Intel Kentsfield trounces AMD Quad FX

jmke · 30th November 2006, 08:19

Test scores reveal that Quad FX manages to achieve equal performance to Core 2 Extreme QX6700 in SiSoft Sandra 2007 and PCMark05 and narrowly edged it in memory tests: both L1, L2 and system memory latency are better on QuadFX than on Kentsfield, but that's nothing new.

However, taking a look into media encoding shows that QuadFather just gets crushed by Kentsfield, especially in MPEG-2 8Mbit reproduction. But the worst result for AMD is a look into power consumption and performance per watt. AMD system consumes far more power than Intel, sometimes even double that Kentsfield setup.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36050

30th November 2006, 08:31

AMD had to go very agressive on the pricing, I doubt it's that easy to get 4 90nm cores with 1 MB running 3 GHz and sell it for 1000$.

jmke · 30th November 2006, 08:35

I still don't want one, overclocking a dual cpu system will prove harder than single CPU systems; and without any useful apps needed more than 1 core to work fluently... there's no point in spending $$$

30th November 2006, 09:30

me neither but there are plenty of people with too much money

30th November 2006, 08:19	#1
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,010	Intel Kentsfield trounces AMD Quad FX Test scores reveal that Quad FX manages to achieve equal performance to Core 2 Extreme QX6700 in SiSoft Sandra 2007 and PCMark05 and narrowly edged it in memory tests: both L1, L2 and system memory latency are better on QuadFX than on Kentsfield, but that's nothing new. However, taking a look into media encoding shows that QuadFather just gets crushed by Kentsfield, especially in MPEG-2 8Mbit reproduction. But the worst result for AMD is a look into power consumption and performance per watt. AMD system consumes far more power than Intel, sometimes even double that Kentsfield setup. http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36050 __________________

30th November 2006, 08:35	#3
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,010	I still don't want one, overclocking a dual cpu system will prove harder than single CPU systems; and without any useful apps needed more than 1 core to work fluently... there's no point in spending $$$ __________________

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 vs AMD Phenom II X4 940	jmke	WebNews	0	7th May 2009 18:46
Cheap Quad Cores: AMD X4 9600 €99 and Intel Q6600 €126	jmke	WebNews	0	4th August 2008 12:48
AMD GAME! Enables Console-like Simplicity for Mainstream PCs	jmke	WebNews	9	19th May 2008 20:51
Mainstream Quad Core Processors Compared from AMD and Intel	jmke	Articles & Howto's	4	13th May 2008 13:48
[M] Mainstream Quad Core Processors Compared from AMD and Intel	jmke	WebNews	1	1st May 2008 13:58
Intel Responds to AMD Quad FX System	jmke	WebNews	3	9th January 2007 15:00
Intel Core 2 Quad (Kentsfield) launches 2nd, available 14th November	jmke	WebNews	0	26th October 2006 13:34
Intel To Ship 1 Million Quad Core Before AMD?	jmke	WebNews	0	29th September 2006 20:08
Intel Kentsfield quad core slated for Q1 2007	jmke	WebNews	0	23rd March 2006 13:06

30th November 2006, 08:31	#2
Rutar Posts: n/a	AMD had to go very agressive on the pricing, I doubt it's that easy to get 4 90nm cores with 1 MB running 3 GHz and sell it for 1000$.

30th November 2006, 09:30	#4
Rutar Posts: n/a	me neither but there are plenty of people with too much money