Comments Locked

26 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ara - Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - link

    This:
    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22332

    seems directed (at least in part) at your review.

    Funny how there was not a single gaming test in sight. Seems a rather high journalist price to pay for an exclusive.
  • red and black - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link

    Great article for Windows users. I have to say, though, that my main reaction to the multitasking tests was that Windows failed them.

    I guess it's good that Windows users can finally have systems that don't lock up horribly under load. Less aggregate suffering in the world, and all that.

    I'm looking forward to the dual-care AMD chips!
  • jak - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link

    Just wanted to say that that was a fantastic article. This is the exact kind of data I was looking to find; the performance of dual-core in multitasking situations; the effect of adding an extra processor on day-to-day tasks. The other reviews I read re: dual-core this morning simply pitted dual-core against AMD or Intel's single-core finest in games(!), of all things, and claim that dual-core 'is not there yet' because an 840 can't beat an FX55 in doom3...

    Well done, and thank you for an informative read.
  • ChineseDemocracyGNR - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link

    Talking about AMD... when will we see socket 939 PCI-E motherboards reviews?
  • Ghandiinstinct - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link

    Meh, lets wait for AMD's rival to 840 then let the testing begin = )
  • Michael2k - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link

    Can you run one of those office benchmarks while DVDshrink is running in the backgroun/foreground?

    That would be interesting.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now