Dr Jones said:Pixie Dust
They have hired tinker bell? They are on the ball
Stelly
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Dr Jones said:Pixie Dust
Gangster said:Does anyone know if running a divider on the conroe is a performance killer?
G
NathanE said:The three key reasons are:
- More execution units (like 3 vector units, as opposed to just the 1 on NetBurst and the A64)
- Pipeline optimisations (compresses certain instruction groups down to one instruction)
- Shared L2 cache (allows cross core communication without hitting the FSB, and hence allows threads to switch between cores with no penalty)
- Black magic that Intel won't ever disclose
Coke > Pepsi >>> Dr. Pepper (which tastes rather like urine.)silversurfer said:Dr Pepper > Coke > Pepsi
I've been looking at some benchmarks today and it seems that he E6300 lags just a tiny bit behind the FX-62 at stock, but I dare anyone to say that's not incredible value for money. The E6400 is equal, maybe a tiny bit better, while the E6600 and X6800 are just miles ahead.silversurfer said:Obviously the 6600 is the one to get but what is a 6300 equalivant to at stock, is it still in fx beating country?
Gangster said:Does anyone know if running a divider on the conroe is a performance killer?