Motherboards Memory Storage Cases/Cooling/PSUs IT Computing Displays Mobile Mac CPUs & Chipsets Video Digital Cameras Linux Gadgets Systems Trade Shows Guides Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
AMD's 65nm Preview Part 2 - The Plot Thickens (Updated with Information from AMD)
AMD's 65nm Preview Part 2 - The Plot Thickens (Updated with Information from AMD)
Date: December 21st, 2006
Topic: CPU & Chipset
Manufacturer: AMD
Author: Anand Lal Shimpi
Buy the AMD ADO4800IAA5DO Athlon 64 Socket AM2
Blank
 Buy.com $70.00
 
 

Gaming Performance & Power Usage

Quake 4 was the first application that really showed us the performance penalty you incur when moving to Brisbane, in this case the older core is about 4% faster. If you take into account that we're looking at performance at 1600 x 1200 with a GeForce 8800 GTX, in more GPU limited situations you're unlikely to notice the performance difference, but at more CPU limited situations the delta could likely grow even larger than 4%.

As the Core 2 processors are pushing much more data to the GPU than their competitors, average power consumption is generally much higher - it's the expense of greater performance in this case. The performance per watt charts take into account both factors and give you more of a breakdown of efficiency. Despite the decrease in performance, the reduction in power consumption gives the new Brisbane cores the efficiency advantage over most of their predecessors.

Gaming Performance - Quake 4

Gaming Power Usage - Quake 4

Gaming Performance per Watt - Quake 4

Oblivion didn't show a real impact in performance due to the slower Brisbane cores, but it clearly favors Intel's Core 2 architecture over AMD's.

Gaming Performance - Oblivion

Gaming Power Usage - Oblivion

Gaming Performance per Watt - Oblivion

Gaming Performance & Power Usage - Continued   Next Page

 
  Index

Tools Share
Find lowest prices Find the lowest prices
Digg   del.icio.us   E-mail  
Print This Article Print this article  

52 Comments - Last by OcHungry, 1052 days ago
Username:
Password:
no overclocking review?? by theteamaqua, 1066 days ago
man i hope this thing overclocks like conroe.... otherwise no one will get quad father

but i already have E6400 @ 3.4GHz ...

might get Q6600 , Q6400 or Yorksfield or Altair ... ill what see what happens

Reply
RE: no overclocking review?? by clairvoyant129, 1066 days ago
Right here,
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2889&p=8

Nothing special though.

Better to stick with the 90nm X2 then this piece of junk.



Reply
Well... by Locutus465, 1066 days ago
I upgraded to an S939 X2 earlier this year, so I'm going to be out of the serious upgrade market for a while (might pick up a better CPU or graphics card that's about it). So personally I'm waiting for K8-L and co-processors to see how things shake out. I do have to say I had hoped better from AMD, but after 3 years of dominance I think a stumble like this is just what they need to get them back on the war path of innovation.

Reply
RE: Well... by peldor, 1065 days ago
AMD's vision of coprocessors is 2009 stuff. You'll be out of the market a long time if you're waiting on that.

Reply
45nm by JackPack, 1066 days ago
...and AMD wants to accelerate their transition to 45nm? Maybe they have a magic lamp somewhere in their Sunnyvale office.

Seems like the increase in L2 latency might be a contingency plan for GHz or more cache, in the event Agena doesn't meet its Q3 target.

Reply
per watt performance by feelingshorter, 1066 days ago
Looking at those benchmarks, I think Intel won based on per/watt performance. AMD had lower watt usage but also lower performance. Given that a cpu can work harder, then be idle, i see per watt performance as the most important thing. I would have expected AMD to do better, but they did not come through.

Reply
RE: per watt performance by mino, 1065 days ago
No offense, but the moment one takes into account the fact of average PC spending >90% of time at idle, well, C2D eats X2's dust.

From energy efficiency perspective, of course.

Reply
RE: per watt performance by JackPack, 1065 days ago
Where did you pull that "90%" figure out of? If a PC is idling more than 90% of the time without going into standby or hibernate, the user is an idiot.

Hardly any PCs operate at pure idle. No real-time antivirus scan, no file indexing in the background, no email autochecking, no IE7 open with at least one Flash ad, etc.

Reply
RE: per watt performance by mino, 1065 days ago
Well, how would you like Your PC to standby(not to mention hibernate) while typing or listening to MP3's ???
At these moments (most common usage of a PC BTW) the average CPU use is 1% to 5%.

... ;-)


Reply
RE: per watt performance by JackPack, 1065 days ago
That's not idling.

Nice strawman, BTW.

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 6

Unlicensed Software at Your Last Company
Anonymously Report Unlicensed Software with Our Form Now. Get Up to $1 Million.
We Buy Laptop and PC Memory! Sell to Us!
Min of 25 pieces required. Call us today at 239.354.1230.
Special Offer from The Economist
Get 12 issues of The Economist for $12. US subscribers only.
Free Forrester Risk Management Report
Demystifying Enterprise Risk Management. Download Free With Registration.
Download Microsoft Visual Studio ® Team System
Streamline Dev processes, Reduce time to market. Try Microsoft Visual Studio Team System, FREE!




Latest news by
DailyTech

 November 20, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 November 19, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank


Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
more CPU & Chipset Discussions



pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2009 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information