Content Creation Performance

We were a bit surprised by the close race in the Multimedia Content Creation Winstone tests, but it does look like the Athlon 64 FX-62 can still be pretty competitive in some areas:

Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004

The Core 2 Extreme X6800 is still faster by 5.7%, but no where near the huge performance increases we saw on the previous page.  Looking at SYSMark's ICC tests however, the picture changes dramatically:

SYSMark 2004 - Overall Internet Content Creation Performance

When AMD introduced the Athlon 64 X2 we saw SYSMark 2004 scores hit new, never before seen, highs. 

SYSMark 2004 - 3D Content Creation Performance

SYSMark 2004 - 2D Content Creation Performance

SYSMark 2004 - Web Publishing Performance

With Intel's Core 2 Extreme X6800, our performance expectations are reset once more.  In all of the Content Creation tests, the Core 2 Extreme outpaces the FX-62 by anywhere from 27% to 28%.

Business Application Performance Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

134 Comments

View All Comments

  • neweggster - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    impressive not really, just shows all the benchmarks we were seeing before were close to reality. minus the 40% faster when it closer to 20% faster on avg.

    Does this matter to me no. Will I still be buying a dual core opteron to put in my 939 board yes. I'll check back again in 18-24 months what is on the market then, until then just videocard upgrades for me. All u fanboys can fight over who has the better processor and larger e-penis till the next century. Does intel or AMD care probably not, why cause they make there money from the system builders.

    Boys and there toys, you would think things would change as some of u guys get older. nope just like grade school.



    If that was the case then you wouldn't be posting on a enthusiast website meant to show performance and benchmarks of new technology, surely you took the time to get registered to post.

    If you hadn't been so interested in this community then why make a posts. I see nobody else bashing enthusiasts on these forums, lol its out of context someone coming here saying we are like grade schoolers because we are interested in technology.

    Take a clue, technology runs this world and the people in it, also it is mainly a big market where 100's of thousands of people work in this type industry. Perhaps if you don't like the people who post here who are so eager for the next best thing then don't come reading the stuff lol. PEACE!
  • Makaveli - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    first of all I love technology And I think both companies are great. my complaint is u lil kids and your fighting over pointless shit all the time. its never ending. I actually like coming to the forums to read stuff that is intelligent and that I can learn from. All the fanboyism shit gets old quick. The point of my post is Who give a flying fuck which cpu is faster. as long as it fits in your budget and meets your needs. That is one of the reason's I hardly go to tom's Hardware anymore they use to be now the forum is over run with lil kids and my intel this my AMD this. None of these companies Care what u think they just want your money. yet u guys fight like your in a war for there loyalty. I just wish some of u would grow the fuck up.

    end of my rant.
  • Xenoid - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    We have all seen the top AMD vs the top Intel cpu, but for those of us who don't own 5 Ferraris and a Maybach, when can we expect realistic reviews.

    I would like to see the lower 3 Conroes (2.4ghz in particular as it has the bigger cache) vs normal AMD cpus in the same price bracket.

    As for my fandom since I have to explain it or else face certain flaming, I own 3 Intels and 3 AMD cpus. That will be all.
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    We have all seen the top AMD vs the top Intel cpu, but for those of us who don't own 5 Ferraris and a Maybach, when can we expect realistic reviews.

    I would like to see the lower 3 Conroes (2.4ghz in particular as it has the bigger cache) vs normal AMD cpus in the same price bracket.

    As for my fandom since I have to explain it or else face certain flaming, I own 3 Intels and 3 AMD cpus. That will be all.


    Not really worth it as the $530 chip is gonna beat the FX anyway. At same price point it won't be even worth comparing.

    And congrats to AT(especially Anand) for making an early and non-biased review.
  • bob661 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    Not really worth it as the $530 chip is gonna beat the FX anyway. At same price point it won't be even worth comparing
    I don't think that's what he meant. I think he wants to see some more realisticly priced Conroe's and X2's. Of course, if you actually read what he said, you would know that.
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    I don't think that's what he meant. I think he wants to see some more realisticly priced Conroe's and X2's. Of course, if you actually read what he said, you would know that.


    Doesn't matter, because at this rate, it won't be worth considering at the same price point, so why look. He can see, but its like those people who wants to see CPU performances at 2048x1536 4xAA/8xAF when there will be no difference between top of the line and Celeron D. It's already know, do you just have to see it??
  • smitty3268 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    Well I would still be interested in a full review, of all the speeds of Conroe with a few X2's thrown in the mix as comparison points. Which I'm sure is what AT's final review will be like.

    Presumably AMD is also going to do some significant price cutting until K8L is released in order to stay competitive. Anyone know this for sure?
  • neweggster - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    Toms Hardware has the slower 2.66 conroe up against the Fx-62. Im sure AMD is lowering prices, already seen significant drops in AMD CPU's in past week.
  • Xenoid - Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - link

    I don't read Toms.

    To rephrase what I said for the ignorant masses, I want to see the lower clocked Conroes compared to X2s of the same price (300~) and hopefully we will have that when it is released.
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    We have all seen the top AMD vs the top Intel cpu, but for those of us who don't own 5 Ferraris and a Maybach, when can we expect realistic reviews.

    I would like to see the lower 3 Conroes (2.4ghz in particular as it has the bigger cache) vs normal AMD cpus in the same price bracket.

    As for my fandom since I have to explain it or else face certain flaming, I own 3 Intels and 3 AMD cpus. That will be all.


    Not really worth it as the $530 chip is gonna beat the FX anyway. At same price point it won't be even worth comparing.

    And congrats to AT(especially Anand) for making an early and non-biased review.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now