Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

(06-12-2010, 10:45 PM)Arpit Wrote: [ -> ]That's why AMD tops intel here....(only)
But if the market size is concerned, AMD is just a RAT in front of intel LION...

See by myself. In India, as an emerging IT industry, there is no market of AMD. Intel is the only option we have got. I bought the only AMD supply of my city, that was AMD Athlon 64 3200+...
Now I am forced to switch to Intel Core 2 Duo (I should have bought Corei3:p), or else I would have bought a Phenom...

Phenoms are a good series made by AMD, mine runs Dolphin on nice speeds.

(06-13-2010, 02:31 AM)GundamQuatro Wrote: [ -> ]both are good in their ways, nuff said...

true words right there!

Quote:both are good in their ways, nuff said...

I partially agree with that. Although neither brand is OVERALL better they do release micro-architectures that are clearly superior/inferior to their competitor in every way, and often trade blows every couple of years. For example athlon was superior to pentium III until pentium IV came out and kicked it's ass, then athlon xp came out took the crown from pentium IV, prescott took the crown back for intel but only for a few months until athlon 64 came out and took it back for amd, I could go on and on.

(06-13-2010, 05:32 AM)Ocean Wrote: [ -> ]Where is IBM They make the best cpu's available.. But they are not affordable for private consumers.

For home users intel is obviously "better" performance if you don't mind paying the price premium. AMD is great for budget rigs

I know, but they are sort of RARE here....

(06-13-2010, 02:31 AM)GundamQuatro Wrote: [ -> ]both are good in their ways, nuff said...

actually, im very concerned about a comparison of the latest AMD cpu vs a i7

i know the i7 has more cores and yade yade yade. but if you disable them to have the same amount of cores as the latest AMD high end cpu i wonder who would be better and in what.

its just that untill recently amd had the upper hand cause they had the ram controller integrated in the cpu. this gave them a faster cpu cause everything was transferred from ram to cpu alot faster (but they still kinda failed at multitasking). but now intel does the same with its i3/i5/i7-series

so ye....

this will never end.................

(06-13-2010, 05:21 PM)thaCASHdude Wrote: [ -> ]this will never end.................

we all know that

(06-13-2010, 04:51 PM)Daco Wrote: [ -> ]i know the i7 has more cores and yade yade yade. but if you disable them to have the same amount of cores as the latest AMD high end cpu i wonder who would be better and in what.

I was wondering the same thing, and compiled some data.

Quote:

For gaming, the Phenom II X6 1090T is adequate and performs good enough to yield smooth framerates in all games. For other purposes it's significantly slower, or slightly behind the intel variant.

However, due to the $1,000 price point, I really don't know if you could recommend it for a home user. It's overkill even if you run a server, play games, download stuff and render 3dsmax at the same time.

Regardless of raw performance, if I were looking for value, I'd get the 1090T because it costs only $299 and the performance is not that far behind the 980x. If you are not a professional who needs good processing power to make money I see no need to make the $1k investment into such a processor. It's like buying a sports car just for your work trips, it's a bad purchase which has little real world utility.

But if you want it just for bragging rights or really run many very heavy apps at once, why not. It's the best thing money can buy, and who's to judge you for spending your own cash.

Why would you post synthetic tests and games? Those results are about as useful as sonys "max theoretical GFLOPS" for the cell processor.

Quote:i know the i7 has more cores and yade yade yade. but if you disable them to have the same amount of cores as the latest AMD high end cpu i wonder who would be better and in what.

Other way around. AMD has more physical cores at the moment. Thuban for mid range desktop has 6 physical cores and magnum opus has 12 cores for the 1k+ server range. With the same number of both physical and logical cores at the same clock rate the current intel cpus do achieve a slightly higher IPC (5-10% higher). Tomshardware has some done some great tests on this very subject but I know ocean views them as unreputable for some reason, or was that naon I'm thinking of?

THW is reliable imo, like anandtech. I just used synthetics and a few game benchmarks because they measure unbiased raw processing power/floating point ops per second.

I'd still get the 1090 6-core simply based on price-performance ratio.