 |
|
Who's Online
|
There are currently 127 people and 0 DV-member(s) online.
|
|
|
|
|
RSS
|
 |
|
|
|
|  |
AMD Quad FX slower and more power hungry than Intel Kentsfield
|  |
Posted on Thursday, November 30 2006 @ 15:40:15 CET by Thomas De Maesschalck |
AMD released its Quad FX processors today, The Inq analyzed one of the early reviews and found out this processor gets crushed by Intel's Kentsfield processors:
Test scores reveal that Quad FX manages to achieve equal performance to Core 2 Extreme QX6700 in SiSoft Sandra 2007 and PCMark05 and narrowly edged it in memory tests: both L1, L2 and system memory latency are better on QuadFX than on Kentsfield, but that's nothing new.
However, taking a look into media encoding shows that QuadFather just gets crushed by Kentsfield, especially in MPEG-2 8Mbit reproduction. But the worst result for AMD is a look into power consumption and performance per watt. AMD system consumes far more power than Intel, sometimes even double that Kentsfield setup.
|
| |
|
|
| | The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
|
|
|
|