you made a completely BS blanket statement.  You finally did it, I'm amazed.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 13, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> I argued with you because I was trying to get you to finally admit you made a completely BS blanket statement.  You finally did it, I'm amazed.



you shopuld send me the ram for free now 


sry about the huge arguement i managed to cause by simply not paying attention


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

Meh, I don't consider it an argument, just a discussion between to hardware geeks. 

I don't really consider it an argument until one starts to just flame the other, we didn't really do that.

And just to clear it up, I didn't mean that "I'm Amazed" comment as an insult towards you, I just meant that most people on the internet won't admit they were wrong after making such blanket statements, it seems you are a step above most internet users.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 13, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> Meh, I don't consider it an argument, just a discussion between to hardware geeks.
> 
> I don't really consider it an argument until one starts to just flame the other, we didn't really do that.
> 
> And just to clear it up, I didn't mean that "I'm Amazed" comment as an insult towards you, I just meant that most people on the internet won't admit they were wrong after making such blanket statements, it seems you are a step above most internet users.



lol didnt take it as one 

i tihnk this is the largest "discussion" ever to have no mod control added at ALL  ppl have been banned for less


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

Yeah, very true.

But I think it is because we kept it pretty civil and didn't just break down into insulting eachother back and forth.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 13, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> Yeah, very true.
> 
> But I think it is because we kept it pretty civil and didn't just break down into insulting eachother back and forth.



pooh head  











j/k


its cause i tihnk each of us was actually making a point kinda sorta


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

And both of us were backing our points up with the evidence we had to support them instead of just saying the other person was wrong.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 13, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> instead of just saying the other person was wrong.



to bad thats the funnest thing to do 

think we kinda hijacked this thread now though


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 13, 2007)

Yeah, better let it go.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

So does a pent d match up with say a 3600x2 when oced


----------



## tkpenalty (Aug 14, 2007)

Not really.. SCREW PENTIUM D, you dont even use a pentium D for a homework rig. Especially with the 8xx series, those run REAL hot. The stock cooler is nowhere near sufficient. So in the end you'll end up paying more just to make the "homework rig" good to use. The Celeron 420s run damn cool and are almost as fast anyway. Overclocking the 420 would be a more viable option. 

Can you just get off Pentium Ds?


----------



## hat (Aug 14, 2007)

yeah man forget the pentium D.


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 14, 2007)

yes they had there time and didnt do really well the a64's where ahead now its the otherway round with the conroe's can we just forget about the netburst it used? like it never happened


----------



## Oliver_FF (Aug 14, 2007)

trt740 said:


> So does a pent d match up with say a 3600x2 when oced



If you can overclock a D805 to 4GHz you'll be on par with an FX-60.

Here's the infamous article on Tomshardware about their adventures ->
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/dual_41_ghz_cores/


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 14, 2007)

yes you might be able to get on par with a fx60 but its not truely fast you clock up a fx60 or even one of the low end conroe's or the celly's or the a 4200x2 when you turn the wick up on them it will kick its ass it in most cases plus the pentuim D eats to much power and gives off way to much heat if you runs those its not a pc you run but a constant heat blower


----------



## Oliver_FF (Aug 14, 2007)

mitsirfishi said:


> yes you might be able to get on par with a fx60 but its not truely fast you clock up a fx60 or even one of the low end conroe's or the celly's or the a 4200x2 when you turn the wick up on them it will kick its ass it in most cases plus the pentuim D eats to much power and gives off way to much heat if you runs those its not a pc you run but a constant heat blower



Yes, it gets hot, yes the performance isn't comparable to a high clocking Core2...

But...
1. Extra man-points for running that kind of overclock
2. Dirt cheap
3. Easiest overclock you'll ever get (I hit 3.7GHz on stock voltages)
4. Due to the low starting FSB you can overclock to ilke 4GHz and still not be stressing your mobo or RAM, so it's probably the "safest" overclock you'll ever get!
5. The performance is more than adequate for anything you'll need, except for getting the best PCMark score ever XD


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 14, 2007)

trt740 said:


> So does a pent d match up with say a 3600x2 when oced



The 805 overclocked against a stock 3600, yeah the 805 would probably win performance wise.  But as others have pointed out, the 805 would produce more heat and consume more power, and the performance difference wouldn't be noticeable.



tkpenalty said:


> Especially with the 8xx series, those run REAL hot. The stock cooler is nowhere near sufficient.



Oh please, you don't know what you are talking about.  I have an 805 in my file server right now overclocked to 3.2GHz running the SMP client of F@H under 100% load and after weeks of that the processor is just hitting 65C under the stock cooler.  And the machine is in a closed closet with no ventilation surronded by networking equipment, the ambient temp is 50C.



Oliver_FF said:


> Yes, it gets hot, yes the performance isn't comparable to a high clocking Core2...
> 
> But...
> 1. Extra man-points for running that kind of overclock
> ...



1. You loose all those man-points because it is on a netburst processor.
2. The Conroe-L is dirt-cheap too, and in the long run the 805 actually costs a significant amount more.  The difference will probably show itself in you first or second power bill.
3. It isn't always easy.  I have 2 805s, one hit 3.2GHz on stock volts, and the other would only do 3.0GHz, I had to jack the volts up to 1.6v just to get it stable at 3.6GHz.
4. The Conroe-Ls also have this advantage.
5. Agreed, but again, so is the Conroe-L performance.


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 14, 2007)

yes running at 3.2ghz it will be running on stock vcore most likely its just runs slow and very hot Full Stop!!! i had a 920 presler running at 4.65ghz and the 65nm plus using less voltage and still runs really hot and i was using a tuniq tower with a high rated fan to cool it temps hardly changed from 3.8ghz onwards but still gets a toasting from my old 3800x2 i had @ 2.8 but my 6000 now blows both away


----------



## Oliver_FF (Aug 14, 2007)

I think with todays surge of powerful processors it's pushed people's perceptions of "required" computing power to have a good overall experience on their PC.


----------



## tkpenalty (Aug 14, 2007)

Haha newtekie... ive had a bad experience with them thats all... 70*C


----------



## mitsirfishi (Aug 14, 2007)

mine exceeded that when i got a digital thermometer and placed 2 one on each core when i got the ISH off and then sealed it again mine where peaking around 80c


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 14, 2007)

tkpenalty said:


> Haha newtekie... ive had a bad experience with them thats all... 70*C



Meh, 70C isn't that bad when the processors can take it.  People seem to think anything over 55C is too hot regardless of processor.  The fact of the matter is that Intel specced their 90nm and 65nm processors to run all out at 85C 24/7 for years.  70C on a netburst processor, while hot, isn't unsafe by any means.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

tkpenalty said:


> Not really.. SCREW PENTIUM D, you dont even use a pentium D for a homework rig. Especially with the 8xx series, those run REAL hot. The stock cooler is nowhere near sufficient. So in the end you'll end up paying more just to make the "homework rig" good to use. The Celeron 420s run damn cool and are almost as fast anyway. Overclocking the 420 would be a more viable option.
> 
> Can you just get off Pentium Ds?



Tk read the my entire post gees i have a 775 board and don't want to spend the 75.00 for a e2140


----------

