Question. The single core AMDs were simply spanking the Intel counterparts for gaming not too long ago. I think that this was in part to their hypertransport design and other chip diffs.
Knowing that the clock speeds are not really comparable, my 2.4Ghz Athlon 64 4000+ desktop simply destroyed my 3.0Ghz P4 laptop. I know that there are some inherent differences b/w laptops and desktops but it wasn't even a battle. My 2.4 AMD, for example, finished a process in about 55 minutes that required over three hours to run on the P4 laptop.
My question is this. Do these performance differences carry over to AMD's mobile processors? In other words, does a 2.2Ghz Turion X2 (is there such a thing) run faster for *single-thread processes* than a 2.2Ghz Core Duo because of architecture differences?
I don't know that AMD didn't do its homework. I, like others, think this is just a leapfrog game, currently pitting a 500 lb. gorilla vs a chimpanzee. Here's an interesting article from elsewhere in the site in case you didn't see it: http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/08/09/rob_enderle_on_amds_a...
I like AMD's approach. They had their time in the sun for awhile. Now Intel has moved back in front. I expect an AMD response eventually. Competition is goooooood.
Yea, they can have all the "strategy" they want, but the bottom line is that AMD has always had heat issues, and I already have in my hand a T7600 2.33 Core 2 Duo, and I have yet to see a viable Turion X2 with a decent GPu to build a system off of.
AMD burned the system integrators, and their channel partners on this one. I certainly am not going to soon forget. Had I not moved away from offering only AMD and no Intel systems I would be out of business right now waiting on AMD's "strategy" to come to fruition.
In war the first casualty is the plan. There is NOTHING in AMD's roadmap that shows me they did their homework. I think the time you are seeing now is AMD trying to reverse engineer the Core 2 Duo to figure out what to do next.
I certainly am not interested in a QUAD CORE AMD chip, what, do they think Intel won't have a quad core? Or their idiotic plan to put 2 CPU's on one motherboard. Not that dual CPU's are idiotic, but moreso that they say they are going to "retain the performance crown" by having 2 X2's on a motherboard. Another brilliant plan, as if Intel can't put 2 CPU's on a board like they have had for 5 years. Furthermore that presents licencing problems with Microsoft.
I hate to kick AMD when they are down, but in this case, they brought this ass beating on themselves.
The cache for the Intel's are making a huge difference. I think AMD adds cache just for comparison shopers. They don't want someone to say, "Oh, Intel has 2 MB and AMD only had 512 Kb" AMD really doesn't need it architectually.
With the Core 2 Duo's having the 4 MB cache and whatever they have done to milk 40-45% more out of the same memory, it is no contest. I mean, i am not telling you something you don't already know. tom's Hardware had the test results where AMD's butt got kicked all the way around the block.
Core 2 Duo's aren't released in the USA yet. I have the T7400's and am testing the T7600's this week in the Executioner. They are a fair premium to a core duo, but from how AMD has handled their pricing in the past... well, let's just say they never cut anyone any deals until Intel's boot is on their neck completely.
I mean, you're talking upwards of $450 for the TL-60 2.0 Ghz, which is essentially what I am getting for the T7400 2.16 Ghz 64 bit Core 2 Duo, and the C2D will hand it an ass beating and fries and say, "Next."
Speaking of great deals, I simply can't believe that you can now pick up an Athlon 64 4000+ single core for $120 or so. That is a fantastic processor for a great price. I paid $330 earlier this year. I'm running it in my desktop and it is stellar. It's one of those chips that, considering cost for performance, is simply fantastic. Wait. Did I mention that it is fantastic?
Here's the dirty little secret with DELL, at their quarter end which just happened end of June they blow the coupons all over the world to make sales numbers. There will be another $750 off soon enough brother. Don't pay too much for a DELL.
See the post XPS vs. Inspiron before you spend too much and assume it will upgrade. Check the chipset on the DELL, I know it is hard to find on their page (if at all) but if you want to upgrade in the future you need to know it can.
Thanks for the advise/info.
Definitely don't want to pay to much... Wife only gives me so much to feed the technology addiction, have to stretch that almighty dollar and get best bang for my cheap ace bucks!