Pentium D vs Anthlon 4400 for MAME

[genesim]

Is there any way a Pentium D 3.0 is going to be faster then and Anthlon 64 X2 4400 with dual core 2.3??

It is my understanding that both are dual core, and the Pentium D is much faster then my old Pentium 4 at 2.6gig.

But it sure as hell looks like the Pentium D is faster! This really makes me angry because I have opened the box. It just doesn't make sense to me. Is ram the issue? How the hell would Mortal Kombat be slower.

All this is so upsetting and anyone that could shed light would make my day.

I have read over and over how AMD's are sooooo fast.    And yet the Pentium D seems to run something as simple as Mortal Kombat so smooth.

Is there an option that would improve this fact on my AMD?    It just doesn't make sense at all.   Matter of fact, it seems to be worse then my 2.6 gig Pentium 4!!!

[rockin_rick]

Is there any way a Pentium D 3.0 is going to be faster then and Anthlon 64 X2 4400 with dual core 2.3??

It is my understanding that both are dual core, and the Pentium D is much faster then my old Pentium 4 at 2.6gig.

But it sure as hell looks like the Pentium D is faster! This really makes me angry because I have opened the box. It just doesn't make sense to me. Is ram the issue? How the hell would Mortal Kombat be slower.

All this is so upsetting and anyone that could shed light would make my day.

I have read over and over how AMD's are sooooo fast.    And yet the Pentium D seems to run something as simple as Mortal Kombat so smooth.

Is there an option that would improve this fact on my AMD?    It just doesn't make sense at all.   Matter of fact, it seems to be worse then my 2.6 gig Pentium 4!!!

I don't understand what you are saying.  Are you asking which is faster?  It seems that you have tested those?  What results did you get/which is faster?

Rick

[Green Giant]

I have an AMD 64 3500 in my cab.  I havn't had trouble playing mortal kombat at all.  Of course I can't play tekken, but oh well.

Are you having trouble with mame on that AMD cpu?  What version of mame are you running and what frontend are you using?  All that stuff matters too.  Need more info...

[genesim]

No front end.   Simply MAME32 or MAME32 PLUS newest version 117u2.

It isn't MAME.

The Pentium D is super fast compared to the AMD.    I hate this crap.    I drop mad cash on a new system only to find out the outdated Pentium D is the better chip for MAME.

My question is how could this be true?   It is dual core as well.    Is it because it is rated at 3 gig?    Is it true 3 gig or is it like all the rest where the CPU is split apart?

I have even tried the affinity thing where I dedicate one core to MAME alone.    Same difference.

All I know is MK is running slower on this supposed beast over the Pentium 4's as well as the Pentium D.     This is going to cause me to pay 90 dollar restocking fee.     Any help is greatly appreciated.

[xmenxmen]

No front end.   Simply MAME32 or MAME32 PLUS newest version 117u2.

It isn't MAME.

The Pentium D is super fast compared to the AMD.    I hate this crap.    I drop mad cash on a new system only to find out the outdated Pentium D is the better chip for MAME.

My question is how could this be true?   It is dual core as well.    Is it because it is rated at 3 gig?    Is it true 3 gig or is it like all the rest where the CPU is split apart?

I have even tried the affinity thing where I dedicate one core to MAME alone.    Same difference.

All I know is MK is running slower on this supposed beast over the Pentium 4's as well as the Pentium D.     This is going to cause me to pay 90 dollar restocking fee.     Any help is greatly appreciated.

Not sure what you are smoking here.  Almost all benchmark shows the 4400 beating out the Pentium D.  It was until the Core 2 came around when AMD got their smacking.

At either speed, there should be no slowdown of any when running MK, so there's probably other problems with your settings.  Try a fresh install or something....

Attach is a quick tomshardware showing the speed different in the 2 cpu.

