SYSmark 2007 Preview Results

Ad

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.


Talkback
mactronix 22/02/2008 11:57
Hide
-0+
mactronix
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?
Wild9 24/02/2008 03:02
Hide
-0+
Wild9
Quote :Unlike AMD, which must produce its 90-nm processors closer to their technical and thermal limits to stay competitive, Intel plays on its manufacturing prowess, which is at least 12 months ahead of that of AMD.


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 ;)
Wild9 24/02/2008 03:21
Hide
-0+
Wild9
Quote :However, AMD’s overclocking margins haven’t been as large compared to what Intel’s modern processors offer.


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.
Wild9 24/02/2008 11:54
Hide
-0+
Wild9
Is it me or doesn't there appear ot be much of a difference between the 266 and newer 333MHz FSB speed?
darthpoik 26/02/2008 12:28
Hide
-0+
darthpoik
wild9 :
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.

Note You are going to post a comment as anonymous.



Google Ads