AMD X2, is it faster than Intel C2D in heavy multi-tasking ?

L

lowrider007

Weaksauce
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
72
There seems to be a increasing number of people now claiming that the C2D is actually slower at mutli-tasking than the an AMD x2 cpu clocked at the same speed, I wonder how much truth there is to this, on my home forum over the pond there has been an intresting thread in regard's to this, the thread was started by a long term member called FatRakoon, he owns an Intel C2D system and an AMD X2 system, he claims that in heavy multi-tasking his X2 setup handles much better and is more responsive, it's quite an intresting read, in the 9 pages of the thread nobody seems to be able to come up with a valid reason as to why this is the case, the best explanation that people seem to be able to come up with is that "the AMD copes better due to its use of an onboard memory controller", do you think this is the case ?

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17665872&page=1&pp=30

Thats not all, I've even heard recently from people that have system's at home folding 24/7 and some are saying that thier older P4 and AMD rigs are actually scoring higher than there new C2D rigs, can this be possible ?


and lets not forget [H]ard|OCP own tests,

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEwOCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
 
.Tret said:
umm...read that page again. Just because the Core 2's bar is smaller than the P4 doesn't mean it is worse. Under the graph it says lower = faster. :rolleyes: :D
Click to expand...

nothing to see here, move along people :eek:
 
no problem lowrider.. common mistake.... i sometimes assume that longer bars are always better... but sometimes they are not... the bar can be short and fat and still perform... oorrr...eerr.. wait.. lol... im tired....

yeah.. so just check the graph carefully.. if shorter bar means faster in time :)
 
lowrider007 said:
There seems to be a increasing number of people now claiming that the C2D is actually slower at mutli-tasking than the an AMD x2 cpu clocked at the same speed, I wonder how much truth there is to this, on my home forum over the pond there has been an intresting thread in regard's to this, the thread was started by a long term member called FatRakoon, he owns an Intel C2D system and an AMD X2 system, he claims that in heavy multi-tasking his X2 setup handles much better and is more responsive, it's quite an intresting read, in the 9 pages of the thread nobody seems to be able to come up with a valid reason as to why this is the case, the best explanation that people seem to be able to come up with is that "the AMD copes better due to its use of an onboard memory controller", do you think this is the case ?

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17665872&page=1&pp=30

Thats not all, I've even heard recently from people that have system's at home folding 24/7 and some are saying that thier older P4 and AMD rigs are actually scoring higher than there new C2D rigs, can this be possible ?


and lets not forget [H]ard|OCP own tests,

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEwOCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
Click to expand...

Most likely tied to hard drive performance difference.
It is amazing how people think that the CPU is everything and nothing else matters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top