Which is better in performance P4 3.4Ghz or the Pentium D 920

[Meena89]

I want to choose among the Intel Dual Core2 6300 with AMD 4000+ processor? So for this I want to compare the speed of the processor among the P4 3.4Ghz with Pentium D 920 and with the Dual Core2 6300 vs AMD 4000+ Which is quicker? I've the P4, but didn't make out any noteworthy perceptible speed when evaluate to friends who owns Pentium D 920 as well as Pentium 6300. After analysis those scale online, I question why sometime my enormous excel worksheet data processing come to an end almost a not many seconds faster than the later two states I am thinking of improve to AMD AM2 4000+, is that worth it?

[Apple.Mac.Rocker]

There is some dissimilarity in speed. Suppose that you’re socket 478 is of P4 3.4 ghz. This CPU is support on HT, pinch all the data as if double cpu practically in execution. Pentium D 9xx double core is based on 2 CPU core with no HT. That's why no important differences when you level down to PD 920 processor. The CPU just implementation applications smoother not faster. Core 2 duo 6300 has a face side bus 1ghz+, but is 1.92 Ghz. Main development is lower wattage utilization a morph from Pentium D. development are all hypes. It's Intel company dishonest civilization. Therefore, you wouldn't perceive important faster when evaluate to the one you contain. But, when approach to multi-tasking, it is plenty smoother. If you're supposing of upgrade to AMD Athlon X2 4000+, I for myself suggested it. Just make certain it's a 65 nm fab CPU. This unit is improved Energy competent then Intel same class e6400 at 2.1 GHz with lower price. You'll also find important speed dissimilarity as per dollar spending wise comparison to your old P4.

[Balamohan]

I think that you are puzzled with the Pentium D which showed 2x Pentium 4 Cores into 2. More Information concerning the Pentium Dual Core can be obtained very easily at any of the website of the Intel. Pentium Dual Core's are exactly made for the 2 core processors but with a somewhat smaller L2 accumulation and slower FSB which doesn't concern much performance. The E5400 he's receiving is a 45nm Wolf dale Core. It strikes the majority if not all Core 2's Conroe on 65nm.

[Logan.M]

Now let's keep in mind that we don't have to obtain the precise CPUs in there. One mark down on GHz will do as long as we contain the similar L2 Cache. "The only real dissimilarity among the E6300 as well as E4300 is that the slower E4300 does not comprise Intel's Virtualization expertise. Eventually this means approximately nothing, as it will not influence the processor's utility or over clocking abilities" So I selected the E6400 but you can make out if there is no matter which closer to evaluate if you attempt the other years.

[Terrextre]

Yeah it seems that the over clocking is more favor by the Intel and the AMD CPU is also good in over clocking but doesn't provide you the similar increase in the performance inside the system as the Intel processor. Of course, most of us keep in mind that the articles evaluate two precise CPU's and not the two CPU relations across the motherboard. You require to note that the Intel processor is nearly about $114.50 at NewEgg as well as carry out correspondingly to the AMD. That is a newer expansion which makes the AMD X2 4000+ a lot more costly for "close call" kind performance. I'm not a admirer of Intel or AMD. I'm for strapping competition among the two so that we have modernization as well as low prices.