OT: Cpu review conclusion

I copied this from the end of a review article on cpu's for anyone who is interested.

seen here:

formatting link

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Let's start by talking about the Athlon 64 X2 4200+. This CPU generally offers better performance than its direct competitor from Intel, the Pentium D 840. Most notably, the X2 4200+ doesn't share the Pentium D's relatively weak performance in single-threaded tasks like our 3D gaming benchmarks. The Athlon 64 X2 4200+ also consumes less power, at the system level, than the Pentium D 840-just a little bit at idle (even without Cool'n'Quiet) but over 100W under load. That's a very potent combo, all told. In fact, the X2 4200+ frequently outperforms the Pentium Extreme Edition 840, which costs nearly twice as much. Thanks to its dual-core config, the X2 4200+ also embarrasses some expensive single-core processors, like the Athlon 64 FX-55 and the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition

3.73GHz. Personally, I don't think there's any reason to pay any more for a CPU than the $531 that AMD will be asking for the Athlon 64 X2 4200+.

If you must pay more for some reason, the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ will give you the best all-around performance we've ever seen from a "single" CPU. The X2 4800+ beats out the Pentium Extreme Edition 840 virtually across the board, even in tests that use four threads to take best advantage of the Extreme Edition 840's Hyper-Threading capabilities. The difference becomes even more pronounced in single-threaded applications, including games, where the Pentium XE 840 is near the bottom of the pack and the X2 4800+ is constantly near the top. The X2

4800+ also consumes considerably less power, both at idle and under load.

The X2 4800+ gives up 200MHz to its fastest single-core competitor, the Athlon 64 FX-55, but gains most of the performance back in single-threaded apps thanks to AMD's latest round of core enhancements, included in the X2 chips. The X2 4800+ also matches the Opteron 152 in many cases thanks to Socket 939's faster memory subsystem. Remarkably, our test system consumes the same amount of power under load with an X2

4800+ in its socket as it does with an Athlon 64 FX-55, even though the X2 is running two rendering threads and doing nearly twice the work. Amazing.

There's not much to complain about here, but that won't stop me from trying. I would like to see AMD extend the X2 line down two more notches by offering a couple of Athlon 64 X2 variants at 2GHz clock speeds and lower prices. I realize that by asking for this, I may sound like a bit of a freeloader or something, but hey-Intel's doing it. No, the performance picture for Intel's dual-core chips isn't quite so rosy, but the lower-end Pentium D models will make the sometimes-substantial benefits of dual-core CPU technology more widely accessible. If AMD doesn't follow suit, lots of folks will be forced to choose between one fast AMD core or two relatively slower Intel cores. I'm not so sure I won't end up recommending the latter more often than the former.

Beyond that, the giant question looming over the Athlon 64 X2 is about availability, as in, "When can I get one?" Let's hope the answer is sooner rather than later, because these things are sweet.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Reply to
Zander
Loading thread data ...

Thanks for posting this.

What are the real differences between the Athlon and the Opteron? Is it akin to the Pentium/Xeon?

Reply to
matt

Reply to
haulin79

Also, Opteron 2xx and 8xx series support multiple chip / motherboard. Opteron 1xx and all Athlon64 support only one chip (which may be single or dual core).

Reply to
Dale Dunn

I would not rule out the next major generation of Intel chips as ones which will pull the Rabbit or Genie out of the hat/bottle.

Some speculation on line regarding the effect of Transmeta's work, the purchase of a small company in Russia last year and other work Intel is known to be involved in may lead to something of a quantum jump in capabilities.

Speculation is that this may be one of the reasons Steve Jobs pushed the envelope by committing to Intel. Steve does NOT ignore reality. I can believe he only runs with winners, as shown by his track record.

Reply to
Bonobo

That new architecture is something like a year out, right? Anyhow, this new architecture hasn't even been formally announced by Intel yet (from what I hear). Speculation is that it will be a radical change in Intel design. We'll have to wait and see. Intel is certainly capable of doing better than the P4's Netburst architecture.

