Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

It's official: AMD X2 6000+ frags Intel quad core Qx6700

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 3, 2007 5:35:04 AM

In Matlab, Pro/Enginer, SolidWorks, and Apache web server benchmarks, the X2 6000+ frags the Intel QX6700 quad.

In file compression, audio encoding, the difference is around 5%. The only thing Intel qaud showed some real advantage is video encoding.

K10 will whip the crap out of Intel's double cheeseburger architecture.

Remember folks, you heard it here first! :lol: 
May 3, 2007 5:59:40 AM

But I like double cheeseburgers! :lol: 

Damn, I swear half the posts on these forums are sarcastic remarks about our favourite Doctor. He's entrenched into our minds, arghhhh! :lol: 
May 3, 2007 6:00:50 AM

PhD... Playa Hatin' Degree

Well... i obviously cannot vouch for the authenticity of these but i can only HOPE that K10 does smash Intel.

This will get AMD some more $$$ which they will use to make better chips, and may cause Intel to speed up development/product life cycles a little. Prices are also likely to fall for most products south of mid market.

So if true... its good news all round. :D 
Related resources
May 3, 2007 6:34:38 AM

Quote:
But I like double cheeseburgers! :lol: 

Damn, I swear half the posts on these forums are sarcastic remarks about our favourite Doctor. He's entrenched into our minds, arghhhh! :lol: 


In the absence of any real news (slow news week), we entertain ourselves with senseless references of comedy and lunacy.....

Sorta like flipping channels and the only thing that catches our attention is an old re-run of the Three Stooges.Jack......you should be ashamed of yourself....comparing him with the 3 Stooges...They offer real entertainment. :wink:
May 3, 2007 6:46:03 AM

Quote:
In Matlab, Pro/Enginer, SolidWorks, and Apache web server benchmarks, the X2 6000+ frags the Intel QX6700 quad.

In file compression, audio encoding, the difference is around 5%. The only thing Intel qaud showed some real advantage is video encoding.

K10 will whip the crap out of Intel's double cheeseburger architecture.

Remember folks, you heard it here first! :lol: 


Please give me a link.
May 3, 2007 6:58:00 AM

Quote:
In Matlab, Pro/Enginer, SolidWorks, and Apache web server benchmarks, the X2 6000+ frags the Intel QX6700 quad.

In file compression, audio encoding, the difference is around 5%. The only thing Intel qaud showed some real advantage is video encoding.

K10 will whip the crap out of Intel's double cheeseburger architecture.

Remember folks, you heard it here first! :lol: 


Please give me a link.

K8 frags the world's fastest DT processor
May 3, 2007 7:17:33 AM

And read what you link.

Quote from the Article:

Conclusions

It's actually simple: Intel's current core is really better than that of AMD. Whether it's a fair 64-bit application, or an older 32-bit one; whether it's multi-way (multi-core) optimized, or is single-threaded classics. In almost every situation Intel Core 2 outperforms old AMD K8 even in its DDR2 modification. And this is so natural: a new core beats an old one anyway. On the other hand, this doesn't mean the show is over. One company just released new-core processors slightly earlier than the other. We've seen that before many times. Those who need the best performance here and now should select the current leader. And the followers of certain vendors may wait a bit all right, until it acts in return. And judging by our experience, we are sure AMD is bound to act...
May 3, 2007 7:18:38 AM

Please share with us what you are on. :p 
May 3, 2007 7:19:02 AM

Quote:
actually i just finished reading the whole article and even with the early synthetic benches the amd part is blown away. this OP is high or something


I think some of you missed the joke. :wink:
May 3, 2007 7:21:08 AM

YES!!! The E4300 beats both the 6700 quad and AMD 6000+ as far as the best in energy consumption...

:oops:  . o O (sorry)
May 3, 2007 7:25:11 AM

Quote:
YES!!! The E4300 beats both the 6700 quad and AMD 6000+ as far as the best in energy consumption...

:oops:  . o O (sorry)

nah... that would probably be one of our beloved PhD arguments if Penryn completely annihilate K8 (given K10 has not been released, which is highly unlikely).

