Core Duo Reaches the Desktop

rtt writes "AMD has long reigned the desktop CPU market due to Intel's offerings struggling to keep up in terms of performance and power consumption. Yonah is the predecessor to the Core architecture and is predominantly a mobile chip, and is used at the heart of Intel's Viiv technology. Bit-tech has an article about Yonah beating the top of the range desktop AMD chip, the FX60, clock for clock. From the article" 'When Yonah is running at the same clock speed as AMD's Athlon 64 FX-60, we found that it beat it into a corner in just about every situation.'"

Comments

Over the top

[Rorian]

I think they go just a bit overboard in saying that Yonah beats the FX-60 "into a corner".. Most benchmarks had it either infront or behind by around 2-3%. Is it really worth forking out a few hundred dollars for such a dismal gain in performance? Does it have better performance-per-watt? That's what really seems to count these days anyway.

Re:It's a play on words.

[anagama]

It's worth noting that the comparison is between the FX-60 running at factory speed, and a Core Duo running overclocked.

Just shows how selective statistics can lie

[jmorris42]

Ok, Intel is getting some game, 'bout freaking time. But this isn't an "AMD killer" by any means.

Notice how they only included ONE FPU intensive task and AMD (and several of the Intel products) schooled this mobile offering? Most reviews include a lot more balanced set of tests, this one obviously had their storyline written for them and was tailoring the tests to fit the plot.

And also, let us not forget that the STOCK benchmark numbers for this chip were anything but impressive, so they played up the overclocked numbers. However, while this chip does have some seriously intersting overclock potential it isn't the first chip to be massively overclocked. Just last week we were salivating over a budgie Intel chip that somebody overclocked into the world's fastest CPU. So why not include THAT firebreathing monster's numbers on the chart along with some seriously overclocked AMD parts? Perhaps that would't have had such a dramatic narrative? Ah.

Meanwhile, I'll keep comparing parts running at factory spec and waiting to see what AMD drops next week to compare current gen parts to current gen parts.

What the heck is "Intel's ViiV technology?"

[dpbsmith]

It seems to be one of those mysterious things like IBM's "SAA" or Microsoft's ".NET" or Vitalis' "V7..." .

It's a secret miracle ingredient about which all that is clear is that you're supposed to think it's good without needing to know what it is, exactly, or what it does, or why it's good.

Intel says: With Intel Viiv technology, you control a highly integrated Intel platform designed for digital entertainment. That means you can: Take charge of your media. Share experiences with movies, photos, and music with your friends and family. Simplify your digital life.

It's sort of like saying "Texaco gasoline has CleanSystem3, which will help you score with hot chicks."

Will somebody please explain to me what technical characteristics of a processor allow you to "share experiences with movies, photos, and music with your friends and family?"

Unless that means it doesn't support DRM?

Sham

[Short Circuit]

You know, I like the Core Duo, and would love to have one in a laptop or on a desktop. (If Debian isn't ready for x86-64, then x86-64 isn't ready for me.)

Probably the most impressive thing is that the T2600 out-guns Intel's flagship Pentium Extreme Edition 965 processor, even with the massive clock speed deficit. After effortlessly overclocking our Core Duo to 2.6GHz, it beats AMD's flagship Athlon 64 FX-60 into a pulp.

As others have pointed out, the Core Duo only beat out the Athlon64 FX-60 when overclocked. If the chip, when overclocked, was safe for production environments, then the chip would have shipped at a higher default clock speed.

The whole tone of the article is wrong...it seems more interested in Intel than in technology. Notice that the "most impressive thing" is that the Core Duo chip does better than a high-end Intel chip. The only negative thing they mention in the article is a reminder that AMD's AM2 architecture is supposed to come out next week.

They're misrepresenting the product. I have to wonder if they were paid for this review.

Enter obligatory comment

[Temujin_12]

Entry obligatory AMD zealot, "intel can't possibly make something better then AMD" comments here _______.

Seriously, I'm sick of the overly zealous statements when it comes to "OS vs. OS" "Company vs. Company" etc. debates. Why is it so threatening when another companies/organizations happen to produce something better than your favorite company/organization?

Sometimes intel will get it right and sometimes AMD will. Deal with it.

Ya, I know. This is probably eligible for flaimbait and/or troll mod points. Oh well, I just needed to get this off my chest.

Re:That would be the Conroe

[reldruH]

A couple of weeks ago Intel announced they were moving up their launch dates. Here's the quote from the article: "Three new chips, one for each of the Core market segments, will be part of the rollout: Woodcrest for servers in June, Conroe for desktops in July, and Merom for notebooks in August." Hopefully by November prices will have already started dropping.