Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I am very confused

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 6, 2006 9:44:07 PM

ok the have just bought an AMD - Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core (3800+) 2.0 GHz, S-939 - L2 1MB (an ok CPU). and here comes all of my confusion, my CPU is a dual core at 2.0GHz each core or 4.0GHz combined right? but an Intel Pentium D 940 3.2GHZ DUALCORE 2X2MB says it's also dual core but it says it 3.2 GHz. So it the intel running at 3.2GHz per core or 1.6GHz per core and 3.2GHz combined. Get my confusion.
someone answer please this is driving my nuts, lol

More about : confused

May 6, 2006 9:46:41 PM

Errrr... Ummm...

Each Core runs like 1 CPU. So both cores run at 2ghz. The advantage is, you can run more applications with basically no loss in CPU cycles compared to single core CPU.

So, in thinking you have a 4 ghz system is incorrect.

Edit:
The P-D is running 2 cores at 3.2ghz. Now the difference is how the architecture or design by intel and amd.

AMD is able to keep up with intel by not my speed, but by performance.
May 7, 2006 9:15:58 PM

Quote:
AMD is able to keep up with intel by not my speed, but by performance.


That paradox just blew up my CPU
Related resources
May 7, 2006 10:45:00 PM

:oops:  . o O (ment.. by speed, but by performance)
a c 473 à CPUs
May 8, 2006 1:39:23 AM

AMD depends on a well designed architecture to give good performance.

Intel depends on speed to give good performance.

An Athlon 64 3200+ @2.0GHz can match or beat a Pentium 4 3.0GHz in games if all other components are the same (except the mobo).

Conroe and Memron should turn the tables on the Athlon 64.
a b à CPUs
May 8, 2006 2:31:24 AM

With dual core cpus, AMD or Intel, each core runs at the advertised speed, not both cores combined equals the advertised speed. Dual cores essentially run in parallel, not in series. Both cores run side by side at the same speed.
May 8, 2006 11:51:34 AM

I look at it this way. Amd like a v6 Car Which could be lighter and faster. Required Less hp (ghz) to do the same work as Intel. Last few years.

Where a Intel chips are like a V8 which are heavyer and sometimes slower. Required More hp (ghz) to do the same work as Amd.

But one thing to remember Each year is differnt. One year Amd faster. But another year Intel faster.

But one fact was Intel was thinking Ghz would win for the Longest time. Untel Northwood and Presscott chips. They found out Ghz did not mean everything. But that how they sold there chips. People would see Amd 1.6ghz vers intel 2.3ghz. So most people went Intel was faster. Then slowly People went hay amd less power and less ghz But runs faster then Intel chips.

But things are about to change. The New Intel chip is going to be faster for a while. But we dont know for how long. A few months to a year mybe 2. And amd is going to be Hotter and slower for a while.

So it will become Intel like a v6 Car Which could be lighter and faster. Required Less hp (ghz) to do the same work as Amd.

But this battle will help both Amd and Intel fanboys. For it will drop prices.

Heres what counts Low Power usesage, Fast computer.

I dont think anyone can disagree with this.
May 8, 2006 12:29:48 PM

Quote:
someone answer please this is driving my nuts, lol


Heh.
May 8, 2006 2:10:02 PM

Quote:
I look at it this way. Amd like a v6 Car Which could be lighter and faster. Required Less hp (ghz) to do the same work as Intel. Last few years.

Where a Intel chips are like a V8 which are heavyer and sometimes slower. Required More hp (ghz) to do the same work as Amd.


While I like this metaphore, I usually think in the reverse, generally a car with a V6 with similar performance as a car with a V8 needs higher RPM's to achieve that performance (almost a direct correlation between RPMs and cycles per second)

... but I guess now I'm just nit-picking.
May 8, 2006 2:34:25 PM

Quote:
my CPU is a dual core at 2.0GHz each core


That's correct, it should still shows 2.0Ghz not 4.0Ghz
May 8, 2006 7:24:30 PM

so which it better
May 8, 2006 8:35:07 PM

Both Intel & AMD CPU's have a set core frequency, which is the speed at which they work internally, with each core acting independently of the other.

A dual core 3.2Ghz processor has 2 cores running at 3.2Ghz each,
A dual core 2.0Ghz processor has 2 cores running at 2.0Ghz each.

There's only one clock generator (oscillator) setting the frequency for both cores. There's no 'combined' speed in a multicore processor.

AMD has been able to compete against Intel CPU's by adding certain features to its internal architecture, things like built in memory controller, the HyperTransport technology and faster FSB's that make up for the lower clock speeds.
May 9, 2006 10:42:36 AM

So which is the better buy for gaming? the AMD athlon 64 X2 3800 or the intel.
May 9, 2006 11:07:32 AM

Quote:
So which is the better buy for gaming? the AMD athlon 64 X2 3800 or the intel.


except for P-D 940 / 950 or up, A64 x2 3800+ is better for nearly all applications.
May 9, 2006 11:39:05 AM

Quote:
AMD depends on a well designed architecture to give good performance.

Intel depends on speed to give good performance.


I'll interpret for you:

The current Intel is like the loud-mouth, caffeine-injected obnoxious mofo at work - always running the mouth at 5.79GHz but not really getting much work done per clock cycle. But at least the dude is going nowhere fast.

The current AMD lady doesn't look to be doing much but she sits there at her desk and gets the job done. Nice and quiet, pretty smile, sweet!

Quote:
Conroe and Memron should turn the tables on the Athlon 64.


So you're saying they are gonna pull the Intel dude's Starbucks access and send him to workforce harassment training?

Sorry, couldn't resist...
May 9, 2006 12:09:04 PM

Quote:
So which is the better buy for gaming? the AMD athlon 64 X2 3800 or the intel.


It depends on which Intel. Generally speaking, comparably rated AMD CPUs perform better in gaming than Intel. Both companies make excellent processors. If your goal is games, you'll probably do better with AMD and the best video card you can afford since most games aren't CPU bound anyway. With today's newest ganes, the bottleneck tends to be the video card.
May 9, 2006 12:12:23 PM

usually the bottleneck is not only on VGA ... but really on gammer skills...
May 9, 2006 1:07:13 PM

Quote:
usually the bottleneck is not only on VGA ... but really on gammer skills...


Ding! We have a winna!
!