Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Dual-Core Shoot Out - Intel vs. AMD

Posted by Zonk on from the draw-pilgram dept.

sebFlyte writes "The Intel vs AMD battle of the benchmarks continues. ZDNet is running its rather comprehensive-looking guide to a side-by-side test of Intel and AMD's dual-core desktop chips, the Athlon 64 X2 3200+ and the Pentium D 820. They look at pure performance, as well as the difference it makes to apps you might use on the desktop. In the end, AMD comes out as the winner. From the article: 'AMD currently offers the most attractive dual core option. The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ may cost $87 more than its Intel counterpart, the Pentium D 820, but the AMD chip is a much better performer. It also uses considerably less power.'"

3 of 311 comments (clear)

  1. Yawn... buy AMD. RAM access is everything. by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 5, Informative

    Isn't this like the fourth time we've seen a Xeon-vs-AMD benchmark on the front page? It's old news.

    The problem with the Xeons is they're totally throttled. The Xeon was like a V-6 engine under a VW carburetor; the dual-core Xeon is like a big-block V8 under the same carburetor.

    The AMDs have better access to RAM and better (independent) cross-CPU communication. The dual-core Xeons were clearly rushed to market to answer AMD's offering, before Intel could get their own memory-access ducks in a row.

  2. again, find an informed author!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    I was doing ok with article until I got to the two points about how their disk defrag and antivirus/spyware apps were running, slowing the machine down, and how a dual core would make this so much better. A dual core will do NOTHING for this user!!! Those two examples highlight the perfect situation where the bottleneck isn't even close to being the CPU, the disks are simply working at 100% capacity, and you can add as many cores as you want, it doesn't change that fact.


    zdnet is usually fairly good, but not this time.

  3. Re:AMD looks fine on paper, but... by SpinyNorman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Huh? No reason you can't use Intel's compiler for AMD64 it if you like the code it generates (AMD64 supports SSE/SSE2).

    Intel themselves even point out that their compiler supports AMD.

    http://www.intel.com/cd/software/products/asmo-na/ eng/compilers/clin/220007.htm

    Incidently gcc 4.0 does automatic loop vectorization using SSE/SSE2, so I wouldn't dismiss it too quickly either.