[xmenxmen]

attach

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=919&model2=890&chart=419

[FrizzleFried]

Bottom line is this is user error.  You aren't setting the AMD system up correctly or something?!  Are you sure you are running it at the proper speed?   Do you have the multiplier set correctly?  How about the memory speed?   

I can tell you for 100% fact that BOTH system should play Mortal Kombat without issue considering my Athlon XP 1800+ that is running a measly 1.5ghz runs Mortal Kombat as fluid as it's going to get.

[genesim]

I ain't smokin' anything, but I admit to being a complete newbie on multicore.

First of all, this is straight out of the box on an Emachines Anthlon T5230.   

Does this chart make sense to you?   I heard this is the closest to MAME.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=946&model2=882&chart=416

Could you help me with the multiplier set and where is the memory speeds?

I have a gig of ram, but other then that I don't have a clue.

[genesim]

Man straight out of the box, the Pentium D is blowing the AMD away.

I don't understand this at all.   How the hell could MK slow down at all???

I do know MK is labor intesive and unless you are running an older version you do need at least 2gb to run it at full speed.

[Malenko]

umm all the MKs run fine on my OLD P4 2.4 (MAME cab) no frame skip, fluid as a mofo.

What vid card are you using?  Also, I dont think MAME take advantage of the multiple cores (yet) though I could be wrong on that assumption.

[FrizzleFried]

I ain't smokin' anything, but I admit to being a complete newbie on multicore.

First of all, this is straight out of the box on an Emachines Anthlon T5230.   

Does this chart make sense to you?   I heard this is the closest to MAME.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=946&model2=882&chart=416

Could you help me with the multiplier set and where is the memory speeds?

I have a gig of ram, but other then that I don't have a clue.

First and foremost,  multicore or single core,  it makes no difference in MAME.  MAME does not take advantage of the 2nd core (yet).   Also,  installation-wise,  single or multicore...it makes no difference.

Secondly... EMACHINES = crap.  At least a couple years ago Emachines = crap.  I do realize they have been bought out my someone else (was it Compaq?)....

Third,  I can tell you 100%...not 99.9%,  but 100% that an AMD 4400+ is faster than that Pentium D when both are properly configured with similar hardware.  I also can tell  you 100% that if the 4400 is having trouble with Mortal Kombat,  there is a problem...cuz MK runs silky smooth on even a lowly Pentium 4 2.4ghz.

I can't help you with setting your rig up likely because not much can be done in the BIOS of that pre-configured ---steaming pile of meadow muffin----box (pardon me for the saying,  but I stopped buying pre-built crap 10 years ago and learned how to build my own...saves money and you KNOW what you are building!).  See...pre-built "Joe Sixpack" ---steaming pile of meadow muffin----boxes are built for EASE OF USE for the average Joe.  Average Joe wouldn't have any clue his brand new 4400 was running slower than my 5  years old 1.5ghz custom built rig...

Most pre-built computers have very VERY limited bios options...

Drop in to BIOS and take a look...perhaps your pre-built is different?

[genesim]

So let me get this straight, I have to drop into bios in order to get my processor running correctly???

Sorry, if you don't like Emachines, but I am on my 3rd one, and it has served me well.    Matter of fact, the other two are still running fine.

Anyway, instead of flaming, I just want an explanation on what would have to be changed in the bios to get a processor to act like a processor??

Are you implying that the processor is somehow running slower because of a bios setting???

I look at a lot of posts on here and people with dual cores are talking about the same problems.

Incidently, 2.4 GiG does not run MK3 at full speed.   

This is my problem.    Perhaps the dual core isn't fast enough in parts.    Screw bench marks because they are not reporting what MAME does.   

Still, I admit I was suckered into the whole dual core thing because I wanted good 3d Gaming as well as fast MAME.   It apppears that the lowely Pentium D does the job better, but I only want to make sure.    If there is a way to get the 4400 running right, I am all ears.     

