Power Draw
So far we've determined a couple things. First of all, the Pentium D 805 offers better performance overall in the value segment -- in general application performance it's especially difficult to argue with the second processor core. We've also found that an X2 3800+ is still going to be faster than the best that the Pentium D 805 can muster, especially once you throw in overclocking. In another month, the price disparity will drop from $200 to only $50, so if you're not in any hurry to upgrade you'll be able to get better performance for about the same price. (The cheapest Core 2 Duo chip should also be pretty interesting, though it will be priced slightly higher than the X2 3800+ once it is launched. We'll have to wait to see how that chip overclocks.)
Of course, NetBurst processors have a history of running very hot and requiring a lot of power. They've earned that reputation, but just how big of a difference is there between the various platforms? We measured system power draw with the computer sitting idle at the Windows desktop for 15 minutes or more, and we also tested them under a full load. Full load was achieved by running one or two instances of Folding@Home (depending on whether or not a dual core processor was installed) and then we ran the Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory lighthouse demo.
While we didn't provide specific results here, temperatures and noise levels are also impacted by power consumption. Higher temperatures are a given, as most of the power that goes into a computer turns into heat. That in turn requires fans to remove the heat, which leads to higher noise levels. If you're using fans that are always running at full speed, you might not notice the difference, but with most motherboards now sporting temperature controlled fan speeds, lower noise levels are easier to achieve with cooler running components. It is still possible to build a generally quiet computer using a hotter processor, but it ends up costing more.
Not surprisingly, the dual core chips require more power than the single core chips. If you've ever doubted the claims that Pentium D processors make for great space heaters, we have once again confirmed NetBurst's place as one of the toastiest architectures on the planet. The extra 20-80 Watts of power (depending on load and overclocking) that the Pentium 805 consumes relative to the X2 3800+ means that an upgrade to Athlon X2 will pay for itself in a couple years once we get $150 X2 chips -- assuming you run the system 24/7 under a heavy load, which may or may not be likely. Again, we will have to wait for Core 2 Duo to officially launch before we can make any more comparisons to that platform, unfortunately.
Long-term, you are better off buying a more power efficient processor. If you're more interested in short-term savings, however, or if you happen to live in a colder climate where the added heat would be welcomed, the Pentium D 805 is still very attractive. Many of the other Pentium D chips also have great prices, and you also get support for faster bus speeds with chips like the 820 and 930. Most people are going to be concerned with performance first and power requirements second, which makes sense when you consider how many people spend $40 or more per month on high-speed Internet connections. If you're looking to save money but still get a lot of performance, and especially if you run applications that can take advantage of multiple processor cores, the power requirements of the Pentium D are high, but not enough to dissuade us from purchasing the chips. That leads us to our concluding remarks.
So far we've determined a couple things. First of all, the Pentium D 805 offers better performance overall in the value segment -- in general application performance it's especially difficult to argue with the second processor core. We've also found that an X2 3800+ is still going to be faster than the best that the Pentium D 805 can muster, especially once you throw in overclocking. In another month, the price disparity will drop from $200 to only $50, so if you're not in any hurry to upgrade you'll be able to get better performance for about the same price. (The cheapest Core 2 Duo chip should also be pretty interesting, though it will be priced slightly higher than the X2 3800+ once it is launched. We'll have to wait to see how that chip overclocks.)
Of course, NetBurst processors have a history of running very hot and requiring a lot of power. They've earned that reputation, but just how big of a difference is there between the various platforms? We measured system power draw with the computer sitting idle at the Windows desktop for 15 minutes or more, and we also tested them under a full load. Full load was achieved by running one or two instances of Folding@Home (depending on whether or not a dual core processor was installed) and then we ran the Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory lighthouse demo.
While we didn't provide specific results here, temperatures and noise levels are also impacted by power consumption. Higher temperatures are a given, as most of the power that goes into a computer turns into heat. That in turn requires fans to remove the heat, which leads to higher noise levels. If you're using fans that are always running at full speed, you might not notice the difference, but with most motherboards now sporting temperature controlled fan speeds, lower noise levels are easier to achieve with cooler running components. It is still possible to build a generally quiet computer using a hotter processor, but it ends up costing more.
