Updated CPU Charts 2008: AMD Versus Intel

Features
By
Published

Tested Processors

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Model Core L2/L3 cache Clock rate FSB / HTT Memory
Phenom X4 9950 Black Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2600 MHz 200/HT2000 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9850 Black Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2500 MHz 200/HT2000 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9850 Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2500 MHz 200/HT2000 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9750 Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2400 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9650 Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2300 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9550 Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2200 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9350e Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2000 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9150e Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 1800 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9100e Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 1800 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9700 Sample Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2400 MHz 200/HT2000 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9600 Black Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2300 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9600 Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2300 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X4 9500 Agena 512KB/2MB 4x 2200 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X3 8750 Toliman 512KB/2MB 3x 2400 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X3 8650 Toliman 512KB/2MB 3x 2300 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X3 8600 Toliman 512KB/2MB 3x 2300 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X3 8450 Toliman 512KB/2MB 3x 2100 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Phenom X3 8400 Toliman 512KB/2MB 3x 2100 MHz 200/HT1800 DDR2-1066
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Model Core L2/L3 cache Clock rate FSB / HTT Memory
Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Yorkfield XE 6144KB 4x 3200 MHz 400 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Extreme QX9650 Yorkfield XE 6144KB 4x 3000 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Quad Q9650 Yorkfield 6144KB 4x 3000 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Quad Q9550 Yorkfield 6144KB 4x 2833 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Quad Q9450 Yorkfield 6144KB 4x 2666 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E8600 Wolfdale 6144KB 2x 3333 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale 6144KB 2x 3166 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E8400 Wolfdale 6144KB 2x 3000 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E8300 Wolfdale 6144KB 2x 2833 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E8200 Wolfdale 6144KB 2x 2666 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E8190 Wolfdale 6144KB 2x 2666 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E7200 Wolfdale 3072KB 2x 2533 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Extreme QX6850 Kentsfield XE 4096KB 4x 3000 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Extreme QX6800 Kentsfield XE 4096KB 4x 2933 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Kentsfield XE 4096KB 4x 2666 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Quad Q6700 Kentsfield 4096KB 4x 2666 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 4096KB 4x 2400 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Extreme X6800 Conroe XE 4096KB 2x 2933 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 4096KB 2x 3000 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E6750 Conroe 4096KB 2x 2666 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E6550 Conroe 4096KB 2x 2333 MHz 333 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E6700 Conroe 4096KB 2x 2667 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1333
Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 4096KB 2x 2400 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe-2048 2048KB 2x 2133 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Duo E6300 Conroe-2048 2048KB 2x 1866 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Duo E6420 Conroe 4096KB 2x 2133 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Duo E6320 Conroe 4096KB 2x 1866 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Duo E6400 Allendale 2048KB 2x 2133 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Duo E6300 Allendale 2048KB 2x 1866 MHz 266 MHz DDR3-1066
Core 2 Duo E4700 Allendale 2048KB 2x 2600 MHz 200 MHz DDR3-800
The Editors of Tom's Hardware
The Editors of Tom's Hardware

Tom's Hardware is the leading destination for hardcore computer enthusiasts. We cover everything from processors to 3D printers, single-board computers, SSDs and high-end gaming rigs, empowering readers to make the most of the tech they love, keep up on the latest developments and buy the right gear. Our staff has more than 100 years of combined experience covering news, solving tech problems and reviewing components and systems.

98 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Mucke
    What about AMD Dual Cores?

    Especially the new Athlon 6500@3GHz would be interesting.

    By the way: the Intel-system uses DDR3-1333, AMD DDR2-1066; that makes some difference in the price (just like the mainboard).
    Reply
  • Ok, this is not a fair benchmark for AMD.. your testing motherboard for AMD platform costs only 140 euros and the testing top-range motherboard for Intel Platform costs 250 euros!!! To be equally tested it should be tested on P35 Chipset with DDR2 RAM.
    Reply
  • cangelini
    Yannis GROk, this is not a fair benchmark for AMD.. your testing motherboard for AMD platform costs only 140 euros and the testing top-range motherboard for Intel Platform costs 250 euros!!! To be equally tested it should be tested on P35 Chipset with DDR2 RAM.
    Yannis,

    Thank you for the feedback.

