Post a Comment
links to (40+) other reviews can be found here: http://www.madshrimps.be/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25598
You beat me to the link! I found that one earlier too, as I was compiling a series of posts with links to reviews, then found that and gave up(pointed to it).
Looks like the reviews are unanimous(excepting the jokers @ hardocp, questionable "review") in supporting those early benchmarks showing core 2 duo whooping it up on AMD. As a matter of fact, the review numbers look relatively scary, well at least if I were AMD I'd be scared, but since I'm not, I'm happy.
Intel's Core 2 are great processors - intel finally managed to be clearly leading in terms of performance for the time beeing.
On a side note, i hate it that every review/benchmark looks only at the high-end cpu's, leaving out the ones that most people will end buying - the entry level/mid range ones.
Please, i had it with X6800 and E6700 benchmarks, how about some E6400 ones?
you can't simply scale guess the performance due to different cache sizes - 2MB on the slower cpu's.
Anandtech had the E6300 benchmarked, but not E6400. Depending on the app, it benchmarked anywhere between an X2 3800 and 5000, but usually around a 4400. Maybe a bit faster.
They also looked at the difference between 2-4MB cache, and found it added 1-10% depending on the app. Average was about 3.5%.
Yeah, I'm on an XP 2800+ (which was a 2600 until I sent it back to AMD for an RMA and they sent back the 2800+... I love free upgrades).
I've got 1.5gb of RAM and a Geforce 6800.
I would love to have a dualo core system, but not for the price I would have to pay. I would need new mobo, new RAM (For DDR2), new proc, and a new video card (mine is AGP)... and for what?
You've definately got me beat with the P3 though...





