Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

(06-18-2010, 08:37 PM)jontcold Wrote: [ -> ]amd ride for good cpu at incredible price
intel get for they super cpu but the price is to expensive for the differnce in price dollard for dollard amd is the best user choose i think

Yeah, AMD offers you quite inexpensive CPUs....

Quote:Also I don't think raw processing power is an opinion since no matter how objective you try to be, AMD processors are not suitable for professional cpu-heavy applications compared to IBM cell blades and intel processors due to relatively low performance.

I've done 3D rendering for some 4 and ½ years and after doing consulting and onsite development never have I seen a company whose studio uses amd in the workstations

You honestly think a thuban isn't good for software based 3d rendering? Just because companies don't use them doesn't mean they aren't good. I'm not even going to bother citing examples of when AMD had more raw processing power and better performance (back in the early years of opteron). At this moment in time intel is the slightly faster choice while AMD is the smarter choice if you do a cost/benefit analysis. You can build 50% more systems with AMD for the same price and keeping up with the latest technology is a lot cheaper since unlike intel amd doesn't constantly play socket roulette.

My opinion of thuban is this. If you get excited by the highest possible numbers, go spend the money on whatever is fastest. If you want to be a bit more realistic, you can build an amazingly good system around one of these chips and walk away knowing you've done the smart thing.

However this does not affect my overall judgement of the two brands. In terms of performance intel is slightly on top now. Bloomfield and lynfield are great but to say that AMD doesn't have a place in the professional workplace is just plain rediculous.

Quote:Intel was founded on July 18, 1968, as Integrated Electronics Corporation (though a common misconception is that "Intel" is from the word intelligence

Learn something new every day. I had always assumed it wasn't an acronym because it didn't look like one.

(06-19-2010, 06:32 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Also I don't think raw processing power is an opinion since no matter how objective you try to be, AMD processors are not suitable for professional cpu-heavy applications compared to IBM cell blades and intel processors due to relatively low performance.

I've done 3D rendering for some 4 and ½ years and after doing consulting and onsite development never have I seen a company whose studio uses amd in the workstations

You honestly think a thuban isn't good for software based 3d rendering? Just because companies don't use them doesn't mean they aren't good. I'm not even going to bother citing examples of when AMD had more raw processing power and better performance (back in the early years of opteron). At this moment in time intel is the slightly faster choice while AMD is the smarter choice if you do a cost/benefit analysis. You can build 50% more systems with AMD for the same price and keeping up with the latest technology is a lot cheaper since unlike intel amd doesn't constantly play socket roulette.

My opinion of thuban is this. If you get excited by the highest possible numbers, go spend the money on whatever is fastest. If you want to be a bit more realistic, you can build an amazingly good system around one of these chips and walk away knowing you've done the smart thing.

However this does not affect my overall judgement of the two brands. In terms of performance intel is slightly on top now. Bloomfield and lynfield are great but to say that AMD doesn't have a place in the professional workplace is just plain rediculous.

Quote:Intel was founded on July 18, 1968, as Integrated Electronics Corporation (though a common misconception is that "Intel" is from the word intelligence

Learn something new every day. I had always assumed it wasn't an acronym because it didn't look like one.

OK. This is the correct time to analyse the comparison between the two hexa-cores and other top processor. This will give the people a big blow who still think Thuban is a lot weaker than Gulftown...But it is no doubt Extreme is actually extreme...

This seems that Intel has uppercut on AMD, and that was for sure as it is extreme. Intel has more uniform arrangement of cores, more Cache, more transistor counts and more compact die size fabrication. But performance wise, it is all cores that matters. AMD is only lags behind a second or two, but it worth the price...(we know it:p)

Now, some serious performances in games..(this is dolphin community and all we talk is about games..:p)

A friend of mine told me that the Intel core I7 is actually a server chip.
I don't know if it is true or not =P
still
i prefer amd because its cheap and it as a good performance.

Well I7 is a box name. It can refer to a variety of microprocessors based off of the clarkdale, lyyndale, bloomfield, and gulftown architectures. Xeon variations for servers have up to 4 cpu dies on one socket running in parallel.

@Arpit

Don't even bother doing a comparison here. Just post links to reviews on reputable sites. Although to be fair those of us that would even bother reading them probably did so over a year ago when they first came out via google.

(06-20-2010, 03:39 AM)UNazo Wrote: [ -> ]A friend of mine told me that the Intel core I7 is actually a server chip.
I don't know if it is true or not =P
still
i prefer amd because its cheap and it as a good performance.

Nah, i7 is pretty general purpose. As mentioned by NV, Xeons are intel's server chips and they are much more powerful than i5/i7 processors, and they can be run as multiples in parallel.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

Some of the newer 8-core xeons also use nehalem architecture. Xeons, even at low clock frequencies such as 2.2 or 2.6ghz still beat every i7 on the market except i7 980 (but even then, there are xeon processors stronger than it, plus models which aren't even listed on benchmarks). There is also a 12-core xeon server model coming out next year.

They are too expensive for a casual user though (...) and it makes little sense to buy one for non-professional reasons like gaming.

(06-20-2010, 04:28 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]Well I7 is a box name. It can refer to a variety of microprocessors based off of the clarkdale, lyyndale, bloomfield, and gulftown architectures. Xeon variations for servers have up to 4 cpu dies on one socket running in parallel.

@Arpit

Don't even bother doing a comparison here. Just post links to reviews on reputable sites. Although to be fair those of us that would even bother reading them probably did so over a year ago when they first came out via google.

Just doing timepass....AT has some very complicated results. just giving a simpler explaination...:p

When run @ the same speeds, it's Core i7 (x4) = Phenom II x6 < Gulftown (x6)

So guess who's getting a Gulftown for his microATX build? This guy.

As long you have money to throw in the fire, go on for Gulftown. I can't force to buy a Ford when you are kneeling to buy a Ferrari.....:p

Intel will always be better than Amd. Intel, in theory, is for the "rich bastards" while Amd is for the "economically disadvantaged" .
I personally favor Amd because i am not at this time employed, nor do i need to be i might add, I think they deliver the best "bang for the buck". Am i right or am i right?