    It does not make sense to handicap the Intel platform simply because AMD's infrastructure is currently priced to compete with Intel's mid-range. This would completely eliminate the scores for higher-end configurations like Skulltrail and the Extreme Edition CPUs, providing an incomplete picture of the current processor landscape.
    Reply
  • Mucke
    It does not make sense to handicap the Intel platform simply because AMD's infrastructure is currently priced to compete with Intel's mid-range. This would completely eliminate the scores for higher-end configurations like Skulltrail and the Extreme Edition CPUs, providing an incomplete picture of the current processor landscape.

    In the final charts the details "3.33 GHz, DDR3-1333 (Wolfdale)" could be supplemented by the price for the entire system. Then it would be fair (you might even include Intels with DDR2 and Athlon X2s as well -- that would make a great list!).
    Reply
  • apaige
    The Linux OpenSSL results are completely out of whack (see http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=category&u=openssl for normal results). Intel results should be higher, and AMD results should be over *three* times higher. That's one benchmark where AMD processors have consistently shown to smoke Intel CPUs by a large margin. Something is definitely wrong with those results.

    Also, could you please give the exact command line for the LAME benchmark? And why do you keep on benchmarking it in CBR mode, even with the version bump, when all the work by its developers in recent years has essentially been on VBR mode? VBR is also highly recommended over CBR.
    Reply
  • Reynod
    It looks to me like you mismatched the mobo, ram and also cherry picked the graphics settings for the games.

    Why ... well it make the little green guys look even worse.

    Bert you don't really need to cheat on the benchmarks to prove the Intel CPU's are generally better.

    We do know that.

    Reply
  • duzcizgi
    cangeliniOne thing missing with the charts is, there's nosorting by price. Only then, your claim that test setups are fair, can hold ground.

    You have ordered the scores with fastest at the top, but what about order by price? Wouldn't it make more sense? If it's apples-apples comparison, then put apples against apples, not oranges. If it's price/performance comparison, then mention price differences also. How much both systems TCO is.
    Reply
  • sgtbaker420
    BTW Guys...Supreme Commander Forged Alliance was misspelled in your charts.
    Reply
  • wavebossa
    ReynodIt looks to me like you mismatched the mobo, ram and also cherry picked the graphics settings for the games.Why ... well it make the little green guys look even worse.Bert you don't really need to cheat on the benchmarks to prove the Intel CPU's are generally better.We do know that.
    You guys make it seem like not getting the fastest mobo and ram would make a real difference in these benchmanrks.

    If they didn't mismatch, what would you have wanted them to do? Only show the intel procs/setups that are closer in perfomance to AMD? If they did that, the Intel fans would whine about the lack of good intel setups.

    However I still believe you made a mistake. Instead of using the M3A32 for AMD, you should have used the M3A79 or another SB750 based bored due the fact that many benchmarks have already proven the SB750 dominance over its earlier counterpart.

    All in all, good article.
    Reply
  • v12v12
    Sounds like a bunch of AMD whining... blah blah "fair" this and that, AMD is inferior and everyone knows it. Hell I'm writing this on an X2 Turion, face the FACTs and stop trying to hold onto former AMDominance: AMD is toast until it completely reinvents itself, crying and whining about "fair" is a moot point. The REAL point is—for the money, Intel IS the better buy and will be for the foreseeable future (Nehalem anyone?)... the only thing stopping AMD is AMD themselves and mismanagement, which has been documented and proven. I don't like the Evil-Intel-Empire as much as the AMD-zealots, but they are proving to be the leaders of CPU technology... If AMD does have an answer for Nehalem and a reasonable (provable) road map, then we'll all benefit in price competition... Until then the whining is lame.
    Reply