IBM claims Intel Paxville beats AMD, sets record

[LOE]

ROFL here's the thing

http://theinquirer.net/?article=27378


Interesting, last time I checked intel was almost 2 times slower with almost 2 times higher power consumption and price

[perkam]

INterestingly enough, the setup that beats AMD is almost 3.5 times as expensive :rolleyes:..

Perkam

[FUGGER]

Interesting, last time I checked intel was almost 2 times slower with almost 2 times higher power consumption and price

You must have been checking Toms or Vans Hardware? :rofl:

Dont even get me started :slap:

[LOE]

You must have been checking Toms or Vans Hardware? :rofl:

Dont even get me started :slap:

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/print_content.asp?id=paxville&cookie%5Ftest=1

Well if you are an active sandra user the difference is not that big, but in actual server tests the amd system seems to be much faster, at least to me...

There is also power consumption data there... :slapass:

So FUGGER please do start, cause for now I can't find any sense in your statement. I am an average Joe and read hardware reviews, and from what I read I really don't understand what records intel beats and breaks, except of price tag and heat

[perkam]

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/print_content.asp?id=paxville&cookie%5Ftest=1

Well if you are an active sandra user the difference is not that big, but in actual server tests the amd system seems to be much faster, at least to me...

There is also power consumption data there... :slapass:

So FUGGER please do start, cause for now I can't find any sense in your statement. I am an average Joe and read hardware reviews, and from what I read I really don't understand what records intel beats and breaks, except of price tag and heat The Paxville was never designed as the definitive answer to the Opterons, loe...We all know that the Paxville is nothing more than Intel's inefficient Smithfield core in server format.

Wait for Intel's answer's in q1 06 with the dempsey, which should offer a little improvement over the prescott and the smithfield, but tons of enhancements to make up. But yes, the opteron wont be going down until the server version of the conroe comes out sometime in q4 2k6/q1 2k7.

I'm a little surprised at IBM myself, considering there's another story on the front page of the inq stating that AMD just extended their contracts with IBM.

Perkam

[Ugly n Grey]

That TDP is ridiculous...nuff said

[Piotrsama]

You must have been checking Toms or Vans Hardware? :rofl:
Dont even get me started :slap:
Yes, I remember you in THG forums.... :rolleyes:

I'm a little surprised at IBM myself, considering there's another story on the front page of the inq stating that AMD just extended their contracts with IBM.
That article you mention also states this:
"So we expect IBM will start pushing Opteron chips as part of a quid-pro-quo, right?

Well, that ain't necessarily so because at IBM the headbone is not always connected to the neckbone. When IBM had a deal with Cyrix 10 years ago, it maintained that the chips the Richardson firm had designed and re-packaged as IBM Microelectronics were better than the Cyrix chips.

But not only that, although the Cyrix designed chip was way better than anything Intel had to offer at the time, IBM didn't sell it in its own PCs.

There was a reason for that then, and the reason for that still exists now. It's called the Intel Inside campaign." Edit: lets not start calling ppl names - Perkam