Test Setup
| System Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Hardware | Details |
| Performance Benchmarks | |
| Motherboard I | Sapphire IPC-AM3DD785G (Rev. 1.0), Chipset: AMD 785G, BIOS: (01/21/2010) |
| Motherboard II (Socket LGA1156) | Zotac H55 ITX-WiFi (Rev. 1.0), Chipset: Intel H55, BIOS: 1.3 |
| CPU AMD I | AMD Athlon II X2 240e (45 nm, 2.8 GHz, 2 x 1 MB L2 Cache, TDP 45 W, Rev. C2) |
| CPU AMD II | AMD Athlon II X2 260u (45 nm, 1.8 GHz, 2 x 1 MB L2 Cache, TDP 25 W, Rev. C2) |
| CPU AMD III | AMD Phenom II X3 705e (45 nm, 2.5 GHz, 3 x 512 KB L2 6 MB L3 Cache, TDP 65 W, Rev. C2) |
| CPU AMD IV | AMD Phenom II X4 905e (45 nm, 2.5 GHz, 4 x 512 KB L2, 6 MB L3 Cache, TDP 65 W, Rev. C2) |
| CPU Intel I | Intel Core i5-661 (32 nm, 3.33 GHz, 2 x 256 KB L2 and 4 MB L3 Cache, TDP 87 W, Rev. B1) |
| CPU Intel II | Intel Core i3-530 (32 nm, 2.93 GHz, 4 x 256 KB L2 and 4 MB L3 Cache, TDP 73 W) |
| RAM DDR3 (dual) | 2 x 2GB DDR3-1333 (OCZ3G2000LV4GK 8-8-8-24) |
| Hard Drive | Seagate Barracuda 7200.11, 500 GB (ST3500320AS), 7,200 RPM, SATA 3Gb/s, 32MB Cache |
| Power Supply | Enermax Pro82+, EPR425AWT |
| System Software & Drivers | |
| Operating System | Windows Ultimate x64 Updated on 2010-03-03 |
| Drivers and Settings | |
| Intel Chipset Drivers | Chipset Installation Utility Ver. 9.1.1.1025 |
| Intel Storage Drivers | Matrix Storage Drivers Ver. 8.9.0.1023 |
| Intel Graphics | Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 15.17 |
Benchmarks and Settings
| Audio Benchmarks and Settings | |
|---|---|
| Benchmark | Details |
| iTunes | Version: 9.0.3.15 Audio CD ("Terminator II" SE), 53 min. Convert to AAC audio format |
| Lame MP3 | Version 3.98.3 Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 min. convert WAV to MP3 audio format Command: -b 160 --nores (160 Kbps) |
| Video Benchmarks and Settings | |
| Benchmark | Details |
| Handbrake CLI | Version: 0.94 Video: Big Buck Bunny (720x480, 23.972 frames) 5 Minutes Audio: Dolby Digital, 48000 Hz, 6-channel, English to Video: AVC1 Audio1: AC3 Audio2: AAC (High Profile) |
| MainConcept Reference v2 | Version: 2.0.0.1555 MPEG-2 to H.264 MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec 28 sec. HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG-2) Audio: MPEG-2 (44.1 kHz, 2-channel, 16-bit, 224 Kbps) Codec: H.264 Pro Mode: PAL 50i (25 FPS) Profile: H.264 BD HDMV |
| Application Benchmarks and Settings | |
| Benchmark | Details |
| 7-Zip | Version 9.1 beta LZMA2 Syntax "a -t7z -r -m0=LZMA2 -mx=5" Benchmark: 2010-THG-Workload |
| WinRAR | Version 3.92 RAR Syntax "winrar a -r -m3" Benchmark: 2010-THG-Workload |
| WinZip 14 | Version 14.0 Pro (8652) WinZIP Commandline Version 3 ZIPX Syntax "-a -ez -p -r" Benchmark: 2010-THG-Workload |
| Autodesk 3ds Max 2010 | Version: 10 x64 Rendering Space Flyby Mentalray (SPECapc_3dsmax9) Frame: 248 Resolution: 1440 x 1080 |
| Adobe Photoshop CS4 (64-Bit) | Version: 11 Filtering a 16MB TIF (15000x7266) Filters: Radial Blur (Amount: 10; Method: zoom; Quality: good) Shape Blur (Radius: 46 px; custom shape: Trademark sysmbol) Median (Radius: 1px) Polar Coordinates (Rectangular to Polar) |
| Adobe Acrobat 9 Professional | Version: 9.0.0 (Extended) == Printing Preferenced Menu == Default Settings: Standard == Adobe PDF Security - Edit Menu == Encrypt all documents (128-bit RC4) Open Password: 123 Permissions Password: 321 |
| Microsoft PowerPoint 2007 | Version: 2007 SP2 PPT to PDF Powerpoint Document (115 Pages) Adobe PDF-Printer |
| Fritz | Fritz Chess Benchmark Version 4.3.2 |
| Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings | |
| Benchmark | Details |
| 3DMark06 | Version: 1.2 Patch 1901 Default Settings |
| SiSoftware Sandra 2010 | Version: 2010.1.16.10 Processor Arithmetic, Cryptography, Memory Bandwith |
52
Comments
- 1 / 3
- Next
-
See more
Sponsored
All about Motherboards
Does the Intel graphics core offer acceleration for Flash 10.1 like the AMD?