[genesim]

p.s.   Emachines are made by Gateway and they stopped being "crap" as far back as 2001.    Now they are a poor mans company, but yet have been given a lot of good reviews by CNET and such.

Cheap product, but alot under the hood.   

Still my problem.....I am trying everything, and the stuttering is still happening.    What a piece of crap.

[scotthh]

Is the Emachines T5230 running Vista vs. XP on your Pentium D? I think it comes with Vista straight out of the box.

What other software is running on the Emachines? Anti-virus and all sorts of other background applications can hog system resources.

[FrizzleFried]

So let me get this straight, I have to drop into bios in order to get my processor running correctly???

Sorry, if you don't like Emachines, but I am on my 3rd one, and it has served me well.    Matter of fact, the other two are still running fine.

Anyway, instead of flaming, I just want an explanation on what would have to be changed in the bios to get a processor to act like a processor??

Are you implying that the processor is somehow running slower because of a bios setting???

I look at a lot of posts on here and people with dual cores are talking about the same problems.

Incidently, 2.4 GiG does not run MK3 at full speed.   

This is my problem.    Perhaps the dual core isn't fast enough in parts.    Screw bench marks because they are not reporting what MAME does.   

Still, I admit I was suckered into the whole dual core thing because I wanted good 3d Gaming as well as fast MAME.   It apppears that the lowely Pentium D does the job better, but I only want to make sure.    If there is a way to get the 4400 running right, I am all ears.     

(A) Not flaming,  trying to explain to you why "out of the box" your Emachine is running like crap.

(B) You said Mortal Kombat,  Not Mortal Kombat 3.  I am not sure how fast of a processor you need for Mortal Kombat 3...frankly,  I'm not sure if I ever played it.

(C) Again,  it doesn't matter if your processor is a dual core or a quad core...MAME only recognizes one core.  I would drop over to PCPERSPECTIVE.COM forums and ask there what you can do to get things running correctly.

(D) Scott makes a good point...if you are running VISTA on the emachines instead of XP,  there may be your problem.  I have ZERO experience with Vista,  so I can't comment on specifics.

(E) How much memory is in the Pentium Rig?  How much memory is in the AMD rig?

(F) What graphics card are you using in each?  Though this shouldn't matter much with MAME.

[Malenko]

Incidently, 2.4 GiG does not run MK3 at full speed.     

Mine does, how do I prove it to you? My MAME PC is a lowly Dell Optiplex 2.4GHZ with 1GB(2x512) of RAM on board video, on board sound. System is tweaked and I used new Kingston RAM (not the best but is better then stock dell junk)

EDIT: I must note , even though I dont know how much of a difference it makes, all my games run in 640x480; a limitation of my monitor

[Malenko]

Also I must note, that if the motherboard is a hunk o'crap its gonna have an adverse effect on performance no matter what the CPU speed

[MrMojoZ]

p.s.   Emachines are made by Gateway and they stopped being "crap" as far back as 2001.    Now they are a poor mans company, but yet have been given a lot of good reviews by CNET and such.

Cheap product, but alot under the hood.   

Still my problem.....I am trying everything, and the stuttering is still happening.    What a piece of crap.

So they stopped being crap around 2001 and you still call it a piece of crap? Oh the funny.

Now on to your problem, THE PROCESSOR ISN'T THE ISSUE. That seems to be a huge sticking point with you, get over it. Now start looking at other aspects of the system. Are you running Vista with under 2gigs or ram? Are you running Norton internet security? Are you loading 30 things at startup? Have you done any basic troubleshooting?

[genesim]

A:)   Out of the Box the Pentium D runs fine.    So it has nothing to do with Emachines.   Perhaps it is the dual core makes it weaker because of course it doesn't run on a single core system...but D is dual core as well, so now it is really confusing, that and I know for a fact that it also trounces the Pentium 4 2.6 that I have.     I think dual core does make a difference, or perhaps it is the 3.0 infrastucture specs of the Pentium D, as opposed to the 64x2 having 2 weaker processors.

