Benchmark Results: Productivity
3D Studio Max is the second professional application to prove the value of added cores, handing October’s $1,500 system a huge lead over the current $1,250 PC. Once again the $625 gamer takes a similarly-impressive lead over October’s $500 configuration.
While it’s used by many professionals, Adobe Photoshop acts like a consumer-level application by ignoring the added processing centers of October’s $1,500 PC and instead offering performance based on clock speed alone.
The $1,250 and $625 builds are too close for comfort in AVG virus scanning, considering the price difference. A configuration issue prevented us from showing October’s $1,500 PC results.
WinRAR results are a little more difficult to interpret, likely because they rely on several factors including hard drive performance.
Winzip gets no noticeable advantage from October’s Core 2 Quad, as the former $1,500 build is outpaced even by our current $625 PC. We also see remarkable progress over October’s $500 system.
It was explained in the Day 1 article but should have been mentioned at the lead of this one, that Core i7 wasn't ready when the site placed its order. And to build a high-end Core 2 machine after Core i7 was available was not a viable option. Since the site couldn't get a retail Core i7 on time, the high-end build was scrapped.
Thanks for the write-up. I look forward to seeing both a AMD and Intel build for the lowest price point builds in the upcoming months hopefully :)
i should have got the pentium dual core for the same price of an amd.
i was focusing too much on core2duos and thought they were too expensive compared to athlon x2's.
my x2 5000 runs at 3.1 GHz compared to pentium dual cores running at 4.2GHz with 2MB of L2 cache, 1MB more than the x2.
ultimately, pentium dual cores are core2duo's with less cache. :)