AMD's Athlon 64 X2 4800+ & 4200+ Dual Core Performance Preview
by Anand Lal Shimpi on May 9, 2005 12:02 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Gaming Performance
Gaming performance is, currently, highly based on single-threaded performance and thus, we see no benefit from dual core. The thing to keep in mind here is that AMD's dual core solutions are closer to their fastest single core offerings in clock speed, so they end up performing more like their Athlon 64 counterparts in games - which has always been quite strong.Doom 3
Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
Half Life 2
Halo
Unreal Tournament 2004
Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
109 Comments
View All Comments
xsilver - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
#33 ..agreed..If anything I think AT is more biased towards AMD, not intel
and #32, there is a well known fact that in scientific testing, if you already have a bias towards one outcome (read: amd fanboi) then your results will subconciously show what you set out to say.... that's why in real scientific tests, also known as a "double blind" test, the testers dont know what they are testing and the subejects dont know what they are using ....in this case the subjects are the cpu's so they cant talk :P
wien - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
#32 Wow... just. wow.crisagatie - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
This is another Inteltech bullshit. After X2 beating Intel hands down in all tests and benchmarks, these guys put up a bag of their own tests (multitasking scenarios) toped by Intel in every single one. Then they say the results are "a mixed bag", with Intel and AMD performing equally...You, Anandtech guys, read the reviews all over the Internet! And try believing: Intel sucks! X2 is by far the best performer (even X2 4200+), being at the same time a cheaper option to Intel D 840 and EE.
Viditor - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
As to availability, I note from the Dell site that the EE 840 isn't available till June 15th either...For applications, I noted in Tech Report's review that they did some very good graphs illustrating results on a thread-basis, and they included the dual Xeon 3.4GHz. It appears that for rendering workstations, the 4800+ blows the doors off of the dual Xeon, at a fraction of the price...
This just caused me to contact a friend who put a big hold on 12 new workstations he was ordering!
Samus - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
Anand, did you happen to do any overclocking with the X2? If so, were the results simular to typical single-core 90nm?I'm sure there is some headroom and 2.6GHz can be achieved with the X2, which would make it untouchable if it scales accordingly.
Zebo - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
#20 dude uncool. there is kids here besides I could'nt fiqure out your point anyway? Did you hate it or love it?phaxmohdem - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
#27 your dead wrong.....I"m a f*cking idiot :)
RadeonGuy - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
#20 your a idiotDeftNinja - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
^ Probably because you are a cunt.AnandThenMan - Monday, May 9, 2005 - link
Scratch my comments about no power consumption tests. How did I miss them? *scratches head* ?????