![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
I see multitasking benchmarks of the X2's, Pentium D's, Opteron's and Xeon's all over the net. So many different tech sites have as many different "multitasking scenarios" and these "scenarios" they claim, should be reflective of the performance of the processors under regular multitasking environment for a regular user. Some of these benchmarks are so lame that all they do is to benchmark games while playing a dvd in the background. Some on the contrary, are so unnecessarily heavy on the processors, the performance difference between processors just become insignificant numbers; none of us encode dvds, play games, surf the web, scan for viruses and render 3d graphics all at the same time.
In my opinion some of these ridicilous benches are just there to make Intel Pentium-D look like a possible contender to the athlon 64 X2's throne. Because hyperthreading helps with multitasking scenarios, pentium-d comes out slight winner in benchmarks that are truly heavily multithreaded, scenarios that are less likely to occur than winning the lottery.
It's time multitasking benchmarks reflect how users, who use apps that truly benefit from multitasking, will benefit significantly by dual-core or just dual processors. Personally I would like to see more benchmarks doing content creation, video editing, dvd ripping and 3d rendering while playing games because its those sort of things that slows me down, even stops me from doing anything else while the app is running.
The reasons I stated above are why I will buy a dual-core processor as soon as I can afford one or an affordable one hits the market. Not because it can run and complete 12 different tasks in 3 minutes or 2 minutes 50 secs.
In my opinion some of these ridicilous benches are just there to make Intel Pentium-D look like a possible contender to the athlon 64 X2's throne. Because hyperthreading helps with multitasking scenarios, pentium-d comes out slight winner in benchmarks that are truly heavily multithreaded, scenarios that are less likely to occur than winning the lottery.
It's time multitasking benchmarks reflect how users, who use apps that truly benefit from multitasking, will benefit significantly by dual-core or just dual processors. Personally I would like to see more benchmarks doing content creation, video editing, dvd ripping and 3d rendering while playing games because its those sort of things that slows me down, even stops me from doing anything else while the app is running.
The reasons I stated above are why I will buy a dual-core processor as soon as I can afford one or an affordable one hits the market. Not because it can run and complete 12 different tasks in 3 minutes or 2 minutes 50 secs.