Core 2 Duo Extreme Benchmarks

Geoff

Geoff

VIP Member
Extreme Tech just released some new benchmarks comparing the FX-62, PEE 3.73Ghz, and two Core 2 Duo EE's. Here are the results:

PCMark05.gif


PCMark05_2.gif


PCMark05_3.gif


PCMark05_4.gif


PCMark05_5.gif


PCMark05_6.gif


POV-Ray.gif
 
Hmm

I have to say that these benchies are nice but what about gaming and so on? What is the difference in those circles?

You are comparing something that's not out for proper with something that's already out. I can bet you that there will not be such a great differences as it seems to be suggested in the ExtremeTech review....even they say that it's run on an Intel owned platform :P

JAN :D
 
Last edited:
jancz3rt said:
This is more REAL for now:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1966027,00.asp

I would hesitate to call out a winner in the FUTURE, because that's what the Conroe (Core 2 Duo) is about. By that time, who knows what AMD will have up its sleeve.

JAN :D
Click to expand...
Thats only the PEE, and according the benchmarks above, we already know the FX-62 is the clear winnier.

Extreme Tech did note that these were tested on Intel based platforms, however they are still the rough numbers of what you can expect to see what the Core 2 Duo is released.
 
any sisoftware benches? i like sisoftware and ive never used pcmark... only 3dmark
i duno... ill upgrade in a year or two if i need it... but my x2 3800+ is really good for right now :)
one of the better chips out :D
maybe ill buy the conroe 1.6ghz just to see how much i can o/c it (after its been reviewed a few times)
 
Last edited:
fade2green514 said:
any sisoftware benches? i like sisoftware and ive never used pcmark... only 3dmark
Click to expand...
PCMark tests all areas of the computer (Memory, Hard Drive, Video Card, CPU, ect), Unlike 3DMark that only tests the video card and cpu (mainly the video card).

SiSoft would be nice, but i havent heard or seen of any yet.
 
the thing that i dont like is that conroe is compatible with SSE4, and uses SSE3 for benchmarks that "older" (current) processors use SSE2 for in sisoftware sandra. im sure once other processors are supplied with SSE4 instructions and newer software of the like, their performance will increase as well. not to say that it will increase to beat conroe... but using an advanced instruction set does offset the balance somewhat... especially considering we dont know much about SSE4 yet.
 
SSE4 adds 16 instructions. SSE2 was the biggest revision (144 new instructions to the original 70, SSE3 added 13). The performance increase is from the reworked SSE engine not the new instructions. If a benchmark was written with SSE2 instructions it uses them not the new SSE4 ones.
 
actually... it says under the benchmark that it used a different instruction... ya know, under the colored bar where it shows the cpu's score.
in fact, i'll bet the FX-62 is much better than those benchmarks because it uses "iSSE2" for the EE chips... "iSSE4" for conroe but only "iSSE" for the FX-62.
btw omega that guys RAM beat both of our... by a good 1GB/s lol
8GB/s!!!??! wow.
w/e lol i still like my ram.
ddr600 at like 2-2-2-5 would be pretty sweet.. probably not gonna happen but with the right RAM maybe..
NOT willing to spend money on it. lol
lol i can see it now... OMEGA is gonna move to TAIWAN to get his hands on a conroe haha :D
 
Last edited:
it says under the benchmark that it used a different instruction
Click to expand...
I know what the benchmark says, but SSE4 doesn't replace every single instruction with updated ones, they have improved the SSE execution engine and added some new instructions.
Thses are the new instructions:
PSIGNW, PSIGND, PSIGNB, PSHUFB, PMULHRSW, PMADDUBSW, PHSUBW, PHSUBSW, PHSUBD, PHADDW, PHADDSW, PHADDD, PALIGNR, PABSW, PABSD, PABSB

Also AMD has never really done a good job implementing SSE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top