SYSmark 2007 Preview Results
Please note that we received the benchmark results for SYSmark 2007 Preview using a different test system, which has been the basis for our power-efficiency analyses of AMD Athlon 64 and Intel Pentium and Core 2 processors later on.
As you can see, the performance difference between the individual Core 2 processors is only significant if there is a lot of multi-threaded workload involved. This is the case in the video-creation section of SYSmark 2007 Preview. Apart from that, office and content creation performance doesn’t vary a lot between a 65-nm dual core and a 45-nm Core 2 quad core processor.
5
Comments
Sponsored
Latest CPU News
- 10/02 – CPU Performance Boosted 20% When CPU, GPU Collaborate
- 10/02 – Leaked Slide Shows Intel Haswell Set for March-June 2013
- 09/02 – $100,000 If You Can Prove Quantum Computers Impossible
- 09/02 – AMD Adds FM1 CPUs Athlon II X4 638 and Athlon II X4 641
- 08/02 – Raspberry Pi Scheduled to Launch This Month
I will admit to not really being a regular overclocker but isnt the whole point about getting the best out of your hardware and in essance getting something for nothing.
from that view point i would have thought it would have made sence to at least include the 8200 for comparison, If not have done the whole article on it instead of the 8500. Or am i missing the point?
Intel has no dedicated inter-connect, no onboard MMU. All inter-core communication for both dual and quad-core CPU's has to go via the FSB. Intel is late catching up because it got complacent.
Also, AMD CPU's at the bottom end still overclock well and are very cheap. I don't think everything is in Intel's favour
Socket 939 90nm Athlon64 3200+ (2.0GHz) can hit 2.7GHz or more on air. Same for Socket AM2 65nm Athlon64x2 4000+ (2.1GHz).
..not bad considering it's a generation before C2D.
Is it me or doesn't there appear ot be much of a difference between the 266 and newer 333MHz FSB speed?
Intel has no dedicated inter-connect, no onboard MMU. All inter-core communication for both dual and quad-core CPU's has to go via the FSB. Intel is late catching up because it got complacent.Also, AMD CPU's at the bottom end still overclock well and are very cheap. I don't think everything is in Intel's favour
Am I wrong in thinking the intel dual core does have inter core communication on chip. It is the quad core that communicates via the fsb for but only between the two core 2 duo dies.