dimopoulos_d Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 I really cant believe this!! I have a desktop Intel DualCore 3Ghz Asus pw5p2 deluxe board (975 chipset) 2 Gigs of 667 memory Geforce 7800 Gt and a laptop Acer Aspire 5612Wlmi Intel DualCore centrino 1.6 Ghz GeForce 7300 go 1 Gb of 667 memory both of them are brand new... The attached .jpg renders 1'34'' in the desktop and 44'' in the laptop!!!!!!! Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHAB Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Im sure of this, centrinos are much faster than P4s. high temperature of P4 is the main cause Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimopoulos_d Posted April 27, 2006 Author Share Posted April 27, 2006 Just did the same test on a singlecore P4 3Ghz 1Gb ram and the result was 1'10''. hmmm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHAB Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 hey wait a minute! do you mean dual core P4 is slower than single core? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimopoulos_d Posted April 27, 2006 Author Share Posted April 27, 2006 It doesnt make sense, i know.... The only thing I can think of, is that maybe the thermal paste on the Cpu needs more than a few hours before it can perform well. If not, then i obviously have a problem..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advisor Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Well a single core centrino was faster in lots of times than a single core p4 so what you see is a bit normal. Intel has a problem in the FSB region in p4's which is slowing the render. especially in duals (both cores share the same Bus I think, which gives them 50% or less advantage on tasks like rendering) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimopoulos_d Posted April 27, 2006 Author Share Posted April 27, 2006 I turned it off, and let it cool off. After a few minutes i tested again, and rendered the same scene 3 times. First render 1'05. second render 1'07'' third 1'19''. Its obviously a heat issue. I will leave things as they are for a few days, and if i notice the same thing after that, then i'll go for a better heatsink.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHAB Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 I turned it off, and let it cool off. After a few minutes i tested again, and rendered the same scene 3 times. First render 1'05. second render 1'07'' third 1'19''. Its obviously a heat issue. I will leave things as they are for a few days, and if i notice the same thing after that, then i'll go for a better heatsink.... will never exceed the centrino even with a dual airconditioners ontop! but dual core slower than single core!! intel is developing backwards ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Videha Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 are you sure it a genuine dual core? is it original?it seems to be a single core just a tought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimopoulos_d Posted April 27, 2006 Author Share Posted April 27, 2006 It is a genuine one yes. The pc case was already open. I went into Bios and PCU temp was 67 degrees (!). I turned off the AI quiet feature of the board. Rendered again. 47' New Bios CPU temp 60 degrees. I shutted down again and let it cool. Rendered again. 47' What really bothers me is not that a dual centrino maybe faster than a workstation dualcore. Its the fact that the centrino runs half speed (1,6 vs 3Ghz) and still is faster! I really dont understand this.... Anyway, I will stop this benchmarking thing now, cause i should be working instead! I will let you know if i figure this out.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terraarc Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 Hello, I would like to ask if you are pleased with your ACER laptop. I'm about to buy a laptop myself, probably the 5612WLMI, and would appreciate some feedback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hess Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 The desktop "Intel" dualcore's are trash. The only reason they exist at all was to prevent people from jumping on the AMD wagon. You can not compare two totally different architectures to one another by looking at megahertz/gigahertz. It just doesn't work. It only ends in frustration. If you were to extrapolate data...a 2.0 duocore intel laptop would be roughly equivilant to a dual 3.6-3.8 xeon, and probably a 4.0-4.2 duocore single processor P4. (Below you'll find a very simple laymans term explanation. If you want detailed analysis of different architectures, start hitting up ars-technica). Why? Why is there such a huge difference? Because the Pentium III architecture was always more superior then the PIV's. Remember a long time about when the 1.5 Pentium IV's came out, and people were doing rendering comparison vs their 933 pentium 3's, and the 933's were faster? Guess what, those 933's are now running at 2 ghz, and there is two of them in one chip. Of course there is tons of differences between a duocore and a standard p3, but this is just a simple explanation. Gigahertz is NOT a measure of performance! I honestly wouldn't even consider an intel duocore desktop system right now unless it was using the pentium