• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

True or False?

Intel's current CPUs are much better than AMD's. If you need cores, get a Q6600. Otherwise, get an E8400 or E8500. AMD's competing chips are simply slower.
 
The funny part is, they are trying to act like a "salvage" item is better than a dual core that was meant to be a dual core.
 
AMD marketing department at work. :p Oh and 640 % faster? faster than what?
I'll put my Q6600 @ 3.6 up against any of AMD's cpu's and run circles around it.
 
veedubfreak said:
The funny part is, they are trying to act like a "salvage" item is better than a dual core that was meant to be a dual core.
Click to expand...

It could be.. if the cores performed in any equivalent way, or if programs scaled really well to three cores. Of course, neither of those are actually the case.

The systems in question, from the end, are apparently:

AMD Phenom X3 8450
AMD 780G with Radeon HD 3200

Intel Core 2 Duo E7200
Intel G35 integrated graphics

I wouldn't think they'd outright lie about it, but there's probably something particular about this setup that means it's engineered to cause this kind of difference - a workload that can use 3 cores, and with a stronger graphics setup on the AMD side. The 780G could certainly be 5-6 times faster than the G35 just because it has a much more powerful GPU - once you use discrete graphics that would disappear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top