Unbelievable how off topic threads get here just bash another site, usually THG. Now granted, the original poster is a complete troll who started this thread with the intention of starting a flame war, but that doesn't excuse the 95% of posters who responded with equally off topic trolling for the other side.
The whole point of this article has zero to do with performance, none, zip, nada and practically all of you seem to have missed this point. It's a stress test to see how stable the platforms are under the worst conditions they will encounter. For those of you who didn't bother to read the article and just skip to the irrelevant benchmarks pages, here it is:
"We subject the two devices to a full week under a maximum load, while running applications chosen to reflect typical usage conditions. This will make clear what stability and product quality really mean and whether investing in them pays off for buyers."
Nothing in there about which is faster, we all already know the answer to that question, as there are dozens of sites that have benchmarks of these CPU's. What would be the point of running benchmarks for a week straight to determine performance of systems, when doing it for 15 minutes would give you all the data you need? They continue on:
"The questions to be answered are: how do these most powerful of CPUs behave under full load and how do they handle rising temperatures resulting from the tremendous amount of waste heat generated? We also deal with the topic of power consumption, as the cost of electricity and energy continues to go up all the time."
Again, nothing about performance. Since the dual core Intel CPU is detected as 4 CPU's by windows, in order for this stress test to be of any use, the system has to be running 4 applications assuming none of the 4 are SMP aware. If you don't, parts of the Intel CPU will be sitting around idle which isn't the point of a stress test. Now in order to make sure the systems are under the same load to make the test fair, the AMD system has to be running the same software. You can't have a valid stress test, while running different applications on the 2 systems.
The whole idea of this project is to try and make the systems crash and burn. That's what a stess test does. If one of them doesn't do it more often than the other, then the results would be considered inconclusive. The benchmarks page is worthless and not meant to do anything but tell you what the CPU's are doing while the systems are running. How many frames of James Bond equals 10FPS in Farcry? How many encodings of Michael Jackson equal 5 Open Office compressions? To try and figure out which system is performing better, that's the type of junk you will have to calculate.
Here is the only benchmark in this article that is actually being tested:
AMD: 1 reboot
Intel: 2 reboots
Advantage: AMD
That's it.
There's also the power issue, but I don't see any live updates of that except for the combined wattage used by both systems.
The whole point of this article has zero to do with performance, none, zip, nada and practically all of you seem to have missed this point. It's a stress test to see how stable the platforms are under the worst conditions they will encounter. For those of you who didn't bother to read the article and just skip to the irrelevant benchmarks pages, here it is:
"We subject the two devices to a full week under a maximum load, while running applications chosen to reflect typical usage conditions. This will make clear what stability and product quality really mean and whether investing in them pays off for buyers."
Nothing in there about which is faster, we all already know the answer to that question, as there are dozens of sites that have benchmarks of these CPU's. What would be the point of running benchmarks for a week straight to determine performance of systems, when doing it for 15 minutes would give you all the data you need? They continue on:
"The questions to be answered are: how do these most powerful of CPUs behave under full load and how do they handle rising temperatures resulting from the tremendous amount of waste heat generated? We also deal with the topic of power consumption, as the cost of electricity and energy continues to go up all the time."
Again, nothing about performance. Since the dual core Intel CPU is detected as 4 CPU's by windows, in order for this stress test to be of any use, the system has to be running 4 applications assuming none of the 4 are SMP aware. If you don't, parts of the Intel CPU will be sitting around idle which isn't the point of a stress test. Now in order to make sure the systems are under the same load to make the test fair, the AMD system has to be running the same software. You can't have a valid stress test, while running different applications on the 2 systems.
The whole idea of this project is to try and make the systems crash and burn. That's what a stess test does. If one of them doesn't do it more often than the other, then the results would be considered inconclusive. The benchmarks page is worthless and not meant to do anything but tell you what the CPU's are doing while the systems are running. How many frames of James Bond equals 10FPS in Farcry? How many encodings of Michael Jackson equal 5 Open Office compressions? To try and figure out which system is performing better, that's the type of junk you will have to calculate.
Here is the only benchmark in this article that is actually being tested:
AMD: 1 reboot
Intel: 2 reboots
Advantage: AMD
That's it.
There's also the power issue, but I don't see any live updates of that except for the combined wattage used by both systems.
Facebook
Twitter