|Date:||Fri, Feb 18 2005 15:28|
"This evaluation of current desktop processors utilises over 60
benchmark tests including office and multimedia software, 3D games,
Internet applications, video rendering and compression. We have used
benchmarks that are relevant to a range of market sectors in order to
get a balanced view of CPU performance. However, in an ideal world, you
should also run your own mission-critical applications on any processor
that you're considering."
Of course, performance is only one aspect of a processor purchase
decision. For example, the Athlon 64's support for the NX (No Execute)
feature safeguards it from certain virus attacks, and could be reason
enough to choose an AMD processor. And if you're after a quiet PC, then
AMD's chips have clear advantages over Intel's latest 'Prescott'
Pentium 4. The power consumption of the Athlon 64 is lower than that of
the Pentium 4 thanks to AMD's use of Silicon-on-Insulator (SOI)
technology. The Athlon's 64's 64-bit capability is also a potential
advantage, although this feature remains largely unused because of the
missing operating system support -- 64-bit Windows XP has now been
delayed until 2005.
|System||Power consumption||idle Max|
|Athlon 64 3800+ (Nforce 3)||91W||172W|
|Athlon 64 3800+ (KT800 Pro)||82W||162W|
|Pentium 4 560 (925X)||155W||258W|
Note: The power consumption figures quoted in the table above refer to
a complete system with otherwise identical components.
But which one to chose? which one is best value for money? Which one
would you chose?
|Date:||Sat, Feb 19 2005 16:13|
What's this? its just copied from