AMD took the opportunity to leave the first triple-core processors on the market: the Phenom X3. The aim was to provide processors that Intel could not produce and must come up position between the dual core and quad core of the American giant. Except that the Phenom X3 can barely compete with the Intel dual-core. And again, AMD has struggled to increase in frequency as the processors the highest clocked Phenom in the family to work at 2.6 GHz.
As for dual-core processors, AMD has considerable ground to be filled. Indeed, the current Athlon 64 X2 are all from the old K8 architecture emerged in 2003 with the first Athlon 64. Worse, the best dual core is the AMD X2 6400 + running at 3.2 GHz but engraved in 90 nanometers! The process of recording in 65 nm was not a real success at AMD with latencies up at the controller and cache memory. In addition, the Athlon 64 65 nanometer have never been equipped with 2x1 MB L2 cache as some models engraved in 90 nanometers, but made do with 2x512 KB of L2 cache. If we add to this the "bug" of the entire memory divider that prevents in many cases the memory to operate at the frequency specified, it is fair to say that the Athlon 64 X2 have many flaws deal with Core 2 Duo Intel Pentium Dual Core. It remains for them but as prices reveals our fight processors, even for the same price, they are beaten like an Athlon 64 X2 6000 + outpaced by a Pentium E5200, yet both in the same price area.
No comments:
Post a Comment