Reply to
Dale Dunn

Bonbo,

Don't bet on it. The last time they said this they came up with a white elephant (Itanium)

At this point in time AMD just has smarter people, period. Intel relies to much on marketing spin, and their captive accounts (like Dell). AMD's only choice has been to just make a better product. This will continue regardless of what Intel does.

Regards

Mark

Reply to
Mark Mossberg

It is just guesses, but there are some bits and pieces of facts insterspersed in Intel's acquisitions. It indeed would take a CPU logic designer to really sort through the techniques being discussed and have half a chance of guessing the next step with some accuracy.

What is obvious to an End User, though, is that Intel is under a performance and power gun that they know they must win to stay dominant.

The world is moving to ever smaller devices in the range all the way from Cell/PDA type devices to Laptops, and these are consuming a larger % of the market as time goes on, along with the new uses found for these devices. Intel can't let this market just slip away, as it can't let it desktop market go South.

The advances on getting more cycles out of fewer watts will continue, and the real winner of the CPU wars will be...The End User!

Reply to
Bonobo

After talking to a mfg rep, the Opteron is designed to be used in a dual config, and when it is used as a single processor, there are some bandwidth and memory access features which are disabled. So, if you're going to get an Opteron, you're better with duals.

On the other hand, for a primarily SW box (assuming SW is and stays predominantly single threaded), the Athlon 64 FX is probably the best choice. I just ordered one from Boxx, AMD 64FX57, 3Gb RAM dual channel, PCIe Quadro FX 3450 256 Mb (only one for now, but SLi capable).

Matt

Reply to
matt

Seems like one is the way to go right now. I didn't keep the link, but a recent article pointed out that two SLI boards are sometimes slower than one and offered only a couple of percent increase on the SolidWorks benchmark that they ran. Sounded like it was going to be a while before NVIDIA could get their act together on the issues.

Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"

Reply to
Jerry Steiger

So I'm confused, what's the difference between the athalon 64 x2 4800+ and the athalon 64 fx57? Price or performance or both????

Reply to
Zander

The FX57 is probably the fasted single-core CPU you can get right now, especially for SW. It is probably faster than the fastest Opteron 1xx chip.

The X2 chips are dual core, and not clocked as fast as the FX chips. What to choose depends on what you plan to do. Rendering and analysis are often multi-threaded, and can take advantage of the dual cores. Most of SW can't. If you are dedicated to just SW, then the FX is the clear choice. If you do a lot of intense multi-tasking, or can take significant advantage of multi- threading, you might consider the dual core chips. One will be faster than the other, depending on what you're doing.

Reply to
Dale Dunn

Thanks Dale,

It's hard to stay current when work keeps you focused on drawing. I just did a little research at anandtech and the majority opinion there (of gamers mainly) is to go for the x2, mostly anecdotal (I'm sure I spelled that wrong). Apparently a lot of new games in the pipe are being written to take advantage of dual core processors.... who knew? (I don't play games) Also, in the link I posted at the top of the thread the x2 4800+ wins nearly everything but the fx in that roundup is a 55 not a 57.

This is all hindsight for me since I ordered the x2 a few days ago. I'm sure I'll be happy regardless as I'm coming from a p4 3.2

Zander

Reply to
Zander

When all is said and done it is the actual measurable performance that counts. Pete just got such a system online and tested both 64 bit and

32 bit performance. It is on par with my AMD 64 FX53 with SW. Since he is running 2005 his system is probably faster than mine which is running 2004 because his times are on part with my 2004 times. He also found that 64 bit mode runs a bit slower than 32 bit mode.

SW simply doesn't take advantage of the dual core for parts. Drawings is another thing and it would be interesting to see if not only dual core but a 2 CPU dual core Opteron would take advantage of all four cores available. It is also likely that CosmosWorks and FloWorks will take advantage of the dual core architecture. But the workhorse of SW won't yet do it.

formatting link

Reply to
TOP

That will be a nice change. The X2 will serve you well, I'm sure. Hopefully, SW is working on finding ways to take advantage of dual cores. Because they're coming, and in a hurry. With the X2, you'll be ready to take advantage. I'd like to have one myself, actually.

Reply to
Dale Dunn

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.