Intel Dual Core Performance Preview Part II: A Deeper Look
by Anand Lal Shimpi on April 6, 2005 12:23 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Multitasking Scenario 3: Web Browsing
For our final benchmark, we decided to switch things up a bit and keep Firefox as our foreground application while background tasks ran. To make things even more stressful, we had no less than 12 tabs open in Firefox, with our main tab being IGN's PSP website - which happens to be very Flash heavy.
The iTunes and Newsleecher tasks from the first test scenario were also present in this one, plus we did the following:
Open Outlook, immediately import 130MB PST file and immediately switch app focus to Firefox.
We then recorded the total time required to import the new PST while Firefox was our foreground application.
As we discovered in our first article, the AMD platform just can't make it under this test - the load (particularly the Flash load) makes the Athlon 64 import process take well over four times as long as the import process on either of the Intel systems.
In the Intel camp, obviously dual core wins out and by a very reasonable margin of victory. The Pentium D 2.8 takes around 19% less time to import the PST into Outlook than the higher clocked, larger cache Pentium 4 630.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
106 Comments
View All Comments
GregL - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
P.S. I love your site... been reading it for years now.GregL - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
Anand,Thanks for the explanation and the quick reply.
Have an excellent day,
Greg
Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
GregLLast time I checked (which admittedly was a while ago), SMP support was broken in the later builds of Q3A. I can't remember if it was Quake 3 or the combination of Q3 and ATI/NV drivers, but the performance stopped improving.
Take care,
Anand
GregL - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
I know Quake3 is dated but how about a quick benchmark with the new dual core CPU. Quake 3 is supposed to support dual core.seta r_smp "1"
Thanks,
Greg
Goi - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
I didn't know 50 cent was an avid reader of ATTuborg - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
It`s nice to finaly see some competition from Intel.They slapped together theyr old stuff in a new package. But we all know that a new package isen`t going to change anything(Like wrapping s*** in gold paper).
Be happy as longe as it last, and have your 15min of fame.
Remember they rushed out the dual core, and they did it for you IndelJugen!.
Viditor - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
Thanks for the article Anand...none of us take Charlie seriously anyway..."AMD's dual core will be quite impressive, even more so than Intel's"
I am hearing the same. There is some serious research work being done in the TV and Film industry right now with the dualcore Opterons, and it is MOST impressive! Still under NDA (as are we all), I can only say that the results so far have been much better than expected!
Son of a N00b - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
Thank You Anand for the great article, especially the info on the NCQ. Great writing, and overall a very good read.btw, I understand how fusterated you must feel making these benchmarks, not having things work, trying to remember all the things you want/have to do next, ect......Keep it up Anand, that is why you are the best!...try to get some sleep though m8 :-P
I would probably say that the 2.2 ghz from AMD it would not be compared to the dualCPU in this article because if the 2.2 is going to probably be the FX line, then it would be compared with the top of the line of Intel's...remember this was an article about "value" dual cores (oxymoron ;-))...so due to price and probably performace it would not be paired with the Pentium D at 2.8...sort of like AMD's naming scheme, an AMD 2800 at 1.8 ghz matches up with a 2.8 ghz Intel...so I would assume that AMD's biggest baddest dualy will blow Intel out of the water...and not because i am an incessant AMD fanboy because i am an avid gamer, but becuase of AMD's past performace, and AMD architechure is designed for dual core. We shall see, wh shall see...
*STATEMENT: The author of this post is not hereby responsible for any grammatical errors, typing, or syntax, of any kind.* lol
Googer - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
In adition to my #57 post,In the future I cannot Imagine the power requrements of CPU's they may end up needing their own 500watt dedicated supply and a second one for HDD's, GPU's, Fans, motherboards, and accessories.
Googer - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
The only thing more ineffieciant than a 250watt fully loaded Prescott is the old eniac, It was said that when it was turned on the Whole City of Philadelphia would go in to a brown out. I am afraid that modern processors are taking steps back instead of forward.