Not surprisingly, the dual core chips require more power than the single core chips. If you've ever doubted the claims that Pentium D processors make for great space heaters, we have once again confirmed NetBurst's place as one of the toastiest architectures on the planet. The extra 20-80 Watts of power (depending on load and overclocking) that the Pentium 805 consumes relative to the X2 3800+ means that an upgrade to Athlon X2 will pay for itself in a couple years once we get $150 X2 chips -- assuming you run the system 24/7 under a heavy load, which may or may not be likely. Again, we will have to wait for Core 2 Duo to officially launch before we can make any more comparisons to that platform, unfortunately.
Long-term, you are better off buying a more power efficient processor. If you're more interested in short-term savings, however, or if you happen to live in a colder climate where the added heat would be welcomed, the Pentium D 805 is still very attractive. Many of the other Pentium D chips also have great prices, and you also get support for faster bus speeds with chips like the 820 and 930. Most people are going to be concerned with performance first and power requirements second, which makes sense when you consider how many people spend $40 or more per month on high-speed Internet connections. If you're looking to save money but still get a lot of performance, and especially if you run applications that can take advantage of multiple processor cores, the power requirements of the Pentium D are high, but not enough to dissuade us from purchasing the chips. That leads us to our concluding remarks.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
56 Comments
View All Comments
Gary Key - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
We are currently testing this board for an upcoming Core 2 Duo article, however, at the time Jarred completed this article the board was not widely available nor did our test board have a bios that fully supported all Conroe CPUs. There is not any AMD bias and we are still waiting on more "budget" boards with Core 2 Duo support to be released. It appears at this time we will have to wait until the beginning of August to see the 946PL, G965, and reworked 945 boards that will be in the $65~$100 range.sprockkets - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
Ha! VIA chipset.PC Surgeon - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
Doesn't matter if it is a VIA chipset. It's Conroe compatable and cheap.mesyn191 - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
The whole point of going Intel is so that you can use thier chipsets...VIA is OK, but I'd rather have a nV or Intel based board than a VIA one. That mobo is probably a POS BTW, you might as well look at a PCChips board...
jonp - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
Some observations/questions about this "budget" system:Memory choice: The DDR2 memory choice is given without much analysis. The specific part would be almost
impossible to determine without the article link. It is part number OCZ28001024ELDCGE-K and according to OCZ
http://www.ocztechnology.com/products/memory/ocz_d...">http://www.ocztechnology.com/products/memory/ocz_d...
has timings of 5-5-5-10 at 2.0v where the so called "stock" setting is given as 4-4-4-12-2T at 2.1V.
It appears that this memory is overclocked even in the base performance runs, so those performance numbers
are of no value to the non-overclocker. Some discussion of CAS 5 6400 memory vs CAS 4 5300 memory should have
been included as Newegg has some CAS 4 5300 for $33 less than the 6400 memory chosen which is really CAS 5.
Processor: The choice of a high performance GPU to turn the "budget" system into a gamer has it's own effects.
$192 has overshadowed choices like more memory or faster processors. For only $20 more the processor could
have been an Athlon 64 3500+ 2.2GHz rather than the Sempron 64 3400+ 1.80GHz unit.
Case/Power Supply: Now here is a non-starter. Great that this one "cheap" power supply has lasted for a while.
Lots of us have experience with "cheap" power supplies that would have us avoid choices of this type in the
future. Also, being able to build the exact system has always been a plus with the AdandTech system recommendations.
How could we, in general, duplicate "generic case with iCute 400W PSU purchased "locally"?
DVD: You keep picking the NEC 3550A but without much justifcation relative to equivalent cost Lite-On or other.
Motherboard: You pick the Biostar TForce 550 and then you say "...it seems to be in need of some updates...".
What are we to take from that? Is it a recommendation or not? How was it chosen among the many, many MBs?
Net: I am not really sure what to take from this guide. I don't think I would build this system as such. I am not
sure who the audience is (the only serious gamers I know buy XBox or PS). It doesn't give enough analysis/
criteria information to help make component selections beyond the specifics. I think this one is puzzling.
