quote: why would you do a performance study in the first place if you didnt have the methodology right.
quote:Memory Subsystem - knowing that the frequencies are different, why were all the results not normalized?
quote:The author should have at least made the effort to normalize the graph to show the real comparison.
quote:) Since when is Linpack "Intel friendly"
quote:why would you do a performance study in the first place if you didnt have the methodology right.
quote:Why is that the "real comparison"? If Intel has a clockspeed advantage, nobody is going to downclock their CPUs to be fair to AMD.
quote:Your LINPACK score just seems obscure. Somewhat Intel friendly compiler? LOL. If the compiler is so great why is the gcc score I read on another review 30% higher with the Barcelona(with a 1.9 GHz CPU)? That is just ridiculous. I thought this review was about architechture and what it can perform and not about which compiler we use and if it is true that optimizations is turned off in then Intel compiler if it is an AMD cpu then the score is worthless and the comparison is severly biased.
quote:And it's not looking pretty. Roughly same performance as the 2.33GHz Xeon in single and dual socket configurations; faster in some, slower in most, slightly less power consumption. We waited 18 months for this?!?
quote: I'm trying to use the Anandtech benchmarks to help project how much performance gain we'll see in a new machine.
quote:It not wrong. It is incomplete and we admit that more than once. But considering AMD gaves us a few days before the NDA was over, it was impossible to cover all angles
quote:1) they choose faster Intel processors, 2 GHz Opteron. There are 2 GHz processors available across all the processors used in this analysis.
quote: And this gentleman used Intel optimized code on AMD to test performance. Who in the right mind measuring performance would do that?
quote:45nm Harpertown and 1600 MHz FSB will be rolling in soon