| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA512 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Grant wrote: |
| 5 |
| I had become an AMD guy, but I think I'm hearing that Intel is beating |
| 6 |
| AMD in performance tests. Plus my AMD64 X2 desktop should be much |
| 7 |
| faster than my Intel laptop but is actually slower. What do you guys |
| 8 |
| think? |
| 9 |
| |
| 10 |
| - Grant |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Well, as others have pointed out, the speed you experience, as an end consumer |
| 13 |
has to do with every other component in your computer, in addition to the CPU. |
| 14 |
For example, the bus speed of the mainboard, the chipset, the size, speed and |
| 15 |
type of hard drives you have, and of course, the video hardware (including the |
| 16 |
interfaces to the mainboard. Lest I forget, it also depends a lot on the |
| 17 |
amount and speed of the RAM that you have in your system. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
As for the performance tests, they are not generally a very good measure of how |
| 20 |
well a processor will perform in the real world. AMD and Intel have been in |
| 21 |
competition for the #1 spot since AMD was formed, and for a long time AMD was |
| 22 |
ahead of Intel on a number of factors (performance and cost being two). Give |
| 23 |
it some time, and you'll see a turn around, IMHO. I can't be certain, since I |
| 24 |
haven't been keeping up with industry news, as I should, but I believe that AMD |
| 25 |
has always had the better engineers. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Regards, |
| 28 |
Chris |
| 29 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
iD8DBQFH5hQGUx1jS/ORyCsRCkvpAKCLzX4d++WW+zW0tmeFkaD5OGzlFQCeI/Vq |
| 32 |
wzMuNgCY1AekTiok5d/44V0= |
| 33 |
=Xs2W |
| 34 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives