Προς το περιεχόμενο

AMD X2 & Core 2 Duo συγκρίσεις


ANEMOS-V

Προτεινόμενες αναρτήσεις

Δημοσ.

ένα αναλυτικό test για τους 2 CPU σε διαφορετικές εκδόσεις.

ελπίζω να βοηθήσει τους αναποφάσιστους..

 

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/348/4

 

το test έχει 11 σελίδες..παραθέτω μονο τη τελευταία σελίδα με την περίληψη:

 

Accordingly to our tests the answer to the big question, “who was the best dual-core CPU, Intel or AMD?” is “It depends on the kind of application you are running”.

 

Amazingly enough comparing apples to apples it seems that AMD has better CPUs for multimedia and 3D applications, while the new Core family achieved a better performance in office-style applications and gaming.

 

We say “amazingly enough” because several years ago, during K6 times, 3D performance was AMD’s Achilles’ Heel, as they didn’t have a good math co-processor (FPU). It is really interesting to see how AMD was able to improve their CPUs, especially if we keep in mind that Intel is the one pushing and leading multimedia-oriented enhancements such as MMX/SSE. It is really funny to see how AMD has beaten Intel on their own technology.

 

But on other kinds of application, Intel made AMD to eat dust. On office-style applications – programs like WinZip, antivirus, Microsoft Office, Adobe Acrobat and web browsing – the new Intel CPUs based on the new Core microarchitecture achieved, on average, at least double the performance compared to competing dual-core CPUs from AMD. We could clearly see this on Sysmark 2004, which runs real-world programs. PCMark05, in a lesser scale, confirmed this tendency.

 

Even though both AMD and Intel CPUs achieved a similar performance on 3DMark06, Core-based CPUs were faster on Quake 4, probably because of the greater amount of L2 memory cache available. We can only confirm if the advantage of Intel Core 2 CPUs on office-style applications and Quake 4 is exclusively due to the higher amount of L2 memory cache or not when Intel releases versions of Core 2 using smaller caches.

 

As we mentioned earlier, a good feature of Core 2 CPUs is that they keep using socket 775, so you won’t need to replace your motherboard if you have a newer motherboard compatible with the external bus – a.k.a. FSB – and voltage of the chosen Core 2 model if you want to upgrade your CPU.

 

So, which CPU to buy? In our review Core 2 CPUs were faster on office-style applications and gaming, confining AMD to a niche market such as multimedia and 3D rendering. However, this conclusion isn’t final, as the reviewed models had 4 MB L2 memory cache and Intel will launch Core 2 Duo models with 2 MB L2 memory cache. As for the high-end models – i.e. the exact models we reviewed – you can follow this advice and Core 2 is, in fact, the best CPU for the average user. However for entry-level models using less memory cache we still need to review them to see how they look like compared to AMD counterparts.

Δημοσ.

Καλά αυτοί στο HS ( Hardware Secrets ) ήταν πάντα ολίγον τι... "γκαγκά-δες" για να μην πω κάτι πιο βαρύ.

 

22+ FPS διαφορά στα Games

120+ πόντοι στο Rendering @ CineBench

ολόκληροι εκατ. πόντοι στο cpu score αλλά και στο total score του 3D Mark06

και λένε ότι...δεν είναι καθαρά καλύτεροι οι C2D...

Καλά οι άνθρωποι είναι άξιοι της μοίρας του HardwareAnalysis...άντε ελπίζω να συνεργαστούνε αυτά τα 2 site κάποια στιγμή :D

Δημοσ.

Καλό είναι να διαβάζουμε και κάτι διαφορετικό, ακόμη και αν είναι λάθος-για να μην πω ψέμα.

Μα καλά, όλοι οι υπόλοιποι που λένε ότι οι core 2 πετάνε, άσχετοι είναι;

Δημοσ.

δε ξέρω.. αν είναι αληθές το test, αλλα γιατί να μην είναι?

επίσης δίνει πολύ μεγαλύτερες ταχύτητες στις μνήμες του AMD..

σε σχέση με τους INTEL,

Δημοσ.

Χονδρικά, ο 6600 ξεπερνάει τον FX-62, τον ταχύτερο AMD.

Ο 6400 ξεπερνά αρκετά τον 5000+ και κοστίζει λιγότερο (ή τουλάχιστον κόστιζε όταν το έψαχνα).

Ο 6300 είναι στα επίπεδα του 4800+.

Αρχειοθετημένο

Αυτό το θέμα έχει αρχειοθετηθεί και είναι κλειστό για περαιτέρω απαντήσεις.

  • Δημιουργία νέου...