B:)I mentioned Mortal Kombat 3 because Malenko says he runs all MK's just fine.


C:)  So therefore it should make no difference right?  I will check out the website, but would they have the experience with MAME??

D:)  Vista is running on the Pentium D, and it runs fine...matter of fact, everything seems to running ALOT faster the XP.    I mean EVERYTHING.     I am so impressed with the system and the complete lack of crashes like the XP is prone too when you try to choke it with too many file names.

(E) Ram is the same on both machines.

F:) Graphics card don't matter.

I have a feeling the 64x2 is the problem with MAME.   I think it is the processor structure not being optimal for single core.    In other words the sum of the parts don't add up to the whole of the single core.

Still, alot of suggestions make sense, but even virus scan and pack ins shouldn't make this much difference.   The speed is uniform...it is just damn slow compared to the Pentium D!

[genesim]

p.s.   Emachines are made by Gateway and they stopped being "crap" as far back as 2001.    Now they are a poor mans company, but yet have been given a lot of good reviews by CNET and such.

Cheap product, but alot under the hood.   

Still my problem.....I am trying everything, and the stuttering is still happening.    What a piece of crap.

So they stopped being crap around 2001 and you still call it a piece of crap? Oh the funny.

Now on to your problem, THE PROCESSOR ISN'T THE ISSUE. That seems to be a huge sticking point with you, get over it. Now start looking at other aspects of the system. Are you running Vista with under 2gigs or ram? Are you running Norton internet security? Are you loading 30 things at startup? Have you done any basic troubleshooting?

I have dropped things at startup and it is the same story.    Do you really need 2 gigs of ram when the Pentium D seems to be just fine without it??

I was calling the processor a piece of crap...unless I figure out what the problem is.

The Emachines aren't "crap"...just not the best, but then again, pretty housing is for the ipod generation.   The hardware holds up fine...even if cheaply made.    Got nothing to do with the shortcomings of this processor with MAME.

[genesim]

Here is from R. Belmont on MAME.net.

> Is there any way a Pentium D 3.0 is going to be faster then and Anthlon 64 X2
> 4400 with dual core 2.3??

"Sure. MAME is single-threaded, and the AMD X2s are fairly slow in that mode. The correct upgrade from a Pentium D is a Core 2 Duo or Quad. Nothing else will be faster."


Maybe perhaps what I thought afterall??   The evidence sure supports it.

[MrMojoZ]

You were calling a better CPU crap. See I take issue with that because the CPU has nothing to do with your problem. And once again on the ram subject the CPU has NOTHING to do with it. What OS are you using? Is it Vista? Are you really comparing XP performance vs. Vista performance in MAME and blaming the CPU? X2 CPUs are not slower runnign single threaded applicatons. If they were then so would the dual core Intel chips.

[Green Giant]

Do you have trouble with anything else besides mame.  If you can barely move your mouse around when playing freecell, it is your computer.

Also, mame32 is mame.  It just has its own graphical frontend.  If the rest of your computer works fine, you messed up with mame32.

You might try running MK with commandline version mame.  If that works, start setting up a frontend.  Mala is extremely easy to setup.  No commandline, just graphical options settings.

[genesim]

I haven't seen ANY benchmarks with the X2's with MAME.    I don't care about other applications, it is single core that matters with me.

So do you have personal experience with the X2 and single core applications?

I notice a few people on here have reported similar issues with slowdown as well as other places online.   MAME seems to be its ahilles heel.

I have an intel 2 core duo (1.8 gig on my laptop SONY Vaio) and it even runs MAME faster!

[genesim]

oh c'mon.

I know its the CPU(or perhaps settings).   Free cell...  yeah thats it.

With other applications that are MULTI THREADED, the computer runs fine.   But I am not exactly using labor intensive games either.

I am sure DOOM3 plays like a charm, but the real issue is this.   X2 is it proven well with MAME or not?

