ivplay's Full Review: Intel Pentium® 4, 2.6 GHz (BX80532PG2600D) Re...
Disclaimer
This is not the intel website! I am not going to explain the architecture and transistor count on the die; if that is what you are looking for, please see http://www.intel.com. If you would like to see a complete review by a user of the actual product, please read on. I will hopefully entertain you and explain to you the reason I believe this is a great product, either as a plug and play processor or (especially) as an overclocked workhorse for your system.
Why did Intel make this processor?
Intel was the long-time leader in the processor market, especially with enthusiasts. Their first big hit with the Celeron 300A was followed up later with the P4 1.6A Northwood, both of which are famous among the overclocking crowd for high overhead. After the 1.6A, however,
AMD claimed the throne of enthusiasts favorites soon after this, however. AMD chips allow you to change the multiplier in the computer, while Intel chips are set multipliers. You have to change the Front Side Bus (FSB) to overclock your computer. The biggest reason that AMD became the processor of choice, in my opinion, is simply cost. You can overclock and do it a lower overall cost, so why not?
This is exactly why Intel developed Hyperthreading, which we will discuss later, as well as the higher FSB. The 3.0GHz chip was released with the 800MHz FSB first, as well as with the previously released Hyperthreading technology that debuted with the 3.06GHz 533FSB P4. In a brilliant move, Intel has won back the middle of the road enthusiast market with the release of the 2.4c, 2.6c, and 2.8c. These chips have the superfast 800MHz FSB, Hyperthreading, 512Kb of L2 ATC cache, etc. What more could you want?
Specifications
As I said, this is not going to be too in depth of a section. This processor is very similar in nature to every other Pentium 4 (henceforth P4) processor made in the past few years with a few important differences.
The P4 2.6c processor I purchased comes packed with Hyperthreading technology and 800MHz FSB. I will briefly discuss each below.
Hyperthreading Technology
Hyperthreading technology is an Intel only solution so far. It allows the OS to simulate two processors, and thus have multiple task threads working at one time. This is stated to greatly enhance performance for today’s multi-tasking individual, as the processor can work the calc’s for multiple programs at the same time, thus reducing stalls and hangs. This website can explain it much better than I:
My experience with the Hyperthreading is neither positive nor negative. I have noticed no difference in my usage with or without the Hyperthreading enabled. However, it should be stated that my benchmarks do show an improvement in some cases. I am simply stating that I have noticed no benefit in everyday computing.
800MHz FSB
The 800MHz FSB is exactly why I bought this processor. The older processor I had was a very capable 2.66GHz 533MHz FSB P4 with 512Kb of L2 ATC cache. I could achieve decent benchmarks with this processor, but I knew there was better heights to be achieved.
The FSB on a P4 processor is actually quad-pumped, which means that the actual cycle speed for an 800MHz FSB is 200MHz. 200 * 4 = 800MHz, get it? With the 533MHz FSB on my old processor, the actual cycle speed was thus 533/4 = 133MHz, see? The higher the speed of the FSB, the faster you can transfer data across the bus. This equates to better performance. The 800MHz FSB is capable of transferring data at speeds up to 6.4GB/s while the 533MHz FSB can transfer up to 4.6GB/s.
Caution:
In order to maximize the performance of the FSB, you need to match the processor with components that can handle the speed. The most notable components would be the motherboard and RAM. If you purchase a motherboard that cannot support the 800MHz FSB, you will not be able to utilize this computer. The RAM should be DDR (Double Data Rate) capable of speeds of 400MHz(PC 3200) or more; more if you plan to overclock and want to get the best performance! You can run slower memory, such as PC2700(266MHz), but your motherboard will compensate by dropping the transfer of data to the RAM via a 3/2 multiplier.
In my experiences so far, I have seen much improvement even at stock speeds with the 800MHz FSB. Programs load faster, Windows boots faster, and my benchmarks are higher.
Purchase
As I said, I purchased this to replace my relatively new 2.66GHz processor. I wanted the added bandwidth with the higher FSB, and I wanted to overclock. I already had a motherboard that could handle it (see review link below), and PC2700 memory, so I bought this on Newegg.com(see review link below) after shopping around for $169.
The box arrived, I opened it up along with my computer, took out the old processor and Heat Sink Fan(HSF) and replaced them with my new processor and my new Zalman CNPS 7000-Cu. I was now ready to crank up the power!
