Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (245425)	1/4/2008 11:04:28 AM
From: wbmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: At single threaded apps where 3 cores aren't doing much, I'll agree to that (Barcelona behind faster clocked C2Ds and C2Qs). But when all four cores are heavily loaded with different tasks, it isn't a dog, but better than C2D or C2Q. Not in 3D rendering. Not in 2D image processing. Not in media encoding. C2Q beats it in all of these, which are threaded and heavily loaded applications. In fact, look at the tally of wins from the Q6600 compared to the 9600: Exhibit 1: Q6600 outperforming the 9600 in 14/15 benchmarks, and dissipating 79.1W of peak CPU power vs. 131.4W for 9900. xbitlabs.com Exhibit 2: Q6600 outperforming the 9600 in 14/15 benchmarks, and coming in at 223W system peak power vs. 252W for 9700 based system. anandtech.com Exhibit 3: Q6600 outperforming the 9600 in 27/39 benchmarks, and matching it in 6 more, and dissipating 241W of peak system power, compared to 290W for the 9600 based system. techreport.com Exhibit 4: Q6600 outperforming the 9600 in 20/24, and matching it in the other 4, while dissipating 96.0W of peak CPU power vs. 103.2W for the 9600. matbe.com