For all you people that think that the athlon x2 line is pathetic compared to conroe, well check this out
http://www.tekbunker.com/index.php [...] &Itemid=57 This shows a side by side comparison, and in most benchmarks the x2 actually beat the conroe!!
All x2 users: take pride in what you have and show proof that the newest thing isn't always the best!
According to the site, people actually won't see much benefit from x2 to conroe unless if they have been doing serious video encoding. I would like to hear people's personal experiences so I can make my decision on what system to build
An OVERCLOCKED x2 4400 (2.67Ghz) *barely* beats an E6600 (2.4Ghz). What they should have done is tested the OC'd x2 4400 against an E6700. THAT would have been a more valid and accurate comparison.
I will say thank you for pointing out another site to add to my "do not read" list.
I did read the last page of it where they OC'd the 6600, but my question is how did they get a 207mz OC on the C2D. They say they OC'd it but give no details. I still maintain it's a shite comparison.
This test shows that when a processor such as the X2 4400 is ran at a similar speed to any C2D, they are pretty comparable. That's a safe idea to follow, since the Core 2 architecture is slightly better than the Athlon X2's.
For all you people that think that the athlon x2 line is pathetic compared to conroe, well check this out
http://www.tekbunker.com/index.php [...] &Itemid=57 This shows a side by side comparison, and in most benchmarks the x2 actually beat the conroe!!
All x2 users: take pride in what you have and show proof that the newest thing isn't always the best!
According to the site, people actually won't see much benefit from x2 to conroe unless if they have been doing serious video encoding. I would like to hear people's personal experiences so I can make my decision on what system to build
Quote :
This test shows that when a processor such as the X2 4400 is ran at a similar speed to any C2D, they are pretty comparable. That's a safe idea to follow, since the Core 2 architecture is slightly better than the Athlon X2's.
oh my god...this argument is so retarded...both processors have advantages...both have disadvantages...let it go.
here's an idea...if you wanna argue with someone about computers, take your computer, throw it out the window, and then get hit by a truck...not just any truck...a semi. arguing about computers is allright, but honestly...this argument is getting as old as a story about ike beating tina.
I'm going to agree with prozac26 in saying this is 3dmark. It's not a benchmark known for it's abillity to accurately reflect real world performance, especially on the CPU side of things. Given the heavy graphical nature of 3dmark, the CPU was mearly feeding the GPU with prechewed data and not even comming close to being fully utilized. Given the X2's ample bandwidth, it's better suited for this task than C2D.
I like how this guy neglected to notice his C2D outperforming the X2 in the CPU test both times. The first time C2D scored 2080 to the X2's 2050 and the second time it scored 2310. That's a 12.6% gap at the same clock speed.
So.. Hasn't the Athlon of the past supposedly proven that clock speeds don't matter across different architectures? K8 might be faster clock for clock but Netburst can scale higher. And consumers don't compare CPUs via clock, they compare by $$$.
The X2 4400+ is a 2MB L2 chip. Overclocked to 2.67, it'd be faster than an X2 5200+, which is currently $413, compared to the $308 E6600.
3.5% advantage in a synthetic GPU test comparing an overclocked to default chip and 1.4% advantage comparing OC to OC. Way to go tekbunker!
For all you people that think that the athlon x2 line is pathetic compared to conroe, well check this out
http://www.tekbunker.com/index.php [...] &Itemid=57 This shows a side by side comparison, and in most benchmarks the x2 actually beat the conroe!!
All x2 users: take pride in what you have and show proof that the newest thing isn't always the best!
According to the site, people actually won't see much benefit from x2 to conroe unless if they have been doing serious video encoding. I would like to hear people's personal experiences so I can make my decision on what system to build
Tekbunker??? Never heard of them but I took a look at Tom's CPU benchmarks and it looks like the E6600 is more comparable with an FX62, heck according to their benchmarks you would be better off comparing an X2 4400 to a E6300. Take a look for yourself. As a matter of fact, I think that you can pretty much look at all the mainstream tech sites and they all pretty much say the same thing since you can easily over clock an E6600 to outperform anything that Amd has by at least 20% and this is on the game benchmarks where the cpu is the bottleneck. On the video encoding the E6600 will beat Amd's top bin by 40%. By the way this site fails to use a high and low resolution benchmark which fails to actually benchmark the CPU since a high resolution would make the GPU the bottle neck and not the CPU.
