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: wbmw who wrote (255369)	8/8/2008 3:30:25 AM
From: Vattila	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Sounds like an endorsement that could work equally well for Intel's integrated graphics. I've heard it is the worst of the options. extremetech.com Many reviews have found that Intel's CPUs have the best performance at given power envelopes. How does cost compare? The 45W Athlon X2 4850 (2.5GHz) is listed at just £49 (incl. VAT) at dabs.com. At that price the only Intel alternative is a Pentium Dual Core E2200 (2.2GHz) at 65W. The Core 2 Duo E7200 (2.5GHz) is £75 and 65W. That is a 53% premium at a higher TDP.

To: wbmw who wrote (255369)	8/8/2008 11:08:41 AM
From: eracer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: Sounds like an endorsement that could work equally well for Intel's integrated graphics. Not exactly. The Intel G45 graphics performance would still be roughly 30% slower than the 790GX on average. I tried the Lock On and Live For Speed demos on my new Foxconn 780G/X2 5000+ system last night. Both had adequate performance at 1280x1024. A decrease in frame rate would likely make both noticeably less enjoyable to watch. The graphics performance of the 780G and 790GX is a good fit for someone like Vattila who will use it for casual gaming or playing games which are several years old. The 790GX price is a bit high, but that will fall a bit as more boards hit the market.