Ouchie..another scathing review of AMD Quad Core vs the Intel QX.

"With as much AMD fanfare as there was leading up to this release,
you'd think they would've managed to drum up a bit better showing.
After running up against a battery of benchmark tests, AMD's Quad FX
dual CPU platform has been throughly trounced by Intel's QX6700
2.66GHz processor. While things looks great on paper for AMD, with
exciting amounts of bandwidth between the two processors, and
dedicated memory for each chip, in practice the Quad FX platform is an
utter power hog (double that of the QX6700), and only squeezed by
Intel in a handful of tests, while for the most part racking up loss
after loss, trailing from 10 to 40 percent behind the Intel's 65nm
quad-core chip. Price is also a concern, since even though AMD is
pricing the actual chips aggressively, you'll still have to spring
around $480 for the only motherboard that can handle 'em, and those
1000W power supplies don't really come cheap. Of course, AMD does have
65nm chips on the way, which should do better against Intel on a
clock-to-clock basis, and Windows Vista will include lots of
mult-thread enhancements to "even the playing field," but there's
still no denying that AMD got spanked in this round, and we don't
suppose Intel will just be sitting around while AMD plays catch up."

http://tinyurl.com/y5whr6

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four 
times a year.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:221626
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to