Posted on 11/28/2005 12:43:51 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
It wasn't even close.
After reading the round-by-round account of our dual-core desktop CPU prizefight, it should come as no shock that AMD's Athlon 64 X2 chips are the runaway victors here, laying out the Intel Pentium D and Pentium Extreme Edition 840 chips pins up. If we had to call out one chip, AMD's Athlon 64 X2 4400+ is an outstanding bargain given the competition, but as our results show, any AMD dual-core CPU will serve you better than its similarly priced Intel equivalent.
If you're wondering why there's such a striking performance difference between the two companies' processors, it likely has something to do with the memory controller. Among the technological differences between the two, AMD's memory controller--the component that sends information back and forth between your system's CPU and the memory--is an integrated part of the Athlon 64 X2's chip architecture. Intel's memory controller, however, exists as a separate piece of silicon on the motherboard. The additional distance between the CPU and the memory controller adds to the processing lag time and likely plays a part in Intel's lower scores.
Whatever Intel's strategy, it doesn't seem to have held up. We're very interested to see what happens when the next generation of chips and chipsets hits the market starting in January. But until then, AMD's Athlon 64 X2 should be your dual-core processor of choice.
Find out more about how we test desktop systems.
Intel test bed
Asus P5N32-SLI Deluxe motherboard; Nvidia Nforce 4 SLI chipset; Crucial
1,024MB DDR2 SDRAM 667MHz; 256MB Nvidia GeForce 7800GTX (PCIe); WDC WD740GD-00FLA2 74GB 10,000rpm SATA; Windows XP Professional SP2; Antec 550w power supply
AMD test bed
Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe motherboard; Nvidia Nforce 4 SLI chipset; Crucial 1,024MB DDR SDRAM 400MHz; 256MB Nvidia GeForce 7800GTX (PCIe); WDC WD740GD-00FLA2 74GB 10,000rpm SATA; Windows XP Professional SP2; Antec 550w power supply
CNET Labs Project Leader David Gussman constructed the test beds and performed all testing.
| Round 1 | Round 2 | Round 3 | Round 4 |
|
Round 5 | Round 6 | Round 7 | |||
| AMD | X | X | X |
|
X | X | X | X | ||
| Intel |
|
ping a ling....
Intel fanboys everywhere are silently whimpering and mumbling "it's not true...it just can't be true!!"
I'm posting with the aid of an AMD X2 dual core. I love it to death. No more of the annoyed stuttering...
I think I read that the AMD chip will use additional memory better. If more memory had been used, the gap would have been larger.
Boy guess I am getting old. I can remember the days when AMD was just a fledging company trying to make ends meet and when Intel almost closed when it's budding ROM technologies where challanged by TI, Signetics etc.. How times have changed.
Same here and I just have the slow 3800+
I am considering buying an AMD. Can you make a recommendation?
Get one of the new X2's if you buy AMD....I am very happy with my two AMD64 X2 3800+...they run all day and run cool for me....I don't load them very heavy....been thinking about the 4600+ X2 or even the 5000+ with the AM2 socket.....but not doing that for now cause of the expense of new Video card's and DDR2 memory....
Now at the high end, the new Intel Duo is beating the best AMD
...be aware of that...
What do you have now and how much do you want to move to the new box?
Oh....remeber ....I think I am right....Windows Pro is required to use both processors of a dual chip...but there some interesting things like Windows Media Edition is built on Windows Pro and costs less at NewEgg....last I checked....course you have to get some hardware with the order....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
On to round 1