For this test, we ran Driverheaven.net's Photoshop benchmark script, using the default test image. The script runs several filters in sequence: Texturizer, CMYK Color Conversion, RGB Color Conversion, Ink Outlines, Dust & Scratches, Watercolor, Texturizer, Stained Glass, Lighting Effects, Mosaic Tiles, Extrude, Smart Blur, Underpainting, Palette Knife, and Sponge.
The red line says it all: Adobe Photoshop CS4, or more precisely, the filters used in the benchmark script, do not fully utilize both cores (Ed.: our own in-house Photoshop CS4 benchmark, on the other hand, is made up of threaded filters, so your mileage may vary).
The performance graph looks familiar, doesn't it? First, let’s talk results. If these numbers are to be believed, Photoshop (or at least the filters used in the benchmark) are more sensitive to clock rate than cache size. We already know they're not multi-threaded, so that’s not a factor. If the filters were, in fact, threaded, we wouldn’t see the Athlon II X2 250 offering more performance than the Phenom II X3 710. Remember, the 6MB L3 cache should have (using the term loosely here) compensated for the 400 MHz difference in clock.
Since the difference in power consumption is lower than the difference in time spent running the benchmark, total power consumption numbers favor the quad-core processors again.
- Test System And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark 2001
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark Vantage
- Benchmark Results: SuperPi 1M And 8M
- Benchmark Results: WinRAR
- Benchmark Results: Cinebench R10
- Benchmark Results: POVRay 3.6
- Benchmark Results: Photoshop CS4
- Benchmark Results: Video Encoding
- Benchmark Results: 1080p WMV With VirtualDub And DivX
- Benchmark Results: 1080p AVI With VirtualDub And XviD
- Benchmark Results: Audio Encoding
- Benchmark Results: Video Playback
- Benchmark Results: DivX And WMV, No Hardware Acceleration
- Performance And Power Management, The Best Of Both Worlds