M processors. I'd either go AMD, or buy a laptop and hook a monitor/keyboard/mouse to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 Gigahertz is NOT a measure of performance! A lot of people have been saying this for a very long time. It seems many people haven't been listening until now. I guess its just so much more obvious with the CentrinoDuo. Laptops faster than desktops? That shouldn't be possible! The marketing machine at Intel has been pouring into the ears of the world the drivel that "GHZ = Power" for so long. It has never been true. It was however, a very concrete method of comparing one aspect of all processors - they all have a clock speed and Intel was able to use this to their advantage. A better analogy is GHZ = RPM. Just because your car revs really high doesnt neccessarily mean it goes really fast. G5s, Opterons, X2s and now CoreDuos are making this very obvious. All of these chips have lower clock speeds than P4s and Xeons and all of them are faster than P4s and Xeons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimopoulos_d Posted April 28, 2006 Author Share Posted April 28, 2006 Have you ever seen any benchmarks (from tomshardware.com for example) proving that centrinos are much faster than desktop dualcores? Although i dont think its impossible, its a little difficult to accept. I'm just considering the possibility that a laptop has a better overall combination of harware parts, and maybe that is an explanation why it is faster. Or maybe if my board didnt have the latest 975 chipset, things may have been different. At the moment, i wish i have bought a second laptop instead of the desktop.... (and that is an asnwer to you terraarc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 The only bench mark that really matters to me, because its my software of choice, is CineBench. Rendering engines perform differently with each processor so read what you will into this. http://www.3dfluff.com/mash/cbtop.php Sorted by render speed, this list is currently topped by G5s, Opterons, and X2s. As you see more people post with CoreDuos I think it will change a bit. 2 Years ago it was topped by Xeons. 4 years ago it was topped by Dual Athlons. I started using Cinema in 1998 with a 200mhz Mac clone...a render speed of 20 for comparison to this list. Looking back, it really doesnt matter what you pick now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hess Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 Have you ever seen any benchmarks (from tomshardware.com for example) proving that centrinos are much faster than desktop dualcores? Nothing of any revelance to this discussion. Besides, tomshardware works in the same building as intel. Slightly biased source there. They aren't going to showcase how pathetic the current cpu's are because the guy's they eat lunch with wouldn't like it. All you to need to know is that Intel is trying to shove out the desktop conroe dual cores (laptop chips) as quickly as possible because their current Pentium IV dual cores are practically useless due to fundamental flaws in the cpu architecture. Hmm I wouldn't say useless...how bout a pointless investment? Deadend upgrade? Hmm that doesn't work either. How bout flawed stopgap solution? Intel dropped the ball about a year or two ago, and has been trying to catch it ever since. The best time to buy intel will be later this year, when their next gen chips come out, which will be similarly clocked to the current athlon X2 processors, and be similar (if not faster) in performance. Right now the performance crown goes to the Dual Core opteron's, followed by the X2's, followed by the Intel Duocore laptops (especially the sexymacbook), to the Xeons, to the single core Pentium IV EE chips, to the Pentium IV's, to the Pentium IV Dual cores. The P4 DC's will render a bit faster then the P4, but the P4's tend to run at significantly higher megahertz which can counter out a slower spec'd DC P4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeilveen Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Same here, I bought a Acer 5652 WMLI laptop thats a dual core machine running at 1.66 ghz with 2GB RAM !! Same specs for the rest. I couldnt believe the rendering times when I took it for a render. It was doing nine times faster than my single core 64bit AMD Turion Fujitsu laptop. Benchmarks in 3DMARK '03 went as high as 8512 !! Thats amazing. Cheers Ronald Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHAB Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 thanks Greg for this full explanation esp. this part Right now the performance crown goes to the Dual Core opteron's, followed by the X2's, followed by the Intel Duocore laptops (especially the sexymacbook), to the Xeons, to the single core Pentium IV EE chips, to the Pentium IV's, to the Pentium IV Dual cores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Hey greg is there some reason that they don't use mobile cpu's in desktops, it would seem to me to be a better idea, considering heat issues and power Consumption, or do you think intel's next move will be to create a centrino desktop series... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Intel's next move is a desktop version of this chip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now