Dr. Phd: "as you can see here, even the newest generation Intel processor, armed with 45nm and EIST, still fragged by a X2 3600+ in idle power. Thus it can be easily concluded that Penryn is still inferior than K8"

ok... i can really see him posting that up...
May 3, 2007 7:28:40 AM

Quote:
:? needs concurrent benches to validate it :? thats some significant scoring by comparison. but how real world is it? the gaming benches look skewed. :?

well the point of this benchmark was to use "new calculating method" to assess performance between processors. the numbers may look a little weird to most of you guys.

but the point of this thread is to conclude that K8 does indeed frag Core 2 in CAD applications and web server application. Thus, according to the doctor, we can conclude that K8 is indeed superior than Core 2, even if Core 2 was released 2~3 years after K8.
May 3, 2007 7:40:50 AM

Quote:
It's actually simple: Intel's current core is really better than that of AMD. Whether it's a fair 64-bit application, or an older 32-bit one; whether it's multi-way (multi-core) optimized, or is single-threaded classics. In almost every situation Intel Core 2 outperforms old AMD K8 even in its DDR2 modification. And this is so natural: a new core beats an old one anyway. On the other hand, this doesn't mean the show is over. One company just released new-core processors slightly earlier than the other. We've seen that before many times. Those who need the best performance here and now should select the current leader. And the followers of certain vendors may wait a bit all right, until it acts in return. And judging by our experience, we are sure AMD is bound to act...


Gotta love that title eh? My favorite part was the fact AMD lost pretty much every single benchmark, yet the title implies amd "frags" intel quadcore.

On a side note, can I submit my severance pay for the time I just wasted in my every important life reading that? :p 
May 3, 2007 7:58:13 AM

11 points is a Frag? And another quote

Excluded I/O scores from SPEC tests for Maya, Pro/ENGINEER, and SolidWorks, as they only reflect disk subsystem performance. We are naturally not interested in these from the angle of CPUs benchmarking. While these I/O scores will be added to the detailed report (Microsoft Excel format), they won't be considered in total score.

Those are the CAD/CAE test. I wouldn't call it anything a frag if excluded from the final scores.
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2007 8:11:41 AM

The only thing that the X26000+ frags the QX6700 in is the price.
May 3, 2007 8:23:08 AM

Quote:
But I like double cheeseburgers! :lol: 

Damn, I swear half the posts on these forums are sarcastic remarks about our favourite Doctor. He's entrenched into our minds, arghhhh! :lol: 

I thought I was your favorite Doctor? :lol: 
This forum is too silly to be taken seriously.
May 3, 2007 8:23:58 AM

Quote:
uh ok are you serious?
we already know how to measure what we want
if amd wants to measure crap we dont care about then they can have fun doing that.

sorry...

i guess i gotta work on my sarcasm.. :oops:  :oops: 
May 3, 2007 9:42:03 AM

Who the fuck runs apache on windows. Still, AMD barely won any and the power consumption was less on a Qcore than a dual core 8O

Edit: 64bit windows?
May 3, 2007 10:53:56 AM



Look like on that one the 6600 is better
May 3, 2007 11:31:00 AM

Quote:
Who the **** runs apache on windows. Still, AMD barely won any and the power consumption was less on a Qcore than a dual core 8O

Edit: 64bit windows?


Lol, the ones who need PHP an ASP mix on the same server and those aren't few.
May 3, 2007 12:33:54 PM

It's official: my coffee mug has the best power consumption vs. my monitor.
May 3, 2007 12:41:34 PM

Quote:
It's official: my coffee mug has the best power consumption vs. my monitor.


Ow rly!?! You oc your monitor?

I just oc my coffee in the morning, and is realy hot!... for about ten min then the temp drops.

If i want more perf for my job the i raise the sugar level about 1.5 spons and oc more ... on air!
May 3, 2007 1:17:11 PM

It's official: Mandrake frags THG Forum with idiotic post.
May 3, 2007 1:24:48 PM

Quote:
In Matlab, Pro/Enginer, SolidWorks, and Apache web server benchmarks, the X2 6000+ frags the Intel QX6700 quad.

In file compression, audio encoding, the difference is around 5%. The only thing Intel qaud showed some real advantage is video encoding.

K10 will whip the crap out of Intel's double cheeseburger architecture.

Remember folks, you heard it here first! :lol: 


If this is true, good for you for your next home server.

The thing is that I don't much use Apache Web Server at home, but encode a crap load of video.

I guess my next cpu will still be Core2Quad over A64X2. :twisted:

We'll see about BARCELONA when we all have numbers, until then this is only wind. You know, everybody know it's there but nobody can touch it. :lol: 
May 3, 2007 1:33:22 PM

Quote:
In Matlab, Pro/Enginer, SolidWorks, and Apache web server benchmarks, the X2 6000+ frags the Intel QX6700 quad.

