Better performance is the one attribute that allows Intel to charge several times as much for its processors, yet we’re certain we won’t get that amount of additional performance from them.
Let's check out the 2010 version of SiSoft's Sandra suite for some extra illumination of each configuration's raw capabilities.
A closer look at Sandra shows that when it comes to basic performance, Intel has a 50% to 100% lead, depending on the test. We’re certain that many buyers will feel guilty for paying 4.5x more for Intel's six-core architecture versus AMD's, but that’s often the case when comparing high-end to mainstream components.
Intel uses 50% more memory channels to help it achieve a 52% bandwidth advantage over AMD, when comparing the stock DDR3-1333 CAS 9 settings of our newer and older $2000 systems. Yet, the older system’s cheaper processor left room in the budget for DRAM with additional headroom, and the difference narrows to 27%.
- The Better Way To Spend $2000?
- Processor And CPU Cooling
- Motherboard And Graphics
- Case And Power
- Memory And Storage
- Hardware Installation
- Test Settings
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark And PCMark
- Benchmark Results: SiSoftware Sandra
- Benchmark Results: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
- Benchmark Results: Crysis
- Benchmark Results: DiRT 2
- Benchmark Results: S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call Of Pripyat
- Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Power And Efficiency
- Value Conclusion