-
Competitor rules
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.
Phenom X3 Worth It?
- Thread starter Mista.Gee
- Start date
yes its a "true quad core" and it does talk to the cores better.
Never used this bench before but the AMD Quad is doing well.
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=733580
http://www.hwbot.org/compare.do?resultId=733580
amd quads are pretty decent, but they've been bashed by the intel fanboys so bad, that people wont even consider them.
the x3's were brought out to perform agaianst the core2duos, and they do beat them but many people dont like the idea that they have a "faulty" core switched off. the good news though, is that you still get all the cache you get with the x4 chips.
the x3's were brought out to perform agaianst the core2duos, and they do beat them but many people dont like the idea that they have a "faulty" core switched off. the good news though, is that you still get all the cache you get with the x4 chips.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
yes, because they both run on identical architechture and therefore need identical amount of cache to run at the same speed right?
Or is it possible that largely due to the onboard memory controller and very low latency access to memory that cache is largely unneeded on the ATh 64 architecture? While the core 2 duo uses quite a lot of on chip logic, prediction and cache reserves to hide the latency to the memory, of course not.
But then again Intel's Nehalem will have on die memory controller and is MASSIVELY dropping on board cache.
Core 2 Duo needs the cache, ATh 64's have basically all the same space taken up by cache and logic taken up by the memory controller. Intel's Nehalem will be the same, its mem controller is simply replacing much of the cache and logic, they are kind of mutually exclusive, you simply don't need both, one or the other.
THe X3 is primarily useful for those who, want a touch more power than a dual core, without spending the higher cost of a quad core. To be honest I've not spotted X3 pricing, if priced well it should/could give an excellent price/performance ratio. say a dual core a 2.5ghz was £50, and a quad core was £100, but the X3 was £65, the price per core is cheaper on the X3. how would they do that? better to sell quad cores with one faulty core at £65 as a tricore than at £50 as a dual core.