I ran the computer for a few days at stock speed, and as I stated above, I really noticed the difference. I would recommend this CPU at stock speeds to anyone who wants a fast processor at a great price. However, I wanted more speed!
Overclocking
I then decided to turn up the speed, little by little. I went into the BIOS of my motherboard and turned up the FSB count by count. Then I would run a few benchmarks to test for stability, run the PC for a few days of normal usage, and bump it up again. As soon as it became unstable under high usage, I would know that I had reached the limit of my overclocking.
To my extreme disappointment, I found out that my cheap PC2700 memory would not allow me to top out my new CPU. I then researched RAM for a short while and bought some new PC4000 memory and installed it. (see link to review below) PC4000 memory can run at 500MHz. DDR memory is called double data rate as it can process two calc’s per cycle, so this equates out to a cycle speed of 250MHz. 250MHz cycle speed quad pumped (250 * 4) equals an actual FSB of 1000MHz, or 1 GHz. If I were to get my CPU to this speed, I would have a processor running at 3.25GHz, which is faster than the fastest stock speed CPU produced today. Nifty, eh?
I installed the memory and began the process all over. I had to raise the VCORE, or CPU voltage, from 1.525 to 1.6V, but was able to hit 3.25GHz, or a 250MHz FSB, with relative ease. I kept going, and going, and going, and finally hit the wall with a 275 FSB, or 3.575GHz processor. I am unsure now if the memory or the CPU is the wall, but I really don’t care.
I backed the FSB back down to 250, which matched my memory speed, and left it there. I have the equivalent of a 1GHz FSB, which is transferring data at the rate of 4.5MB/s to the RAM and back. My CPU is stable, and I have no heat problems.
Is this the best out there?
For me this is the best CPU I could get. Enthusiast sites will tell you that you should get the 2.4c, as you get more bang for the buck. You can crank the FSB higher on the 2.4c, as the processors are the exact same with a different multiplier. This means that with a 250MHz FSB on the 2.4c, you are only running 3.0GHz, where I am running 3.25GHz with the 2.6c. You can extend the 2.4c higher, getting even higher FSB, and thus faster data transfer before you hit the wall of heat generation/dissipation.
When I purchased the 2.6c, it was for $169. At that same time the 2.4c was listed at $174, and the 2.8c was $219, and the 3.0 was $285. I got the best bang for my buck, as I am not interested in higher FSB than the 1100MHz I was able to achieve. Besides, to run higher than that I would have to buy PC4200 or PC4400, which obviously carries a higher pricetag. The 2.8c and 3.0c, aside from carrying a higher pricetag, cannot overclock as high on FSB with stock air cooling fans, due to their higher multiplier and the same barriers on heat generation.
Conclusion
I matched the 2.6c to the memory speed I wanted to run and was able to achieve all that I wanted a relatively lower pricetag. I would recommend this for the amateur PC maker for its stability, high FSB, and hyperthreading capability. For the enthusiast that wants to run reasonable FSB overclocks without requiring crazy memory speeds, this is also the chip of choice.
Benchmarks, for those that are interested
Interested in knowing how your CPU stacks up in benchmarks? Here are some links to benchmarks I use:
Pifast: Pi Fast is a program that tests your CPU by loading it. It will calculate the value of Pi to as many digits as you want and then report to you the time it takes to do so. The lower the better. My current best score is 43 seconds to calculate to 10,000,000 digits.
3dMark benchmarks: There are four, to be exact, that I use from 3dMark. 3dMark2001SE and 3d2003 are graphics engine benchmarks, while PCMark2002 and PCMark2004 are benchmarks for the CPU, Memory and Harddrive.
http://www.futuremark.com/
Aquamark: This is simply one that will benchmark your graphics engine.
http://www.aquamark3.com/
UT2003: Unreal Tournament 2003 is a graphics engine test as well. It is also a fee downloadable game that is pretty awesome.
http://www.unrealtournament.com/
Finally, Prime95: Prime 95 is not a benchmark, but a test for stability of your system. You run this program for an extended period of time, and it will torture your CPU and RAM. If you are at all unstable, this will find it before anything else.
http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm
Other reviews of interest
My Motherboard, the IS7-E, based on the I865-PE chipset:
The Intel Pentium 4 Processor is designed to deliver performance across usages, such as image processing, video content creation, games and multimedia...More at Buy.com Marketplaces
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.