The reason why the Crossfire results on Yonah were lower than the X2 was because although the i975 chipset itself supports Crossfire, it was never designed to support Yonah. Somewhere in the modification to support Yonah, the Crossfire support was effected.
The motherboard does officially support ATI’s “Crossfire” multi-GPU technology, Just as many other Intel 975X are certified for this multi-GPU scenario as well. However, in practice, we were not able to set up a Radeon X1900 XT Crossfire configuration on this motherboard, as Windows would lock up any time the second card was added to the mix. We were able to get two individual graphics cards working on this motherboard, but there appears to be some sort of driver glitch preventing Crossfire operation at this time.
Overall, the 2.16GHz Yonah matches or exceeds the 2.2GHz X2 4400+.
The reason why the Crossfire results on Yonah were lower than the X2 was because although the i975 chipset itself supports Crossfire, it was never designed to support Yonah. Somewhere in the modification to support Yonah, the Crossfire support was effected.
The motherboard does officially support ATI’s “Crossfire” multi-GPU technology, Just as many other Intel 975X are certified for this multi-GPU scenario as well. However, in practice, we were not able to set up a Radeon X1900 XT Crossfire configuration on this motherboard, as Windows would lock up any time the second card was added to the mix. We were able to get two individual graphics cards working on this motherboard, but there appears to be some sort of driver glitch preventing Crossfire operation at this time.
Overall, the 2.16GHz Yonah matches or exceeds the 2.2GHz X2 4400+. Owned.
Hey, rettihSlluB my fecal comrade -- I noted in prior discussions that you and 9-Inch seem to be the intellectual equivalents of Schroedinger and de Broglie (two of the fathers of mondern physics).
I was wondering if you could help me get past a quandary....
I do not completely understand the concept salicides and their roles in reducing the Schottky barrier, could you explain for me and the rest of the forum readers?
I am sure we all could use a lesson from you in this regard....it could be very educational..... with utmost urgency I request the grace of your attention to give this matter an appropriate review so that we may all be blessed by your extremely accute intellectual powers.
I generally don't count the synthetics since they really don't mean much.
Secondly, you can't just say won or lost. If you go through the benchmarks you'll find that most of the cases that the 2.16GHz Yonah losses, it's by a small margin.
SiSoft Sandra 2005 - CPU Arithmetic Benchmark
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 1.4%
SiSoft Sandra 2005 - CPU Multimedia Benchmark
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 1.7%
Acrobat 7.0 Pro - 5000 Page Word to PDF Creation
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 20.9%
Apache Benchmark - 10,000 Users w/ Concurrency Of 2
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 1.9%
Apache Benchmark - 50,000 Users w/ Concurrency Of 10
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 1.6%
Performance differences less than 2% are usually considered a tie since they are within the margin of error and aren't relevent in the real world anyways. Including the synthetics the results are:
X2-4400--->5
core duo---> 5
Tie---------> 5
However, if you discount the synthetics, 2 of the ties disappear along with 1 of the X2 4400+'s wins. It should also be noted that the Half-Life 2 win by the X2 was only by 3.8%.
Based on the above:
X2-4400--->3
core duo---> 5
Tie---------> 4
Which with the greater than 5% improvement in real-world benchmarks constituting a win, makes crowning a winner (or at least a comparison) more definitive.
I generally don't count the synthetics since they really don't mean much.
Secondly, you can't just say won or lost. If you go through the benchmarks you'll find that most of the cases that the 2.16GHz Yonah losses, it's by a small margin.
SiSoft Sandra 2005 - CPU Arithmetic Benchmark
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 1.4%
SiSoft Sandra 2005 - CPU Multimedia Benchmark
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 1.7%
Acrobat 7.0 Pro - 5000 Page Word to PDF Creation
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 20.9%
Apache Benchmark - 10,000 Users w/ Concurrency Of 2
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 1.9%
Apache Benchmark - 50,000 Users w/ Concurrency Of 10
Athlon X2-4400 (2.2GH< ) by 1.6%
Performance differences less than 2% are usually considered a tie since they are within the margin of error and aren't relevent in the real world anyways. Including the synthetics the results are:
X2-4400--->5
core duo---> 5
Tie---------> 5
However, if you discount the synthetics, 2 of the ties disappear along with 1 of the X2 4400+'s wins. It should also be noted that the Half-Life 2 win by the X2 was only by 3.8%.
Based on the above:
X2-4400--->3
core duo---> 5
Tie---------> 4
Which with the greater than 5% improvement in real-world benchmarks constituting a win, makes crowning a winner (or at least a comparison) more definitive.
So, are you finally admitting that core duo is no match to the X2-4400 with this post??
It seems kinda laughable to see that you guys praise conroe's superpi results (which is also a synthetic becnhmark) and still give no credit to the X2-4400. Even in the Apache benchmark (which is real world performance) the X2-4400 blow away the core duo.
Lols Seems liek the Conroe and Yonah are the same thing as an AMD Athlon64 @ 2.4ghz just seems like Intel bought a load of X2s and put a different socket on the bottom and another sticker on top and called it the future King of the Computing, lols they seem to be too similar to tell weather if Intel just Copy and pasted a AMDx2 or what maybe a few Fsb here and there and a little copper or silver conductors here and there and you got a Conroe/ or Yonah.
Bull$hitter(ya i'm still calling you bull$hitter) don't you think that it's oddly strange that some sites report yonah is beating x2 or x2 is beating yonah? I think that they're both even and sites that are loyal to intel or amd are spinning the truth to make people come to their side it's all about money!
haha....yonah architecture is almost same as conroe, which means we will see almost the same result here as well. conroe better than AMD by 20%?it is nothing much but a marketing strategy by intel. whihc is loosing its market share nowdays. and will continue to loose even conroe is out. cheers for AMD.
