...but why is this?

[TrainTrackHack]

I've heard heaps of people say that even though Core2 wipes floors with X2, X2 is slightly better at games and stuff...why is that? Claims of fanboys or a fact?

 

[reddevil6]

i would say either u or the people are saying it wrong.
the core2duo is better at games! back in the single core processors now that is a different story the AMD single cores it was like this a 2.0GHz AMD was = to a 2.5-2.6GHz intel single core.

 

[hermeslyre]

Clock efficiency belongs to the Core2. A similarly clocked X2 and C2d, obviously the C2d will win, and at everything. You can take this premise all the way up to 70% the clockspeed of an X2, most the time, and the outcome will remain the same.

 

[StrangleHold]

Clock efficiency belongs to the Core2. A similarly clocked X2 and C2d, obviously the C2d will win, and at everything. You can take this premise all the way up to 70% the clockspeed of an X2, most the time, and the outcome will remain the same.

I agree with part of that but the Core 2 doesnt win at everything. The Athlon still wins alot of memory test and it doesnt take a 70% more clock for a X2 to match a Core 2, thats way overstating it. Its true that the core 2 is faster clock for clock but thats no reason to over state it. If you have a Core 2 dual core at 2.4ghz its going to take a X2 at about 2.8 to match it. Now that can vary alittle one way or the other depending on what Core 2 and X2 your talking about. But its not nowhere near 70%.

 

[TFT]

I was under the impression that the X2 have the system memory controller built onto the CPU and Intel controls the memory by the northbridge. As games are memory bandwith intensive I thought the AMD scored here and Intel for number crunching. But I have been known to be wrong

EDIT: Obviously thats only true if all things are equal in the CPU speed area