In file compression, audio encoding, the difference is around 5%. The only thing Intel qaud showed some real advantage is video encoding.

K10 will whip the crap out of Intel's double cheeseburger architecture.

Remember folks, you heard it here first! :lol: 


If this is true, good for you for your next home server.

The thing is that I don't much use Apache Web Server at home, but encode a crap load of video.

I guess my next cpu will still be Core2Quad over A64X2. :twisted:

We'll see about BARCELONA when we all have numbers, until then this is only wind. You know, everybody know it's there but nobody can touch it. :lol: Yeah, someone broke wind... :x :x
May 3, 2007 2:33:07 PM

FLASH NEWS!!!!

FX-74 in 4x4 outperforms QX6700 in video encoding by 37%.

Quote:
Giant said..
Core 2 Quad Q6600 frags FX-74 4x4 setup. Yes. One 2.4Ghz CPU from Intel frags two 3Ghz CPUs from AMD. 4x4 CPUs


Actually, in Video Encoding FX-74 frags intel QX6700

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2065499,00.a...

From the benchmark above,

QX6700 -> DIVX Video encoding = 100 seconds
However, if you want to encode more than one video for example 2 DIVX videos, therefore you will waste about 200 seconds

FX-74 -> DIVX Video encoding = 126 seconds
But, with AMD FX-74, you can perform multiple tasks at the same time.
So, you will get only 126~130 seconds to encode 2 DIVX videos at the same time

Conclusion,
In hardcore videos encoding benchmark, FX-74 is 37% faster compare to Intel QX6700.

EDIT: Link updated, so it will jump directly to the video benchmark.
May 3, 2007 2:35:32 PM

Well, let them buy the AMD chips. SOMEONE hast to buy them or we won't have the competition. He's doing us a favor! And wasting his life in the process, what more can you ask for?

God bless you, Sharidork. Erm... Sharikork.... Whatever.
May 3, 2007 2:53:59 PM

Quote:
Who the **** runs apache on windows.


Heh...I do.

Can never get Apache installed on Linux... My sanity and available time usually runs out before I can get Apache installed properly on Linux. That may change though in a little bit. I DO want Apache on Linux...
May 3, 2007 2:59:30 PM

Depends on who you play with.
May 3, 2007 3:15:00 PM

Quote:
In Matlab, Pro/Enginer, SolidWorks, and Apache web server benchmarks, the X2 6000+ frags the Intel QX6700 quad.

In file compression, audio encoding, the difference is around 5%. The only thing Intel qaud showed some real advantage is video encoding.

K10 will whip the crap out of Intel's double cheeseburger architecture.

Remember folks, you heard it here first! :lol: 


Please give me a link.

K8 frags the world's fastest DT processor

Doesn't that prove Intel's CPU is faster?
May 3, 2007 3:26:49 PM

Now there's a coherent response...

If it's meant to deride my technical abilities, well, it isn't very effective...about as effective as the source commercial. LOL.

Anyhow, I don't have the attention span required to wade through the alphabet soup that is Linux most days. How in the HECK is anyone supposed to get anything done when you install one alphabet soup package and then find out you need TWO more to make it work...then another one or two to make THOSE work...gods. Linux is a mess.

EDIT: Though my brother in law recently gave me BSD 4.0. It's solved at least the stability issues I was having with Linux so as soon as I clear out some space on my network I'll be able to maybe give it a try.
May 3, 2007 3:33:29 PM

I read somewhere that Sharidouche's blog is just a social experiement - some college student posting the sort of mindless nonsense he does just to study how rabidly fanboi's will defend their respective products...still doesn't make him any less of a wank...
May 3, 2007 3:34:27 PM

Quote:
But I like double cheeseburgers! :lol: 

Damn, I swear half the posts on these forums are sarcastic remarks about our favourite Doctor. He's entrenched into our minds, arghhhh! :lol: 

I thought I was your favorite Doctor? :lol: 
This forum is too silly to be taken seriously.

Yeah. I end up either bored with endless fanboy stuff from people who think someone else is the fanboy (psychological projection), or else just slightly funny stuff (to me) which was not meant as a joke or self-satire, but comes across that way finally. Even the constant witch hunts (for "fanboys") aren't even distressing in the end, since they are comical actually -- how seriously can you take someone that needs to find a demon and denounce him, when the subject matter is computer chips. Now *that* is funny.


