AMD vs Intel: A Linux Bout
CrzyP writes "AnandTech puts the latest and greatest AMD and Intel CPUs, including 32-bit and 64-bit versions, to the test in their first ever "Linux Desktop CPU Roundup" to see which performs the best in various Linux applications including database, compiling, rendering, encryption, and more. They suggest the Athlon 64 3500+ over the P4 560 for "balancing price and performance". Very informative!"
So this latest benchmark suggests that HyperThreading doesn't do a whole lot. Is this the case on all unixy systems (ie: is HT geared more to Windows?) or is lacklustre performance on Windows the case as well?
I'm leaning heavily to the AMD 64 stuff for my next home unixy machine, any arguments for the P4?
Trolling is a art,
Why am I surprised ?? :)
Printer friendly link
Tired of clicking next page
Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the
Poor guy. You have an heroic job, my friend. Keep on spinning, our processors' integrity depends on you.
Prescriptive grammar:linguistics
Any article that bases its conclusions on price/performance ratios that leaves out AMD's socket 754 Athlon64s is overlooking a major contender. Socket 754 chips generally cost far less than the s939 ones at comparable speeds and with the current generation of chips the dual-channel memory that s939 offers doesn't provide that much of a performance boost.
Some might say that the s754 chips are an upgradability dead end but most people aren't upgrading CPUs without replacing the motherboard & RAM anyways. A s939 chip doesn't really get you much more upgrade headroom since there are no 939 boards with PCI-Express and DDR2 on them anyways...
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
I love AMD for the stealth marketing.
AMD has never ran an ad campaign informing me the processor is inside the computer. AMD has never assaulted my ears with crappy noise from painted blue freaks.
1. Put the money into R&D
2. produce a great product a fair price
3. let the word of mouth advertising do it's thing.
4. Profit
There is no ??? in this business strategy.
The Swiftech MCX462-V (MVX does not exist afaik ;)) is not the best heatsink out there money can buy. There are a lot of others which beat the Swiftech in both performance, price and noise levels. I've done 2 AMD heatsink roundups, one of them was posted at /. here
:)
The latest update I made can be found here from August 2004 and includes tons of innovative Heatpipe coolers which deliver great performance at a lower price! can't beat that?
Look for a Thermalright SP-94 or Sharkoon HSP1 to get your AMD chilly
Ya because todays consumer is well informed about all issues surrounding the product they intend to purchase. Thats why OS/2 and Apple beat out the less then stellar offerings from Microsoft over the past decade.
Hmmmm....
People buy what ever a company makes the most noise about. There are still people that you really have to slam their head against a wall to convince that an AMD processor isn't inferior to Intel, simply because they never hear of this 'AMD thing.' The only real reason to choose one over the other is the cost. That said, being a fan of either is just silly. Unless you run benchmarks that spit out numbers, which are meaningless in the real world, you will not be able to tell what a system is running. If I threw a AMD processor in a box and slapped an Intel Inside sticker on the front, 99 out of 100 people would tell me I'd get better performance from an AMD chip after they used it, the last person probably wouldn't care. You see an increase in performance in an AMD system because you expect to, not because it actually is so much better, since the differences in real performance are imperceptible.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
Recently posted: Intel's New Platform Verses AMD's 64-bit Prowess. Similar scope in benchmarks, perhaps better analyzed.
-- v --