Opteron Vs. Xeon @ TomsHardwareGuide

De to CPU giganter mødes igen. Denne gang er det AMD's Opteron 250 der møder Intels Nocona 3.6, Xeon 3.2, Xeon 3.06 samt en P4 - 3.6'er

Der er som altid kamp til stregen, og onkel Tom kalder i starten af konklusionen AMD for "heldig" med deres Dual channel. Heldig eller ej... Jeg ville kalde det "bedre" ;o)





"AMD can consider itself lucky, because due to the dual channel memory controller that is part of each processor, the dual Opteron has a nice advantage, despite having a clock speed that is 1.2 GHz slower. When simply comparing AMD and Intel, the astute observer will also notice that the results for the Xeon Nocona are, to a large extent, due to the 875P-chipset, which we also included. The reason behind that is the memory controller, because even though the E7525, alias Tumwater, supports DDR2-400, these memory modules are worlds behind DDR400 in terms of the timing possible. The new memory thus currently only delivers theoretical advantages, which is why the increase in FSB to 200 MHz does not achieve much either in many cases: the Xeon clearly suffers from a lack of memory performance. "

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040927/index.html