JarredWalton - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
I can give you some 5-5-5-15 DDR2-667 numbers as well as 4-4-4-12 DDR2-533, both using G.Skill DDR2-667 RAM. The differences are pretty small, generally less than 3%.I really don't even consider additional voltage on memory to be "overclocking" anymore, as many modules are rated to run with extra voltage and will in fact require it to run at tighter timings. The G.Skill DDR2-667 5-5-5-15 runs at 1.8V with those settings, but with 2.1V I can run it at 4-4-4-12; the same goes for a lot of DDR2 memory.
As for the OCZ RAM, we've http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=230...">tested similar memory in the past, and we were able to get some nice results with tuning. 5-5-5-10 is the rated speed, but you can certainly do a lot better. I switched to the OCZ because I was trying to determine if it would improve the AM2 performance on the Biostar board (it didn't), and because I had about $30 in "wiggle room" due to the RAM used on the 754 setup.
Again, I would not get cheap DDR RAM for overclocking if you are after ease of endeavor. I've done that as well, and at higher overclocks the performance impact can definitely be substantial. I also wouldn't recommend anyone actually go out and buy the Sempron 754 configurations these days, as dollar for dollar you can get more out of AM2 or 775 platforms. You will never see anything faster than Athlon 64 3700+ (stock speeds) on socket 754, for example.
JarredWalton - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
I forgot to talk about the Biostar TForce 550 motherboard. It was purchased right around the time socket AM2 launched, and given my experience with the socket 775 TForce board I figured it would make for a good budget overclocking motherboard. There are lots of AM2 motherboards available now, but in the budget price range there are very few that are likely to outperform the Biostar TForce 550 when it comes to overclocking.http://labs.anandtech.com/search.php?q=am2%20mothe...">Here's a list of the AM2 motherboards we're tracking sorted by price. I would be very surprised if any of the integrated graphics solutions overclock well, given my past experience with that type of motherboard, but I could be wrong. For better overclocking, the ASUS M2N-E should perform better (both in overclocking and stock performance).
The Biostar TForce 550 board looks great on paper, but the inability to POST at about 280 MHz HyperTransport bus speeds, as well as the lower performance relative to other AM2 motherboards left me disappointed. You could try the MSI K9N Neo-F, and it may or may not perform better. You can look at the performance achieved by the Biostar TForce 550 with the Sempron chip and compare that to the Gigabyte nForce 590 board with the same chip and you can get a reasonable approximation of the performance you are likely to get with such a configuration.
You want my honest recommendation? Wait until the end of the week and watch how Core 2 Duo performs. Then try to find a budget motherboard that will allow you to overclock the E6300 to 2.8 GHz or higher. It's going to be more expensive than any of the systems used in this article, but it will require less power and provide more performance.
PS -- most of the gamers I know that play with only Xbox or PlayStation do so because they don't know all that much about computers. It's partly a matter of taste, though, as some people will prefer the console gaming experience over a PC gaming experience. There certainly is no correct answer as to which is better, but with the escalating prices of next-generation consoles, budget PC gaming is looking a lot more flexible and attractive. These $650 PCs can also be used to do research and homework at college; try doing that with an Xbox 360, right?
mostlyprudent - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
I am trying to figure out how the Pentium D 930 (presler) would compare performance wise with the overclocked 805. The overclocked 805 still has a lower FSB, but a higher effective clock speed than the 930. Any thoughts?JarredWalton - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
You can generally get 4.0 GHz on stock cooling with the 930, so it's faster, runs a bit cooler (not really once overclocked), and it performs better because of the 800FSB default. It depends on the apps you're running, though - as can be seen, you need a better GPU than a 7600 GT for faster gaming performance. You would also want a better PSU for 4.0 GHz 930 overclocking - you can definitely break the 400W mark in such systems.sprockkets - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link
I like the Biostar TForce 6100 board. The power button on the motherboard itself glows blue, and has a reset button on it as well. The fan options on it are very adjustable in the BIOS. Still can use the video card, but I know people here do not prefer uATX.InWin cases are also nice too for the price. They come with 350w power supplies with 12cm fans. Not the best power supplies, but not the worst either.