techreport.com — The first wave of Athlon 64 X2 6000+ reviews focused on performance in Windows XP with 32-bit apps, but what happens when AMD's latest faces multi-threaded 64-bit apps in Vista x64? The Tech Report has the answer, complete with a unique take on power consumption testing that actually measures the energy used to complete a task.
Feb 21, 2007 View in Crawl 4
timmertcFeb 21, 2007
Intel has 10 times the budget of AMD, I would hope they could finally be competitive. Considering AMD's size, they've done a fantastic job of not only keeping up with Intel, but mopping the floor with them for quite some time. Intel has finally taken the lead back, but not by a lot.AMD processors have generally been 20-40% slower in clock speed, but ahead in actual computing power. Yes, this has changed with the Core 2 Duo, but, as was said, AMD hasn't released its newest technology yet, while Intel's newest technology only marginally beats AMD's 3-year-old technology. Pretty impressive on AMD's part!
rtiniFeb 21, 2007
I hope AMD catches up soon, just to keep the pressure on Intel.At this rate, Intel won't have to do anything but come out with slightly speed-bumped versions of Core 2 Duos for the next year to stay ahead.
lateralusFeb 21, 2007
Hooray for competition. If AMD hadn't pushed the envelope 3yrs ago, you Intel fanboiz would be a buz over the latest Intel "Aliens" commercial during the SuperBowl. That said, the ball's in your court AMD. Impress us.
chetanwFeb 21, 2007
Well said, lateralus!!
Closed AccountFeb 21, 2007
Thanks for reading the article. From the very end:"AMD has made some progress on this front, incidentally; the Athlon 64 FX-62 was also a 2.8GHz part, but had a 125W rating. And all of AMD's 65nm CPUs to date have a rating of 65W or less. The progress at 90nm probably helped open up the possibility of 3GHz parts like the X2 6000+.)"So yeah, they're using the 65nm process already, but it's not 'across the board' yet.
tenoqFeb 21, 2007
Which will be piss-easy for Intel, given how overclockable the Core 2 processors are. Quite a few people are achieving 50% overclocks on stock volts, and the majority will easily get 30% on stock volts. Mind you, even without changing voltage, the heat output of the Core 2 scales quickly as your increase the clock speeds.I too hope AMD can stay in the race. Competition is the best thing for us, the consumers!
babywookieFeb 22, 2007
I'm not sure I understand you... Are you suggesting that I should have bought something like an A64 X2 4400+ and gotten two more GB of RAM, instead of this FX-60?FX-60 might be top-of-the-line when it comes to Socket 939 CPUs, but it's not this expensive these days. As I said, I only paid $280 (including shipping), which is only about $100 more than a Socket 939 4400+, which is sold out everywhere, by the way.So, I don't see how this purchase was "silly".
Closed AccountFeb 22, 2007
AMDs still have the better architecture (low latency, integrated memory controller, Hypertransport bus). I'm sticking with my A64 X2 5600+ as it performs exceptionally well and the AM2 socket will likely have a longer lifespan than LGA 775.
Closed AccountFeb 22, 2007
From the article: "Performance-wise, the X2 6000+ is slower overall than the Core 2 Duo E6700"
svpirateFeb 22, 2007
I'm afraid I've grown out of the raw horsepower requirement, I'm onto the power vs. efficiency break-over on my machines. My P4 PC sucks (it's not terribly fast and throws out tons of heat) and is going to get a Core2 Duo in it before long. My Mac Pro is totally the opposite. I generates very little heat or noise and is... well... FAST. This comparison proves that although the differences head to head are marginal between the Core2 Duo E6700 and the A64 X2 6000+, if you take into consideration the reduction in heat, and subsequently noise a Core2 Duo machine is slightly fast *and* a lot nicer to sit next to when gaming. It's a no brainer at this point int time I'm afraid.Yet I *still* have Fanboys hammering me everywhere for buying Intel (yes, okay it's a Mac, but it's still Intel Core2 tech, and the Core2 Extreme and Xeon are very similar anyway), and also recommending others to buy Intel over AMD. I guess all fanboys are the same - can't accept bare facts over their zealoted opinions...