Intel takes a lead in overall efficiency, though the AMD platform still costs less.
it htpc system, so where test for htpc - pay full hd, bd ?
So the AMD Procs are hanging with the Intel procs in power use, despite their older 45nm manufacturing process? This doesn't bode well for Intel when AMD's next generation comes out next year.
Sold an old HTPC for 90€ (cpu and mobo) and used the DDR2 sticks that got left behind.
Bought an ASUS M4A78-EM (support for 6cores) for 50€
Bought an AMD AThlon II X4 600e (2.2ghz,2mb cache L2, 45w) for 110€
And I have a quad cpu with almost as much power as my Q6600, but with 45w máx TDP.
Cheap to upgrade, efficient, and very powerfull. Couldn't choose the Intel way because I had to buy DDR3 too, and the Intel HD graphics are really bad compared to AMD's.
AMD is dead. They should just dissolve themselves instead of cutting into Intel's well deserved profits.
Anybody have any suggestions for a case and graphics card for the Zotac H55-ITX? I'm willing to pay more for performance, but I'm getting confused trying to validate which components will fit in the reduced footprint / thermal envelope. Thanks...
^--^ what are you talking about killerclick
Seriously, AMD have never been more alive since the beginning of the c2d days, they are producing fantastic chips, at great prices with tons of performance..
Intel have the lead in performance for sure, but you pay through the nose for that..
These days pretty much any decent chip..AMD or Intel rocks and is capable of most users uses.
You can thank AMD for staying in the fight and keeping Intel honest, Imagine what they could charge if there was no AMD churning out cheap good chips like they do!
And dont even get me started on the awesomeness that is the ATI division!
Intel are good, very very good, but we need AMD now more than ever and they are starting to deliver!
AMD is dead. They should just dissolve themselves instead of cutting into Intel's well deserved profits.
I feel dumber for having read your comment. I could literally feel my IQ drop a few points. They are no where near dead. Definitely not dominant in the CPU market, but they have an excellent grip in the GPU market and are still hanging with Intel. They have quite a ways to go until the are not relevant anymore.
AMD is dead. They should just dissolve themselves instead of cutting into Intel's well deserved profits.
AMD=Budget
Intel=You got cash
I don't have spare cash for the 980X but AMD offers me a good price for what I need (a good performing CPU).
Does the Intel graphics core offer acceleration for Flash 10.1 like the AMD?
Yes.
AMD is dead. They should just dissolve themselves instead of cutting into Intel's well deserved profits.
The guy's just a trolling fan boy, why bother guys?
the Intel HD graphics are really bad compared to AMD's.
Really? Evidence please.
Recent Anandtech article suggests otherwise.
For gaming, AMD integrated and Intel integrated are fairly similar; Performance is comparable and Intel is clearly working to resolve driver issues.
For HTPC, Intel has full dual steam HD decode, HD post processing, and 7.1 audio and bitstreaming DTS-HD/MA audio - the latter 2 are things AMD integrated doesn't support. And it does it all at lower system power than AMD for quiter operation.
I've been playing with replacing my full-size desktop with a mini-ITX rig, but haven't been able to find a decent single-slot video card. Best I've been able to find is a Radeon 4850. Supposedly there's more powerful cards out there, but can anyone point me to one right now?
Your CPU choice is unfair, you should pick cpus that have the same performance, or the same price, not power saving AMD and High end intel, also you did not mention 3d bechmarks, as you know any body may like to play sometime...
Very Bad Choices.
Are the graphs blurry to anyone else? It's been like that for the past few days, across several computers, so I know it's not just one.
This is another Intel fanboi article where the authors have cherrypicked low end AMD CPU's to deliberately make the Intel i3 and i5's look good.
1. Note there are no prices listed against the AMD CPU's ... wonder why? They are much cheaper ... so you would purchase a faster CPU from AMD ... and turn the tables on the review.
2. Note, the deliberate selection of a higher clocked i5 CPU against the low end CPU's.
3. Note the positive spin on all aspects of the Intel performance.
4. Note the selection of the older chipset for the AMD mobo - check out the later 8 series AMD chipsets which frankly put the Intel GPU's back into their box ... as they are clocked 200Mhz faster for a start.
Other than the complete mismatch of components it was well written.
This is another Intel fanboi article where the authors have cherrypicked low end AMD CPU's to deliberately make the Intel i3 and i5's look good.1/ Note there are no prices listed against the AMD CPU's ... wonder why? They are much cheaper ... so you would purchase a faster CPU from AMD ... and turn the tables on the review.Note, the deliberate selection of a higher clocked i5 CPU against the low end CPU's.Note the positive spin on all aspects of the Intel performance.Note the selection of the older chipset for the AMD mobo - check this out for the later 8 series AMD chipsets which frankly put the Intel GPU's back into their box. Other than the complete mismatch of components it was well written.
I couldn't agree more, but you missed how they used a lot of applications that perform better on Intel systems. I hate it when articles are skewed like this, makes you wonder why they write them at all, other than to make money.
Are the graphs blurry to anyone else? It's been like that for the past few days, across several computers, so I know it's not just one.
Your glasses. Put them on.