Z
Originally posted by SPeedY_B
64-bit means nothing. I wouldn't mind one of Intels extreme chips actually, that cache sounds niiiiice
Mathematica
Athlon 64 FX-51 : 572 sec
P4EE : 639 sec
Dual G5: 997 sec
SETI@Home
Athlon 64 FX-51 : 106 min
P4EE : 111 min
Dual G5: 173 min
UT2003
P4EE : 334 FPS
Athlon 64 FX-51: 332 FPS
Dual G5: 80 FPS
Jedi Outcast
P4EE : 133 FPS
Athlon: 130 FPS
Dual G5: 72 FPS
Quake III
P4EE : 501 FPS
Athlon: 445 FPS
Dual G5: 404 FPS
InDesign 2.0 Export to PDF
P4EE : 46 sec
Athlon: 47 sec
Dual G5: 61 sec
Photoshop 7.0.1 All Filters
P4EE : 266 sec
Athlon: 269 sec
Dual G5: 330 sec
Photoshop 7.0.1 MacAddict Filters
Dual G5: 37 sec
Athlon: 38 sec
P4EE: 41 sec
Bibble/MacBibble
Dual G5: 240 sec
P4EE: 354 sec
Athlon: 451 sec
QuickTime 6.3 Export to .MOV
Dual G5: 706 sec
P4EE: 744 sec
Athlon: 803 sec
Compressor "Fast" vs. Procoder "High-Speed"
Athlon: 225 sec
P4EE: 225 sec
Dual G5: 263 sec
Compressor "High Quality" vs. Procoder "Mastering"
Dual G5: 724 sec
Athlon: 1105 sec
P4EE: 1190 sec
intel is greater than asterisk?Originally posted by madmatt
INTEL > *
Originally posted by Sazar
an oc'd p4c can keep up witht eh athlonFX... the athlon64 3200+ is around the same performance as a top of the line p4c...
the EE runs hot as hell and is expensive but it is the fastest out there... and doesn't need registered memory...
Originally posted by ming
What is this telling us??
You'd have to OC an Intel P4 (@3.2GHz) to whatever speed to keep up with an AMD running @ 2.2GHz?
Originally posted by black-syth
Either way AMD seems to be doing ok. Tommys just let out a complete benchmark on an FX-51 OCed to 2.8Ghz. It seems to scale well, and the performance is quite overwhelming. You might want to take a look.
IRT Goatman:
MaximumPC?