Where is evidence instead of theories.    Even the Toms hardware chart that I posted shows some proof of this.

[MrMojoZ]

Nah, I have it figured out. You convinced yourself the processor is the problem and you were hoping someone would post agreeing with you. Good luck. 

[genesim]

Yeah thats exactly it.    Gee, silly evidence.   That is just asking too much.

Its all my crappy computer and not that crappy computer.

YET, others have reported the same damn thing!   Even R Belmont on the MAME board is pointing out the problem.    I see the proof right before my eyes, I just wanted to know WHY.

I was reading somewhere the allocating the program to a single CPU helps.   Not really.   But I did try.

I have worked with computers alot, and I know slow when I see it.    Hold up from programs are erratic.   This is uniform.

[Malenko]

B:)I mentioned Mortal Kombat 3 because Malenko says he runs all MK's just fine.

Just to be sure I wasnt blowing smoke up your butt I fired up the MAME cab and let MK (V5.0), MKII(V3.1), MK3(V2.0) and UMK3 (V1.2)
Auto 0 53/53 on all of them (hitting F11)  I noticed no studder or slow down. I dont think I have ever or would ever buy a new PC for MAME, all Ive ever used is old spare parts.  Im just curious why you dropped alot of money on a new dual core 4400 when old single core 3800+s are less then 1/2 the price?

[FrizzleFried]

For the last time...single core or dual core it doesn't matter.  MAME see's a dual core as a single core and a dual core processor acts exactly like a single core processor when running single thread applications.

I have an Opteron 165 (essentially a 4400+ dual core with 256K of additional cache) and I can run damn near every game possible in MAME short of NFL Blitz and a few other CHD "3D" games.

The 4400+ is a BETTER processor than the Pentium D...period...even if it was ON PAR,  or even SLOWER slightly,  you shouldn't see the stuttering you are seeing regardless...and it has NOTHING to do with it being a dual core processor.   I would highly suggest you go google and research what it means to have a dual core processor...what it does...what it doesn't do...etc.  Your statements indicate that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about...which isn't necessarily bad,  everyone starts from scratch,  it's the smart ones that take the advice of others and RESEARCH.  Go see what the difference between single and dual core is... wikipedia is a great source.  GOOGLE is you friend bro.

[Green Giant]

From the sounds of it you are comparing the 4400 to the pentium D.  This typically means you own both of them since you can compare them.

You don't like mame on the 4400, but it can pretty much do everything else better than the pentium D.  Why not use the pentium for your cab and the 4400 as a desktop?

I have a good AMD 64 3200.  If you want I would be willing to trade you my cpu and mobo for your AMD cpu and mobo.  I know its generous, but thats the kind of guy I am.

[genesim]

I don't own both, I bought them both, and I want to take back one of them.

As for reasearch....I researched ---my bottom--- off, and I got the same advice I am getting here.

BUT the problem is that the Pentium D is running faster.   

Now here is what I got.   A MAME Dev, and Toms Hardware(check out my chart posting) saying that the Pentium D 930 is faster then the 4400 for a single core application.     

Hell, maybe I have answered my own question since I have both computers at my house to compare!

[rockin_rick]

(It is my opinion) that the "Lame 3.98 beta....." benchmark at Tom's Hardware is the closest (not dead on) chart for comparing MAME performance.  I believe that Lame only utilizes one core, like MAME.  I came to this conclusion after reading CPU reviews and their benchmarks, and compared that info with MAME benchmarks, etc. 

FWIW

Rick

[FrizzleFried]

OK...lets use those benchmarks.  According to that benchmark the AMD XP4400+ is 94.5% as fast as the Pentium D.  OK...lets entertain the fact that the Pentium D is faster...

...just about 5% faster...

That gives you your answer...but still doesn't explain why you are getting such dismal performance with the AMD machine....as it sounds like it's running more than 5% slower.

