“In a head-to-head comparison, the CRN Test Center put Intel’s soon-to-be-released Core 2 Extreme Processor and AMD’s top-of-the-line Athlon FX62 Dual Core processor through the paces. Initial test results show that Intel’s latest processor lives up to the hype and outpaces AMD’s best by almost 28 percent,” Frank J. Ohlhorst reports for CRN.
Ohlhorst reports, “Intel’s advances on AMD’s territory doesn’t end with just performance, but also includes lower power requirements and reduced costs, a combination that could prove fatal to AMD’s growth in the desktop processor market. What’s more, AMD is several months away from anything new in the desktop processor market, leaving the Sunnyvale, Calif.-based company’s current Athlon product line very vulnerable to the mammoth marketing machine of Intel, Santa Clara, Calif.”
“With the systems configured as close to equal as possible, Intel outpaced AMD by almost 28 percent. To narrow down where the CPU’s strengths and weaknesses are, Test Center engineers dove a little further into the tests to look at individual benchmarks. For example, the X6800 scored a 261.5 for integer math, while the FX62 scored a 172.6,” Ohlhorst reports. “Another test showed that the Intel X6800 scored a 1,351.6 for CPU image rotation, while the AMD FX62 scored 765.3.”
“Intel’s re-emergence as a performance leader will fuel a new performance war on the desktop, with pricing and availability being the primary weapons used,” Ohlhorst reports. “The real challenge ahead for both vendors and for the channel alike is generating the need for these advanced technologies on today’s corporate desktops.”
More info and benchmarks in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “David G.” for the heads up.]
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple chose well: Anandtech – Intel Core 2 Duo ‘the fastest desktop processor we’ve ever tested’ – July 14, 2006
RUMOR: Intel’s Woodcrest to power Apple’s next-gen high-performance Mac Pro desktops – July 11, 2006
Intel aims for 32 cores by 2010 – July 10, 2006
PC Mag: ‘Top Ten’ list of things to know about Intel’s new Core 2 Duo processors – July 07, 2006
RUMOR: Apple to unveil ‘Mac Pro’ with new enclosure design, Intel Core 2 Duo at WWDC next month – July 03, 2006
Report: Dell signs deal with AMD for millions of chips for full range of desktops, notebooks – June 26, 2006
Independent benchmarks: Intel Core 2 Duo (Conroe) 2.67 GHz – June 22, 2006
Apple chose well: Intel poised to take massive lead across the board over AMD – June 07, 2006
My iBook G4 suddenly feels pokey.
Yeah, and my DP 2ghz G5 is suddenly not the bad-a$$ it used to be.
Think I’ll keep it, though.
looks like apple made the right choice, anyone surprised that dell are now starting to use amd chips as intels race ahead, what geat business sense for a company trying to remove itself from the low end market lol
Clyde,
I feel the same way about my G5, but, I continue to add more memory (up to 4.5 GHz now) and it continues to sail through all my apps. I know I will be keeping it for a little while longer.
yeah same here my dp 2.7 is on 2.5 gigs of ram and serves me very well, ill consider changing next year with 2nd gen mac pro and when all my software is universal, cs3 / maya
It would seem to me that MDN is giving AMD the same type of coverage that is typical in the mass media of Apple – a healthy dose of FUD. Lets not forget that AMD was in the lead for awile ‘”Intel’s re-emergence as a performance leader”‘ AMD may not have anything in the pipeline at this moment, but lets not forget that Intel really did not either when AMD rolled their 64 bit processors. I would count AMD down but definatly not out… yet.
Guys, don’t be so silly. Intel is top dog right now. Of course AMD will not sit around and just accept it. Prior to this tiny slice of time, AMD was wiping the floors with Intel. So the pendulem swings from one to the other. So what?
“The real challenge ahead for both vendors and for the channel alike is generating the need for these advanced technologies on today’s corporate desktops.”
I thought that was the purpose of Vista.
Nice. I hate to get petty and vapid, but I can’t wait to hear what all those “MY COMPUTER IS SO MUCH FASTER THAN YOURS GET A REAL COMPUTER” AMD goofballs have to say about this.
Ha ha.
m
Right now (OK, real soon now), and likely for several more years, computer users are in a Good Place. Competition has forced the industry leader to reconsider, to innovate, and to prove itself worthy of being the leader. Some of the intellectual property inside those chips belongs to AMD (Intel bought the rights to use at least some of it) but the fact that AMD was scoring some big sales off Intel was the driving force. AMD still has some server stuff, but they will be struggling in the desktop market for a while.
IBM was never enough of a force on the desktop to force Intel to do much more than innovate at their own pace and on their own terms. The G5 isn’t really a desktop chip, though it works fine as one. As long as AMD remains a threat and an innovator, we’ll have more CPU power than we (consumers) can think of productive ways to use.
Poor pathetic Dell is committed to AMD’s slower and hotter processors and Microsoft’s real and mythical bloated and ineffectual operating systems. A double-whammy of bad choices. Tsk, tsk.
Hey, Mike, how’s it feel using obsolete and dysfunctional technology in your machines? Got any emails from stockholders lately? Is your strategic plan similar to Microsoft, “obfuscate then divert attention, dispel bad reports, and deny the truth”?
Wingsy –
“‘The real challenge ahead for both vendors and for the channel alike is generating the need for these advanced technologies on today’s corporate desktops.'”
“I thought that was the purpose of Vista.”
That is the purpose of Aperture.
I would normally be ready to upgrade to a used dual 1.8GHz G5 for about $1,000 right about now, but I’m saving up for a Mac Pro with at least an X800 GPU instead, just to run Aperture.
So, did Microsoft make the wrong decision to go with the PPC in it’s xbox’s?
Mark
Mark:
Is Microsoft capable of making correct decisions? Considering the ongoing failure of Vista, the miserable performance of Origami, and the embarrassment of Virtual PC and Office 2007 what has Microsoft done right lately?