Updated CPU Charts 2008: AMD Versus Intel
Tested Processors
| 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 |
| 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 |
Summary
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).
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).
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.
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!).
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.
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.
One 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.
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.
Nice charts overall though. I would have liked to see some AMD X2 thrown in there myself, since they're still being manufactured and sold.
What's the problem with the graphics settings? Both setups used the same video card, seems like a perfectly valid test to me.
I do think Tom's staff should include some lower end CPUs into the chart, since they are still on the market. Nehalem and Deneb are coming, and it should keep them busy updating the chart early next year.
Also, can we have server CPU chart please?
AMD has done well against a much larger competitor and you have to give them credit for spanking Nvidia (finally) with their new video card releases. AMD has won half of the battle and for a company that has taken on so much (video and cpu markets) they are doing a great job. Hopefully their new Deneb cpus will give a better fight than the current cpus.
Its laughable to see people post and get so riled up over a brand of cpu they use like a couple of posters above. I hope that I dont end up in the same old folks home as they do and get forced to play checkers with them because I will probably get a good fussing out and a black eye.
Nothing wrong with taking sides but its more impressionable when you do it with reasonability...
You take the 400 dollar intel chip, put it up against 200 dollar atholon chip, both dual cores, and chances are you may notice a small diffrence but was that small diffrence worth the extra 200 bucks?? Have a friend with the latest greatest intel chip, I have the atholn 6000 dual core and in the real world. Not that big of diffrence. So many factors decide your computer speed. What os your using, what programs are running in the back ground, is your computer clean of virus and spyware ? Bench marks are simply for bragging rights. Rember the real world diffrence is a diffrent story. Don't buy into the hype of people bragging about how fast there computer is. Talk is talk.
In the real world, my sub par 8600gr runs all the latest greatest games just fine including call of duty 4, and I paid 100 bucks for it a year and a half ago.
I'm looking at this chart to see for the money in my pocket right now what is the best CPU that I can buy.
If a chart is unusable for buying decisions, then what's the meaning of it?
In all other comparisons, we get the price ranges/price points of the graphics cards, hard disks, memory sticks etc. But here in this chart I don't see anything about pricing.
Please tell me, which CPU is the best one if I have $100 for CPU?