FadingTheory
I Rule You
- Messages
- 543
And that 3.8 GHz Pentium will thump the 3200+ in applications with hyperthreading.
I agree with you for the most part, except AMD do make use of multitasking. the Athlon 64's are not for multitasking, but the Opterons, and the Athlon MP's (the MP's were the server processor alongside Athlon XP's) do. even without dual cores, they do a good job of multitasking especially the 8xx series Opterons which emulate 8 CPU'sFadingTheory said:To PC_Boy:
?
You just made a broken post.
First of all, it is entirely too early to say dual opterons will 'rape' anything. Unless I'm missing a load of benchmarks, it hasn't been completely documented.
Second, all of the CPU makers are behind. Intel lacks an onboard memory controller (Hyper-transport) and AMD lacks the mult-threading technology (hyper-threading). So, no ones really up to date. untill both companies get back to having the same options, and simply going for a race of speed, no one will be on top in this aspect.
Second, its unfar to to judge an entire line up by its heavy weight. You can say an AMD FX whomps a P4 3.7EE, but but you can't conlude that everything else will end up the same.
Example: an AMD 3000+ is named just that for a reason: its runs similiar to a P4 3.0 GHz. Each has its strengths.
And if Intel was so 'retarded,' then wouldn't everyone own an AMD?