Core Duo not that much better?

fade2green514 said:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2648&p=2
check it out...
core duo is just as good as athlon 64's in most apps... not better (as i had expected).
i guess for a laptop its good, but i expected it to outperform athlon 64 x2... and it really didn't.
now i would REALLY like to see the specs of the system that intel tested the fx-60 O/Ced vs. the intel conroe....
Click to expand...
wow, you have that totally wrong.

My cpu outerforms the A64 3200+ with ease, it actually outperforms the AMD X2 3800+.

Try getting a CPU score of 1530 in 3DMark06 with an a64, or 30sec in SuperPi with an A64...aint gonna happen. ( I also hold the forum record of 30sec :P)

Also, the Conroe is about twice as good as the X2 4800+ in multi-media benchmarks.
 
Also thought you should see this, its a screenshot i took with the cpu in my sig:

<<Look at Images in the following post>>

Note the A64 3200+ on the bottom.
 
Last edited:
1. that picture didn't show up.
2. my cpu scored about 1900-2000 in 3dmark06 :)
3. i haven't tried superPi, but as soon as i get home you can count on it ;)
4. the 3200+ is single core. double its score, and that should be around where the 3800+ is.
5. I don't have it totally wrong. if anyone has it wrong, its anandtech.
6. look at the test setup... the core duo system has a better video card (7800gtx vs. x850xt), and if the ram is much different the core duo's is better.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2648&p=5
 
Last edited:
fade2green514 said:
1. that picture didn't show up.
Click to expand...
Imagedshack is stupid, i'll make a post following this with the pics.

fade2green514 said:
2. my cpu scored about 1900-2000 in 3dmark06 :)
Click to expand...
Your cpu is oc'd to 2.54Ghz, try running it at 2.0Ghz and then come back to me.

fade2green514 said:
3. i haven't tried superPi, but as soon as i get home you can count on it ;)
Click to expand...
You wont get below 30s, someone else here had their X2 3800+ oc'd to around 2.6Ghz and only got 32sec.

fade2green514 said:
4. the 3200+ is single core. double its score, and that should be around where the 3800+ is.
Click to expand...
The A64 3200 is not dual-core though, you can say double a FX-57 to say its better then mine.

fade2green514 said:
5. I don't have it totally wrong. if anyone has it wrong, its anandtech.
Click to expand...
I looked at alot of benchmarks before buying my cpu, and in system tests mine outperformed the AMD X2 3800+ is almost every test, and it outperformed the X2 4200+ in a few tests. It even outperformes the 3800+ in some games.
 
Here are some benchmarks i just did with my cpu, i also had a bunch of programs open at the same time:

Multi-Meida.jpg


Arithmatic.jpg


cache.jpg
 
yea, note that X2 3800+ is at 1.8ghz, they're stock at 2.0ghz.. not to mention mines at 2.54ghz.
also, the core duo (very similar architecture to conroe) was reported to be 50% better than athlon 64 X2 at a higher frequency, im simply proving it wrong. (intel didn't report system specs)
also note that your processor has more cache, which makes the testing unfair. an athlon 64 X2 with as much cache as that chip would perform at least as good if not better than it.
also note that sisoftware sandra supports dual core, and therefore a dual core chip should perform twice as good as a single core chip with the same specs.
core duo is a very good processor for laptops though, i think thats what i'll get when i go to college (or turion 64, less power usage under load)... i guess it depends on what graphics cards i can get for the price inside the laptop. what's an x1400 comparable to?
 
Last edited:
its impressive though, for a lappy proc. dual core is already mobile, that's nice.
how long does your battery last?
i already asked this but how good does that x1400 do in gaming?
 
Well the X2 has more L1 Cache.

I get around 4.5 hours when i do normal tasks, about 3 hours if im doing cpu intensive work, and around 2 hours if i do constant gaming.

The x1400 isnt the best card, but for a notebook its pretty nice.

Also, i ran SuperPi again and i got 29sec. :D
 
fade2green514 said:
what can i use to take a screenshot? and do i take the "initial value"?
Click to expand...
Just use the Prnt Scrn button, and use paint or something to copy it there.

And take a shot of when it says "calculations complete", for both 1M and 8M.
 
fade2green514 said:
lol ok ok... it scored 34 seconds... except it only used one core... it never went above 50%... double u tee EFF MATE
Click to expand...
mine only uses one core as well, its only written for one core. Heres a screenshot:

sss.jpg



fade2green514 said:
where would prntscrn put the pic, i can't find it.
also, ill show you my sisoftware sandra benchmark. lol
Click to expand...
Go into paint, and press CTRL+V, then save it as a JPEG.

And take a screenshot of your sisoft sandra results.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top