But...ya got nice link finding to interesting stuff elsewhere, so I come back to read the links.
May 3, 2007 3:37:41 PM

LOL! Maybe I should have [/sarcasm] ?
May 3, 2007 3:50:32 PM

I found the link to his benches.

May 3, 2007 5:39:26 PM

Quote:
I found the link to his benches.



This proves everything!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2007 6:20:13 PM

genius
May 3, 2007 6:37:26 PM

Yeah, it says in the corner they are real so it's probably true.

I don't remember what OS I was using for the benches though.
May 3, 2007 7:20:26 PM

Quote:
I found the link to his benches.



That had me in stitches at work! :lol: 
May 3, 2007 7:30:08 PM

Quote:
I found the link to his benches.



There is no scale or info on that graph!!! That is probably encoding time and intel one. Either that or it is zoomed in on the end of the graphs and only represents a <1% difference in performance. :cry: 
May 3, 2007 8:38:49 PM

It is actually the very tip of the graphs. I made the graphs in a really high tech program using eight 22" widescreen monitors, but I knew if I posted it at native resolution, your puny Intel machines couldnt handle the size and would crash. So I cropped it for ya.
May 3, 2007 9:29:04 PM

A reply from one of Sharidouche's followers:

Quote:
So AMD's 6.0 GHZ (2 X 3.0GHz), STILL kicks Intel's 10.64GHz (4 X 2.66GHz) in some tests.


Idiot.
May 4, 2007 12:42:22 AM

Quote:
It is actually the very tip of the graphs. I made the graphs in a really high tech program using eight 22" widescreen monitors, but I knew if I posted it at native resolution, your puny Intel machines couldnt handle the size and would crash. So I cropped it for ya.


And I bet anyone trying to view the full size graphs on an Intel based laptop would have an EXPLOSION on their hands due to overheating Intel CPUs. :lol: 
May 4, 2007 1:15:46 AM

wow- I know people that have worked for AMD and they were not even that much of a fanboi-
this thread is so comical I can't even come up with a flame that is worthy on this "i luuv amd thread"
Here's a real test buy a few K of those GREAT K8's and build some rigs and put em up on ebay and see how long they sit. I'll build a few more C2D rigs and see how long they sit- now thats a real benchie-

bwhahahahahahahaahah

And no I am not really an intel fanboi- i owned an amd rig before i graduated college and got a real job, thus i can afford a real rig..hehe- really the amd rig was pretty good as well for ut's time.
May 4, 2007 1:50:01 AM

the 6000+ won those benches cause they rely on clockspeed, run those benches on a X6800 and i bet it flips back to intel or OC the quad
May 4, 2007 2:15:39 AM

Quote:
Yes... those particular benches were singlethreaded, FPU heavy apps against a clock speed that is a deficit.... not an unexpected result. Though, as our good doctor typically does, picks the corn out of crap and generalizes it to a false conclusion.... no amount of pshycological treatment will help him.


Exactly. He picks tests that don't take advantage of the four cores of the C2Q and then claims that Intel's quad core can't scale properly. :lol: 
May 4, 2007 2:27:42 AM

Quote:
Yes... those particular benches were singlethreaded, FPU heavy apps against a clock speed that is a deficit.... not an unexpected result. Though, as our good doctor typically does, picks the corn out of crap and generalizes it to a false conclusion.... no amount of pshycological treatment will help him.


Exactly. He picks tests that don't take advantage of the four cores of the C2Q and then claims that Intel's quad core can't scale properly. :lol: 

The funniest thing was when he said the X2 3600+ is only 10% slower than the QX6700 in GPU bound single threaded gaming. :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
May 4, 2007 2:34:57 AM

Don't forget gaming will be 90% faster on an AMD platform. :lol: 

Quote:


I predict that 3D gaming will be 90% faster on AMD platform. The R600 is only optmized for AMD and that gives a 50% lead.
May 4, 2007 2:45:00 AM

Quote:
It is actually the very tip of the graphs. I made the graphs in a really high tech program using eight 22" widescreen monitors, but I knew if I posted it at native resolution, your puny Intel machines couldnt handle the size and would crash. So I cropped it for ya.


And I bet anyone trying to view the full size graphs on an Intel based laptop would have an EXPLOSION on their hands due to overheating Intel CPUs. :lol: 

Now your getting the idea!
!