Intel vs. AMD - Today's Generation Compared

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Friday March 23, 2007 @02:12AM from the who-doesn't-like-a-good-chip-comparison dept.

Bender writes "The Tech Report compares 15 Core 2 and Athlon 64 processors from Intel and AMD — from sub-$200 to a cool grand, from slower dual cores to fast quad cores — in 32 & 64-bit apps in Windows Vista, including the new, multithreaded RTS game Supreme Commander. 'The release of Windows Vista and a round of price cuts by AMD prompted us to hatch a devious plan involving Vista, a new test suite full of multithreaded and 64-bit applications, fifteen different CPU configurations, and countless hours of lab testing. That plan has come to fruition in the form of a broad-based comparison of the latest processors from AMD and Intel... from the lowly Athlon 64 X2 4400+ and Core 2 Duo E6300 to the astounding Athlon 64 FX-74 and Core 2 Extreme QX6700.' Folding@Home in Linux, power use, and energy efficiency are tested, too."

1 of 150 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Bogus test benchmarks.. by FirstOne · 2007-03-23 03:05 · Score: 5, Interesting

Most of these benchmarks are targeted towards unified caches.. (Intel)

Meanwhile real world apps favor separate caches per core.
(Where one user app isn't flushing cache entries of another app executing on different core.)

If they wanted to make it fair..
They should execute n-copies of each benchmark compiled separately using different module names. (no unified cache sharing.)

Next item.. Graphics & games. What are they really measuring?
The ability of some device driver writer to take advantage of some esoteric CPU optimization?

Last item they disabled Cool and Quiet on over clocked AMD configuration s it should have never been published.. I.E. They're simulating certain AMD configurations and aren't testing the real thing..