Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Tech Link (Overclock): Yonah T2500超頻2.7GHz vs Athlon 64 FX-60

Pardon the ??, I just copy/paste what is posted on an Asian website. Again, I have no idea what they are talking about there, translating the web makes my head spin. The graphs should be a universal language though.
All images are owned by that site.

From what I can pick from the bits and pieces of English words there (via poor translation), they pit the new Intel® Core™ Duo Processor against an AMD* FX-60. They seem to have used an AOpen motherboard based on the i975X chipset, and ran a bunch of benchmarks, ranging from the usual SuperPi, SiSoft Sandra, PCMark05, and 3DMark05.

Do keep in mind, that the battle between I vs A is Ghz vs PR. AMD A64 FX-60 is slated to be rebadged as an AMD X2 5000+ on Socket M2 in mid of 2006 as posted in my old Blog entry.
So with a little bit of substitution, the face-off between Intel® Core™ Duo T2500 vs AMD* A64 FX-60 is equal to Intel® 2.0Ghz vs AMD* 5000+. Since they are both Dual Core, both mention of DC is cancelled out. Also, in the spirit of the old way of comparison, price between the two shouldn't be discussed (even if the other camp has always been touting they get better performance for lower price, *duh* *duh*, $1,000.00+ is cheap?), after all, those who remain on the cheap use the Pr0n CPU. On the other hand, the Intel® Core™ Duo, like all Intel® that isn't a Celeron, is an uber enthusiast beast.

As proven with the Banias, and Dothan core integrated memory controller isn't necessary to reach uber performance. Dropping the Intel® Pentium® !!! Timna core Processor (which, contrary to other Fanboys' and expert-wannabe-websites beliefs), this is even an earlier processor that has an integrated memory controller (which the current AMD* processor has). Inducing too much things on the processor die severely impacts succesful yields, since many components tend to fail. High failure rates (aka low yields) will lead to high-priced processor (now you don't have to wonder why the other processor isn't ramping just as fast and why they are even more pricier than Intel®'s offerings). The lesser components that can fail, then the better yield that can be produced, and high yields = lower priced processor (aka Intel® Pentium® D 820 and 920 and other mainstream processors).

Enough with FanBoyism for now, and do let me know if you happen to understand what they are discussing over the Chinese/Japanese/Korean land.


No comments: