Games Now Use Dual Cores ,amd Still Rapes Intel

[trinithemc]

A bit of the same old story with a new coat of paint, AMD raping intel in battlefield 2..... a 2.8ghz Athlon Fx is oh.. only 2.5 times faster than the 2.8ghz P4 , and still 40% faster than the fastest pentium Xtreme Edition .
intel is kicking ALOT of @ss , namely its own cheating , monopolistic behind .
On a more important note , new graphics drivers and games are finally multithreaded ,allowing dual core cpu's to really shine in these games ...
However, the major intrigue is not about the victory of Athlon 64 over Pentium 4. As you can see from the diagram, CPUs with two computational cores run faster in Serious Sam 2 than single-core processors working at the same frequency. It means that this game uses parallel computational threads actively enough, and it is a very big achievement, because there hasn’t been a single game yet that could boast anything like that.
This graph was taken from a system with the dual-core Athlon 64 X2 4800+ processor. As we see, the overall CPU utilization stays around 60%. It means that Serious Sam 2 also involves the second computational core. However, it would be not quite fair to praise only Croteam guys for the implementation of dual-core support. I have to point out NVIDIA drivers also started supporting dual-core architectures. ForceWare version 81.xx allows enjoying the advantages of dual-core technology in DirectX as well as in OpenGL.
Also note than hyperthreading doesn't help the P4 one bit , the HT enabled dual core is beat by an HT disabled dual core at the same clock .....


AMD continues to be your pimp daddy .












http://img.webhostfree.net/upload/ss2.jpghttp://img.webhostfree.net/upload/ss2-1.jpg















http://img.webhostfree.net/upload/bf2.jpg

[Paradoxxx]

sigh even with all this evidence n00bs will STILL buy intel.

[cereal_killer]

sadly yes, they see high number ie 3 ghz and say that go be a real good cpu :(

for me i could care less, once either intel or amd givin me the best bang for my buck i would buy from them

[CRaZYMoFo]

^^^^
NO CK NOOOOOOOO
x2 3800+ iymc and you know it :P

[opium]

ent 3800+ x2 will own u

if i eh buy meh san diego and and seen de 3800 coming out i would done buy de 3800+ x2

[cereal_killer]

Originally posted by CRaZYMoFo@Nov 13 2005, 11:49 AM
^^^^
NO CK NOOOOOOOO
x2 3800+ iymc and you know it :P
Quoted post



well right the x23800 giving me best performance so i would go with it :P

[opium]

intel should just close down :P

dey working had to make it one of de best but dey not

[w1ntry]

Nah man Opium without intel we'd be in the stone age still. They deserve some props for the work they've done for the industry over the years. Plus with the kinda money and R&D intel has yuh cyah rule them out at all. That Pentium M is a beast watch out for it (esp as the desktop dual core due out 2006 Meron). For now AMD pwnz them and will for the while but without intel pushing to catch back up AMD woulda sit on dey @$$ and we'd not get the kinda improvements we getting on a ongoing basis.

[Paradoxxx]

Intel also sells on its cache!!

AMD performs very well @ 512k cache, even we you pay the extra for the 1mb cache the performance isn't noticable. Intel pushing all kinda 2mb and still can't compare to 512k equivalents.

Even 256k semprons pwning

[G_Pinkie]

It's not what they did...It's what they are doing...

For how big intel is and how much money they have, amd still able to come out with a better and more refined architecture. As analyst have suggest intel wont be able to make a comeback to amd for at least a 2 yrs. As always competition is good, it allows innovation.

[Paradoxxx]

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.as...paxville&page=1 (http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=paxville&page=1)

The Final Word
Intel’s “Paxville” Dual Core Xeon processors can provide a much needed performance boost in applications which are designed to take advantage of a lot of processors and run a lot of simultaneous threads. Namely, server and high-end workstation class applications. In applications which can fully make use of its abilities, these new Xeon processors can push some solid performance numbers and crunch through code fairly fast. The amount of processing power with two of these Xeons is pretty impressive; however, all this processing power does come at a cost.

Intel’s new dual-core Xeon consumes the most power of any processors we’ve seen to date, and also runs exceedingly hot, both negative qualities for a processor which is designed for the server space. In addition, the chip is also not compatible with older Socket-604 platforms, meaning you will have to drop an additional $400-$500 on a new dual-core Xeon compatible platform, which will be a painful purchase if you’ve already got a Socket-604 Xeon system up and running today, and want to upgrade to dual-core processor. In addition, as of today, there are no motherboards on the market available to purchase which will support these new processors, which certainly will put a damper on any prospective buyers.

The one platform we did have the chance to test with, Asus’s PVL-D, was certainly up to the quality and stability levels we would expect from a server-class Xeon platform. The board provides a lot of memory capacity and plenty of high-speed I/O options, and certainly is a compliment to Intel’s new dual-core Xeon design. This board is expected to star shipping in the next month in SCSI and non-SCSI variants. From all we’ve seen, Asus will likely be the first on the market with a Paxville ready solution; other manufacturers may trail by a few weeks. It’s hard to get really excited about a server motherboard, but it does its job quite well and we have no qualms with it.

Unfortunately, even a solid platform can’t help Intel’s performance numbers, as their new dual-core chips (while powerful in their own right) simply are bested across the board by AMD’s dual-core Opteron processors. Even worse, the Opterons typically perform much better while running at slower clock speeds and only having half the amount of on-die L2 cache to utilize. AMD’s chips also consume far less power and run quite a bit cooler, giving AMD an edge on nearly all fronts. AMD’s top of the line dual-core Opterons are quite a bit more expensive compared to the top of the line 2.8 GHz Dual Core Xeon (which will sell for ~$1,000 per CPU), putting it roughly on par with AMD’s Opteron 270 (2.0 GHz) processor. Even comparing the Opteron 270 to the Paxville Xeon 2.8 GHz, we still would opt for an AMD based solution.

While the chips themselves can push some impressive numbers in the right environments, we are seeing more “collateral damage” than we’re used to seeing from a new Intel product launch. To us, it looks like Intel pushed out their dual-core product in order to quell the movement towards AMD dual-core products. Unfortunately, a chip like “Paxville” isn’t enough to do it. Intel certainly has some tricks left in their bag, with codenames like Sossaman, Bensley, and Dempsey. Let’s hope they can get these out of the labs and on to store shelves sooner rather than later.

[w1ntry]

I think this is fitting in this thread and its HILARIOUS:

Top 10 Reasons Intel Paxville will not Participate in the Dual-Core Duel

10. Tried to follow their own roadmap to get to the duel
9. Decided to take the "front-side bus" to the duel; got stuck in a bottleneck
8. The "Intel Inside" stickers they used to package the cores together keep melting
7. Too busy rearranging the deck chairs on the Itanic
6. "Hey, we don't expect anyone to actually buy these things!"
5. Didn't want to compete when they realized that the duel would involve actual "rules" of fair competition
4. They couldn't get a permit from the fire department to emit that much heat
3. No systems available yet - protective clothing used by manufacturers only safe for up to 149 watts
2. Dell told them they weren't allowed to participate

And the number one reason Intel won't accept the dual core duel:

1. Moore's Law has been replaced by "Paul's Paradox": the number of canceled products per year at Intel will double every year after the introduction of the AMD Opteron processor.

[CRaZYMoFo]

The Opterons own!!!
Many are OCing the single and dual core skt939 optys and are getting great results :)

As those paxvile procs dont seem to keep up with the optys Intel will most likely have to sell dem as cheaply as they could...Or just have dell make lots of new servers for ppl to buy..