Please login or register. Welcome to the Studio, guest!


Quick Links:


newBookmarkLockedFalling

Scorpian

Scorpian Avatar

******
[ Bracket Admin ]

2,457


April 2006
Alright, I've done a little research on the subject, so I thought I'd share my findings. I'm going to compare the known Intel Core 2 Duo series with the new AMD Phenom X4 series. Both series have 4 cores, but which is better? Allow me to answer.

Now, first off, I'll warn you all up-front that I am AMD-biased. I think you're all well aware of that by now. I'll still try to be fair, though. I'll prove it by saying this: Intel is currently in the lead, and I agree with the reason why. Intel's quad-cores, at the moment, are faster, and more efficient, than AMD's. Yes, I admit it. Does that mean I'll go buy a Core 2 Duo? &@#$ no. Intel's may be better, but it ain't what I want.

You see, I'm kind of being generous, here. I'm calling the Core 2 Duo a quad-core CPU, when in reality, it's not. Intel did the same thing they did with their original dual-cores. The Core 2 Duo is simply 2 dual-core CPUs merged into one. Yes, it has 4 cores. No, it's not "true" quad-core. I can find tech specs that prove this, if you're that picky. Also, think about the name. "Core 2 Duo". Two dual-cores fits right into it, doesn't it?

AMD gets all the credit for making the first true dual-core CPU, and now gets the credit for the first quad-core. AMD's Phenom design is a true quad-core design, featuring one CPU with 4 cores in it, not 2 with 2 cores each. Of course, this technology is still in its infancy. Therefore, the fastest speed that AMD has been able to achieve is 2.4GHz* per core. My current Athlon 64 X2 CPU gets 2.6GHz* per core, and the best X2 AMD makes can get up to 3.2GHz* per core.

Anyways, Intel is in the lead because of their efficient inefficient design. It may not be true quad-core, but it does a really good job of mimicking it. So, if you're thinking about buying a computer with a Core 2 Duo in it, go ahead and get it. At the moment, the dual dual core design is running better than the true quad-core layout. However, if you really want your money's worth, wait until AMD gets their Phenom FXs out.

Oh, and one more thing: the Core 2 Duo has been out for a while, now. Thus, it has a lot of bugs worked out. However, that's a very minute fact. The point I want to make is that there is large system support for it. AMD's Phenoms run on socket AM2+ motherboards. Although it has been confirmed that they will work on socket AM2 boards, the most popular AMD boards, socket AM2+ boards are still the only way to get the full effect. At the moment, these are very rare, and pretty expensive.

Finally, AMD has created a few chip sets for use on these AM2+ boards. I don't know any details (hell, I know nothing except the fact that they exist XD), but I have heard that they are really really good. A socket AM2+ board running an AMD chipset is the best option for running a Phenom.

In conclusion, the Core 2 Duo is clearly better than the Phenom. Then again, it's like comparing a new race car driver with a professional. The Phenom is really really new, and mostly experimental. The Core 2 Duo is still better, but in due time, the Phenom will own it. For now, go ahead and buy that Core 2 Duo system you've had your eye on, or whatever. I'm personally going to wait until the new, ultra fast stuff comes out.

*Do not compare these speeds directly with Intel's. AMD is notorious for having really heat efficient processors. Thus, they run cooler, and function just as good as Intel's at lower speeds. 2.4GHz on an AMD cpu is about the equivalent of 4.0GHz on an Intel cpu.

wat

mukei

mukei Avatar

****
Senior Member

481


July 2006
You should check some of my posts here and at SSD. I posted stuff about this months ago. :P It's amazing how people still don't understand the difference between two dual-cores and a single quad-core. It's like comparing two heads that have two brains each, and one head that has 4 brains.

Good explanation. :)



Scorpian

Scorpian Avatar

******
[ Bracket Admin ]

2,457


April 2006
Thank! :D

Anyways, to further state what I said before, I'm going to say that the Phenom is like Vista. It has extremely great potential, but... it only runs properly on the newest stuff. It's also a real pain to get it working, and costs too much. I'd use it if somebody gave it to me, but I wouldn't go out and buy it. Hell, that's the only reason I use Vista. Somebody gave it to me. :P
wat

mukei

mukei Avatar

****
Senior Member

481


July 2006
I'd bet you still wouldn't want to buy it. The motherboards/chipsets that are compatible with penom are quite pricey at the moment as well.



Scorpian

Scorpian Avatar

******
[ Bracket Admin ]

2,457


April 2006
I have a socket AM2 motherboard right now. It'll accept it, and would probably work twice as well as my Athlon 64 X2 5000+. At the moment, I do posses the ability to use it at about 75% of it's max power. It's still better than what I have now. :P
wat

mukei

mukei Avatar

****
Senior Member

481


July 2006
Is it Rev4?

Chris

Chris Avatar

******
Head Coder

19,519


June 2005
Good explanation for the computer-components-idiots out there (me). I'll look into AMD next time I buy a computer (see: 4 years from now), but for now I have yet to have a need to upgrade since I don't really buy computer games anymore.

newBookmarkLockedFalling