While we’re still hot with our CPU survey, I’d like to direct everyone to this nifty CPU Comparison Chart for 2007 over at Tom’s Hardware.
Tom’s Hardware tested over 90 Intel and AMD desktop processors under 35 different benchmarks on a Windows Vista machine. All the data were compiled and presented in a dynamic chart as shown below:
I selected 3 of the desktop CPUs I currently have at home — a Sempron 3200+ 1.8GHz, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ 2.3GHz and the new Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz and pit them against crowd favorite Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0GHz.
Accoridng to the Tom’s Hardware Chart, running AVG anti-virus on these 4 CPUs takes between 63 seconds to 154 seconds, the E8400 being the fastest.
Running a filter on a 69MB TIF file on Photoshop CS3 took the E8400 100 secs, followed by the Q6600 at 122 secs.
The same results showed up on Premiere Pro 2.0 when converting an MPEG2 file to WMV9.
The last test here is for encoding MP3 files using Lame. The E8400 still tops the charts over the rest. This should be obvious since the E8400 has the fastest clock speed among the four.
Had I saw this chart much earlier, I would have gone with an Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 or even the pricier E8500. Running the charts for an AMD Phenom and the Intel Core 2 Quad should also be interesting.
Check it out at Tom’s Hardware. Should be very helpful on your next CPU upgrade.
Loading ...
So Intel now is on top again, speed performance wise?
Not much stuff speed wise takes advantage of multi processors, its more for multiple applications i think
Newer Games love multi processors and multi GPUs.
Mas mabilis naman talagal intel eh, sino bang nagsabing AMD?
Yeah BrianB is right. Intel is superior on any field….I’m currently using an Intel equipped processor which is the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600..and i cannot say anything about this one. Pure speed and power.
Sure Intel’s Quad core and 8400 are awesome and fast, but look at the money too.
I run an Athlon 1600LE and Phenom 9600. They are way cheaper and still get the job done and games played.
Can’t go too cheap though because when I got a Cyrix C7 it was soooo slow as to be not useful.
considering the fact that an e8400 costs 3x as much as an x2 4400+ and isnt even twice faster, the amd offering still wins in the performance per peso category. but then if money isnt an issue for you, then you should just get the latest mid to high-end intel processors
AMD needs to wake up now or suffer the same fate as with other tech companies that could not take the competition.
AMD has woken up to the fact that they simply cannot compete with Intel in the speed department and with their money situation they aren’t going to be faster anytime soon.
So they are taking a different focus. They are working on decreasing the energy needs of their chips for efficiency. They are also looking at making their mobo’s better with things like hybrid crossfire.
Then they make their chips competitive at comparable speed.
They know they are dead meat in the sheer speed department so they are focusing on the value market.
I build lots of computers and when looking at a ‘powerful enough’ computer in the ‘value’ department I have to stick with AMD…. Of course for those people who want the most powerful its Intel all th way.