Barcelona 42% faster than Xeon

[Phynaz]

According to Spec fp_rate2000.

AMD just cried foul about using old benchmarks because Intel was using Spec int_rate2000.

The Irony

Edit: Corrected title per PetNorth,

 

[PetNorth]

wrong.
Barcelona (probably at 2.3-2.4mhz) 42% faster than Clovertown (Xeon 5355 quad 2.66mhz) in fp_rate.
9% faster in int_rate.

 

[nyker96]

well in little over 2 months all will be evident, they can claim everything now, but it's the released hardware benchs that matters. But I do hope this is all true which means we can get more CPU for the money.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: PetNorth
wrong.
Barcelona (probably at 2.3-2.4mhz) 42% faster than Clovertown (Xeon 5355 quad 2.66mhz) in fp_rate.
9% faster in int_rate.

Exactly...imagine what it will be on a more equivalent benchmark!
This is a good example of DUF...that's FUD when it backfires.

 

[A554SS1N]

Originally posted by: Viditor

This is a good example of DUF...that's FUD when it backfires.

hehe

 

[StopSign]

Originally posted by: PetNorth
wrong.
Barcelona (probably at 2.3-2.4mhz) 42% faster than Clovertown (Xeon 5355 quad 2.66mhz) in fp_rate.
9% faster in int_rate.

PetNorth...very clever username...

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: PetNorth
wrong.
Barcelona (probably at 2.3-2.4mhz) 42% faster than Clovertown (Xeon 5355 quad 2.66mhz) in fp_rate.
9% faster in int_rate.

Exactly...imagine what it will be on a more equivalent benchmark!
This is a good example of DUF...that's FUD when it backfires.

No, this is a good example of being a hypocrite. Once again AMD shows it's okay for it to hand pick benchmarks, but unfair when it's competition does.

 

[ahock]

not to be bias with Intel or AMD but honestly AMD is also using flawed benchmarks in their website when comparing Core vs Athlon. I'm not sure whether someone here notice it.

 

[coldpower27]

Theoreticals are nice, but I am still waiting on actual programs benchmarked to see what the average performance improvement is.