[Dmod]

This still isn't clear to me from reading through this thread...

Are you running the exact same version of MAME (or MAME32) on both machines with the exact same set of options (especially the ddraw and d3d settings)?

Have you tried backing off to an older MAME version to see if that helps?  Could be a new issue that creeped into this latest version of MAME.  Try something like v102 and see if that resolves the problem.

[Green Giant]

All I know is MK is running slower on this supposed beast over the Pentium 4's as well as the Pentium D.     This is going to cause me to pay 90 dollar restocking fee.     Any help is greatly appreciated.

Why would you buy two processors just to test them knowing there is a restocking fee?

[knave]

Let's get back to the OS.

If the AMD 4400 system is running Vista and the Pent D is running XP it will seem as if the Pent D is running faster simply because Vista is using up more CPU cycles than XP.

[FrizzleFried]

Let's get back to the OS.

If the AMD 4400 system is running Vista and the Pent D is running XP it will seem as if the Pent D is running faster simply because Vista is using up more CPU cycles than XP.

I think both systems are running Vista...

D:)  Vista is running on the Pentium D, and it runs fine...matter of fact, everything seems to running ALOT faster the XP.

[genesim]

I was convinced by what every review I ever wrote said about 4400's.

Both are running Vista and from the MAME posts themselves, it sounds as if the AMD X2's are terrible for MAME.

I am going to experiment dropping every program off the computers, but I know from experience that it means little.

Frizzle Fried did you look at my chart?   I heard the PC Marks 2005 was the best way to test MAME behavior...of which the Pentium D is faster.

But I agree, the fact that MK is running slower at all just makes no sense.    All I can say is that if the X2 is running like a pentium 4 2.3 I can see it not running smooth.    But it still seems slower then even that!   

[knave]

I think both systems are running Vista...

Ok, then perhaps it's a heat issue.  If the AMD CPU is overheating then ity might me throttling down to save itself. 

Even on a new setup there could be a problem with not enough thermal compound or some such...

You might see if there's a CPU temp in the Emachines bios.  Also check to be sure the CPU fan is spinning freely.

[xmenxmen]

go and download cpuz and post your result here.  If not already mention, what motherboard is being used on the amd?  And while you are at it, post your bios cpu settings.

And one other thing, try running on a single memory to see if one of your memory is causing a problem.

And to reply to on of your comment above about XP causing your system to crash, I can tell you that most crashes that happens with XP or even 2000 is completely hardware related.  On stable hardware XP is as stable as any OS out there. 

[MrMojoZ]

Okay found a system slower than yours to test on:

This is the slowest dual core I have access to, any particular game scenario you want me to check before I give it back to the customer?

[genesim]

As I said before I am new to the whole dual core processor when it comes to MAME.

I have a dual core lap top it is a dual 1.6 intel core I believe.   While it did very well, it is my main computer.

But not only am I new to dual core, but I am ultra new when it comes to Anthlon 64x2.    So alot of what I said was out of sheer frustration.

It turns out that the tearing effect had to do with my Plasma display.    More then likely just improper video drivers because when I went to my LCD display everything was fine.    Full speed on just about everything that I have thrown at it.    Alot of problems was also coming from the fact that I was using beta MAME which pretty much breaks MAME for Vista around 117u1.   

So far I am very impressed with 3D games and the Pentium D is history.    I am glad I stuck with it...and no restocking fee!

I appreciate those that helped/or tried to help.   thank you.    It got my mind thinking about every possibility.

[genesim]

On a side note...isn't it funny how I get full speed on an Emachines.

Which is worse, me jumping to conclusions about the CPU(though I admitted it could be configurations) or those that would trash a system as some kind of half assed attempt to diagnose a problem

Emachines are far from top of the line, but for a MAME computer it is filed under good enough.    The computers have always been good producers for me, and I trust the brand just like I do with my HP and Sony Vaio.

Good price with good processing power.