Difference in Intel/AMD

[LeftEyeBlind]

Alright, i see.

 

[phucng_10]

I don't think you get what vernong was trying to state.

 

[westside4live]

Howdy.

I was checking out the requirements for some games and I noticed this

I was curious as to what that ment, I always figured a 2.8 was a 2.8 (only lately have I realized thats just not how it works anymore) ...can someone explain?

Single core AMD 3000 is more powerfull than an intel 2.8ghz.
The reason is that AMD has a higher FSB,and the support of hypertransport,which have a great impact on the processor's performance.
Single cores-AMD is more powerfull,and cheaper
Dual cores- Intel is way more powerfull,as the core 2 duo can swipe the X2 in all angles
Quad cores- Intel(for now),as AMD are still working on their opterons after a massive failure.
Future seems bad for AMD...never thought it would happen,lol

 

[LeftEyeBlind]

So, let me see...

An AMD 3600+ (single core) is not equal to a 3.6GHz, the 3600+ is just a model number... but a single core amd 2.8 would run faster than an intel 2.8 because they're built completely different? You can't compare GHz between the two companies.. And AMD has better performance at the single core level, but for now intel has the better chips at a dual core level?

 

[veg1992]

So, let me see...

An AMD 3600+ (single core) is not equal to a 3.6GHz, the 3600+ is just a model number... but a single core amd 2.8 would run faster than an intel 2.8 because they're built completely different? You can't compare GHz between the two companies.. And AMD has better performance at the single core level, but for now intel has the better chips at a dual core level?

yes... and quad-core... the Intel Extreme Editions beat the quad-fx.. but amd and Intel will be pulling out some new processors soon.....

 

[Apokalipse]

Single core AMD 3000 is more powerfull than an intel 2.8ghz.
The reason is that AMD has a higher FSB,and the support of hypertransport,which have a great impact on the processor's performance.

Actually, it's a lot more to do with the 12-stage pipelines (lower is better) that can process 3 IPC (higher is better). The Pentium 4's had a 31 stage pipeline that could only process 2 IPC.
the HyperTransport bus does make a difference, but not as much.

Single cores-AMD is more powerfull,and cheaper
Dual cores- Intel is way more powerfull,as the core 2 duo can swipe the X2 in all angles

depends which dual core you're talking about.
Pentium D's were terrible.
AMD's 4600+ > E6300
AMD's 6000+ is roughly equal to an E6600 at stock
E6750 will generally perform better than AMD's CPU's
Q6800 will perform better than AMD's CPU's (but costs far too much)

AMD's upcoming K10 processors will increase their IPC to 4, their FPU's to 128-bit, their HTT bus up to 4GHZ, add 2MB L3 cache, put all four cores on one die sharing the L3 cache, vastly improve the caching and prefetching system, add out of order execution, can skip L3 and L2 cache entirely, and generally get instructions to the core faster.

Quad cores- Intel(for now),as AMD are still working on their opterons after a massive failure.

What failure?
Opterons stole a lot of market share from Xeons.

Future seems bad for AMD...never thought it would happen,lol

see above.